Care homes face ban on recruiting workers from abroad in huge visa crackdown
Care homes will be ordered to recruit from the UK under a major shake-up of immigration rules.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the Government will close the care worker visa route to end the reliance on overseas staff as part of a package of reforms due to be unveiled on Monday.
But care operators warned the move could deepen persistent staffing shortages, risking harm to older and disabled people. The Homecare Association, which represents operators, said the sector was struggling to fill over 130,000 vacancies - despite more than 185,000 overseas recruits who joined the workforce between 2021/22 and 2023/24.
Ms Cooper told the BBC: "We will allow them [care operators] to continue to extend visas and also to recruit from – there's more than 10,000 people who came on a care worker visa where the sponsorship visa was cancelled.
"Effectively they came to jobs that weren't actually here or that were not of the proper standard, they are here and care companies should be recruiting from that pool of people rather than recruiting from abroad. So we are closing recruitment from abroad."
Dr Jane Townson, Chief Executive of the Homecare Association, said international recruitment was "a lifeline" for providers. She said: "Care providers are already struggling to recruit within the UK. We are deeply concerned the Government has not properly considered what will happen to the millions of people who depend on care at home to live safely and independently.'
She warned ministers the plans were being introduced in a "vacuum" as promised fair pay agreements for the sector designed to encourage Brits to join the workforce are still being worked on.
Dr Townson said: "We urge the government to consult with the sector and agree interim measures allowing care providers to recruit sufficient staff. Otherwise, we risk repeating the chaos of 2021, when care shortages increased hospital admissions, delayed hospital discharges and left thousands without the help they needed.'
It comes as the Government prepares to unveil long awaited plans for a crackdown on immigration on Monday.
The Home Secretary said she was aiming for a "substantial" reduction in net migration figures - the difference between the number of people arriving in the UK and leaving each year. Net migration reached 728,000 in 2024, despite a string of Tory PMs promising to bring it down.
Ms Cooper refused to set a Tory-style target on the numbers, saying: "We're not going to take that really failed approach, because I think what we need to do is rebuild credibility and trust in the whole system."
But she said she expected around 50,000 fewer lower skilled visas to be approved next year due to changes to the care visa and the skilled worker visa.
Today, the Home Office confirmed that the skills threshold for visas will be increased to graduate level, with salary thresholds increasing to match. Officials will also set up a labour market evidence group to examine which sectors are reliant on overseas workers.
Ministers will also reform deportation rules so the Home Office is notified of all foreign nationals convicted of offences, which officials say will make it easier to remove people who commit offences.
It comes as Labour seeks to neutralise the threat from Nigel Farage after Reform UK swept to power in 10 councils in England and snatched a by-election win in Labour-held Runcorn and Helsby by six votes.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
18 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Majority of public back housing and developments in their area
The poll of 2,005 people conducted by Public First in July found that 55% of respondents would 'generally support new buildings or developments or buildings being built in my local area'. The research found that Labour backers (72%) and young people aged 25-34 (67%) were most likely to be 'Yimby' (yes in my backyard). Reform backers (44%) and people in the East of England (44%) were the most likely groups to say that they generally oppose development in their locality, the poll found. Overall, 33% of people said that they would generally oppose development. Sir Keir Starmer has pledged to put 'builders not blockers first' and 'overhaul the broken planning system'. In December, the Prime Minister announced new mandatory targets for councils when it comes to housebuilding. He said at the time: 'Our plan for change will put builders not blockers first, overhaul the broken planning system and put roofs over the heads of working families and drive the growth that will put more money in people's pockets.' In its report, The Quiet Yes, released on Thursday, Public First argued that a 'more representative planning system' is needed. The policy research organisation recommended that councils bring in changes to surveys and research on public opinion on building plans and questions about how residents would want councils to spend certain money earmarked for development. Jack Airey, director of housing and infrastructure at Public First, said: 'Most people instinctively support new development, yet their voices go unheard. 'Our research finds the public understand the housing shortage and back new homes, but the planning system doesn't reflect that reality. 'Councils and Government should build on this majority view, creating a representative planning system that unlocks support for new homes and the infrastructure communities need.' Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary Angela Rayner has said that Labour are 'overhauling the broken planning system'. She said: 'With investment and reform, Labour is delivering the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation, unleashing a social rent revolution, and embarking on a decade of renewal for social and affordable housing in this country.'
Daily Mail
19 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Lucy Connolly to walk FREE: Tory Councillor's wife who was jailed last year for 'racist' Tweet during the Southport riots is being released from prison in a matter of hours
Lucy Connolly is set to walk free from prison in just a matter of hours after being jailed for writing a racist tweet during last summer's riots. The mother and former childminder has spent more than nine months behind bars after admitting making the inflammatory post on X in the wake of the Southport attacks in July last year. Connolly, who is also the wife of Tory Councillor Ray Connolly, pleaded guilty to a charge of inciting racial hatred and was handed a 31-month sentence in October. The post, which she later deleted, said: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the b******* for all I care... if that makes me racist so be it.' She has been serving time at HMP Peterborough and had an application to have her sentence reduced rejected in May. But, the Daily Mail can now reveal that Connolly is due to be released on Thursday. The news will come as a huge boost to her husband and 12-year-old daughter as well as campaigners calling for her release. Connelly's imprisonment had prompted allegations that she was a victim of 'two-tier justice', with claims that those with right-wing views are treated more harshly than others in the UK. Connolly's X post was made just hours after killer Axel Rudakubana murdered three young girls and attempted to murder 10 others at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class on July 29, sparking nationwide unrest. She was arrested on August 6, by which point she had deleted her social media account. But other messages which included other condemning remarks were uncovered by officers who seized her phone. The Southport atrocity sparked nationwide unrest, with several people - including Connolly - jailed as a result. Her tweet was viewed 310,000 times in three-and-a-half hours before she deleted it. She later pleaded guilty to distributing material with the intention of stirring up racial hatred at Birmingham Crown Court and was sentenced to 31 months in prison in October. In May, she had an appeal against her sentence refused by three Court of Appeal judges at the Royal Courts of Justice. In a written judgment, Lord Justice Holroyde, said: 'There is no arguable basis on which it could be said that the sentence imposed by the judge was manifestly excessive. 'The application for leave to appeal against sentence therefore fails and is refused.' He added that the principal ground of appeal 'was substantially based on a version of events put forward by the applicant which we have rejected'. Connolly argued she had been 'really angry' after the Southport attacks, but hours after posting the rant on X realised it was not an acceptable thing to say, so deleted it. She also said that news of the Southport murders had triggered her anxiety caused when her baby son, Harry, died as the result of a hospital blunder 13 years earlier. At her appeal case, Adam King, representing Connolly, asked if she had intended for anyone to set fire to asylum hotels or 'murder any politicians'. She replied: 'Absolutely not.' Naeem Valli, for the prosecution, told the court the post was a reflection of her attitude towards immigrants. At the time Mr Connolly told of the pain of his wife's long imprisonment, saying: 'The 284 days of separation have been very hard, particularly on our 12-year-old girl.' Connolly's case later became international news, with US officials saying earlier this year they are keeping tabs on developments over their 'concerns' about free speech. A State Department spokesman said in May: 'We can confirm that we are monitoring this matter. The United States supports freedom of expression at home and abroad, and remains concerned about infringements on freedom of expression.' It came after political commentator and Trump ally Charlie Kirk was made aware of Connolly's ordeal after a visit to the UK and vowed to get the US State Department involved in the process. Appearing on GB News, Kirk said: 'I am going to try and get the US State Department involved. I'm going to bring this up to Marco Rubio. I'm going to send him a text.' Kirk had been in the UK for a debate at the Oxford Union on Monday when the case of Mrs Connolly was raised. He later appeared on GB News, during which he said: 'I'm sorry, speaking as a citizen not on behalf of the US government, is this a way that a liberal democracy and ally of the United States acts? Kirk continued: 'I just find it so outrageous that she is now going to jail for two and a half years for a deleted social media post that she apologised for. As you guys (the UK) have birthed free speech to the world, you are now becoming a totalitarian country. 'I'm going to bring this up to Marco Rubio. I'm going to send him a text. This should be mentioned. It's not new.' Connolly's sentence was recently brought under the spotlight again last month after a man who abused a first class cabin crew on a flight from London was jailed for just 15-months. Recruitment tycoon Salman Iftikhar, 37, was flying in first class when he launched a vile tirade of abuse towards Virgin Atlantic staff on a flight from London Heathrow to Lahore in his homeland of Pakistan. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said the sentence was evidence of 'two-tier justice', given Connolly was jailed for more than double his sentence. Mr Philp told the Mail last month: 'Iftikar was sentenced to only 15 months in prison last week for threatening an air stewardess with gang rape and for racially aggravated harassment. Iftikhar has multiple previous convictions. 'Yet Lucy Connolly got 31 months for a far less serious offence - a prosecution Lord Hermer personally authorised. 'This is two-tier justice in action. 'I have today referred the case to the Attorney General Lord Hermer for review under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme. 'We'll now find out if Hermer is willing to take action to fix Britain's two-tier justice problem.'
Leader Live
29 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Badenoch urges Tory councils to challenge asylum hotels in court
In a letter to Tory councils, Mrs Badenoch said she was 'encouraging' them to 'take the same steps' as Epping Council 'if your legal advice supports it'. Labour dismissed her letter as 'desperate and hypocritical nonsense', but several of its own local authorities have already suggested they too could mount legal action against asylum hotels in their areas. Epping secured a temporary injunction from the High Court on Tuesday, blocking the use of the Essex town's Bell Hotel as accommodation for asylum seekers on planning grounds. The decision has prompted councils controlled by Labour, the Conservatives and Reform UK to investigate whether they could pursue a similar course of action. These include Labour-run Tamworth and Wirral councils, Tory-run Broxbourne and East Lindsey councils and Reform's Staffordshire and West Northamptonshire councils. But Labour's Newcastle City Council and Brighton and Hove City Council have both ruled out legal action. Tuesday's High Court decision has also caused a potential headache for the Home Office, which has a legal duty to house destitute asylum seekers while their claims are being dealt with. If planning laws prevent the Government from using hotels, ministers will face a scramble to find alternative accommodation, potentially in the private rented sector. In her letter, Mrs Badenoch praised Epping Council's legal challenge and told Tory councils she would 'back you to take similar action to protect your community'. But she added that the situation would 'depend on individual circumstances of the case' and suggested Tory councils could pursue 'other planning enforcement options'. She also accused Labour of 'trying to ram through such asylum hotels without consultation and without proper process', saying the Government had reopened the Bell Hotel as asylum accommodation after the Conservatives had closed it. The hotel had previously been used as asylum accommodation briefly in 2020 and then between 2022 and 2024 under the previous Conservative government. A Labour spokesperson said Mrs Badenoch's letter was a 'pathetic stunt' and 'desperate and hypocritical nonsense from the architects of the broken asylum system', saying there were now '20,000 fewer asylum seekers in hotels than at their peak under the Tories'. The letter comes ahead of the publication on Thursday of figures showing how many asylum seekers were being temporarily housed in hotels at the end of June this year. Home Office figures from the previous quarter show there were 32,345 asylum seekers being housed temporarily in UK hotels at the end of March. This was down 15% from the end of December, when the total was 38,079, and 6% lower than the 34,530 at the same point a year earlier. Figures on those staying in hotels date back to December 2022 and showed numbers hit a peak at the end of September 2023, when there were 56,042 asylum seekers in hotels. Data is not released on the number of hotels in use, but it is thought there were more than 400 asylum hotels open in summer 2023. Labour has said this has since been reduced to fewer than 210.
