Minister defends PM's ‘island of strangers' claim amid Labour backlash
The Prime Minister used a Downing Street speech on Monday to lay out plans to 'significantly' reduce net migration as the ruling party seeks to head off the electoral threat from Reform UK.
He suggested that without better integration, the country risks 'becoming an island of strangers, not a nation that walks forward together'.
Left-wing MPs including Labour's Nadia Whittome, along with migrant campaign groups, have condemned Sir Keir's rhetoric as 'dangerous' and divisive.
Migration minister Seema Malhotra dismissed suggestions that Sir Keir's choice of language was anti-migrant when pressed on what the Prime Minister's underlying message had been during an interview later on Monday.
'What that really recognises is that without ways in which we've got common ties that bind us together, the way in which we can communicate well with each other, neighbours can talk to each other, people can play a part and play a role in their communities, that we risk being communities that live side by side, rather than work and walk together,' she told BBC Radio 4's World at One programme.
We're ending Britain's open borders experiment.
For too long, businesses were actively encouraged to bring in lower paid workers, rather than invest in our own people.
We're fixing the system and restoring control to our borders.
Here's how. Thread👇 pic.twitter.com/03e3eHW1sw
— UK Prime Minister (@10DowningStreet) May 12, 2025
Asked whether the Prime Minister had been saying there were too many people moving to the UK and integration cannot happen fast enough, Ms Malhotra said: 'Well no, that's not what he was saying.
'I think what he recognised as well in the press statement this morning was how much migration has been and remains a vital part of our identity.'
Ms Whittome, Labour MP for Nottingham East, said: 'The step-up in anti-migrant rhetoric from the Government is shameful and dangerous.
'Migrants are our neighbours, friends and family. To suggest that Britain risks becoming 'an island of strangers' because of immigration mimics the scaremongering of the far-right.'
The step-up in anti-migrant rhetoric from the government is shameful and dangerous.
Migrants are our neighbours, friends and family.
To suggest that Britain risks becoming 'an island of strangers' because of immigration mimics the scaremongering of the far-right.
— Nadia Whittome MP (@NadiaWhittomeMP) May 12, 2025
Labour MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill Bell Ribeiro-Addy appeared to endorse the message by reposting Ms Whittome's statement on social media site X.
Labour MP for Luton North Sarah Owen warned that 'chasing the tail of the right risks taking our country down a very dark path'.
She said: 'I am proud of what immigrants like my mum and those across Luton North have given to our country.
'The best way to avoid becoming an 'island of strangers' is investing in communities to thrive – not pitting people against each other.
The problems in our society are not caused by migrants or refugees.
They are caused by an economic system rigged in favour of corporations and billionaires.
If the government wanted to improve people's lives, it would tax the rich and build an economy that works for us all.
— Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) May 12, 2025
'I've said it before and will say it again: chasing the tail of the right risks taking our country down a very dark path.'
Zarah Sultana, the Coventry East MP who sits as an Independent following a rebel vote over the two-child benefit cap, accused Sir Keir of imitating Enoch Powell's infamous 'rivers of blood speech' in the 1960s.
'That speech fuelled decades of racism and division. Echoing it today is a disgrace,' she said.
'It adds to anti-migrant rhetoric that puts lives at risk. Shame on you, Keir Starmer.'
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who was elected last year as an Independent, said: 'The problems in our society are not caused by migrants or refugees.
'They are caused by an economic system rigged in favour of corporations and billionaires.
'If the Government wanted to improve people's lives, it would tax the rich and build an economy that works for us all.'
Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer said the language was 'divisive' and 'lifted straight out of Reform's playbook'.
When will @Keir_Starmer learn that no matter how good his Nigel Farage impression gets, it won't save him from wipeout at the hands of Reform? Here's another idea – how about doing the work that's needed to actually make people's lives better? 🧵
— Carla Denyer (@carla_denyer) May 12, 2025
Care4Calais, a refugee charity, said the Prime Minister's 'dangerous' rhetoric risked fanning the flames of the far-right, and called on him to apologise.
'This is dangerous language for any prime minister to use. Has Starmer forgotten last year's far-right riots?' Steve Smith, the charity's chief executive, said.
'Shameful language like this will only inflame the fire of the far-right and risks further race riots that endanger survivors of horrors such as war, torture and modern slavery.
'Starmer must apologise.'
Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: 'It's right that ministers look to address concern over immigration, but the public wants principled competence rather than populist performance.'
Natasha Tsangarides, associate director of advocacy at Freedom from Torture, said: 'Successive governments have been hooked on the cheap political points they can score by punching down on migrants, and it appears that this Labour Government is no different.
'Instead of more appeasement to the right wing, this Government should focus on building an effective and humane immigration system, including a fair and effective asylum process that's capable of making the right decision quickly, so that survivors of torture can recover in safety and rebuild their lives in strong and united communities.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
22 minutes ago
- The Independent
New Reform chair David Bull calls for return of death penalty
The new chairman of Reform UK has said there is a 'very strong case' for the death penalty - 24 hours after Nigel Farage said he would not support its reintroduction. Dr David Bull, a former medical doctor, has said he would support the return of capital punishment for criminals such as Axel Rudakabana, who murdered three girls in a mass stabbing at a children's dance class in Southport. 'For those people, I think there is a very strong case that I would support the death penalty,' Dr Bull, who succeeded Zia Yusuf as Reform's chairman on Tuesday. He also added to a row in Reform's ranks over burqas, calling for the religious covering to be banned, saying 'I don't like seeing people in them'. He added: 'I don't like seeing people in burqas. I feel particularly in East London, where I live, it certainly has divided the community. We've got a whole swathes of people not even speaking English, which I just think is not acceptable.' Dr Bull was unveiled as Reform's chairman at a press conference at which Mr Farage sought to put the chaotic saga of Mr Yusuf's sudden and unexpected departure - and swift return just days later - behind him. Asked for his thoughts on the death penalty, Mr Farage has said it is an 'issue of conscience', likening it to the debate over assisted dying. He said: 'Personally, given there have been 500 quite serious miscarriages of justice in this country since the 1970s, I don't think I could ever support it. But I understand why others take a different view. 'I think it is quite interesting that the younger generation seem to increasingly support the death penalty… it will be back in the next decade as an issue of major national debate.' The death penalty was fully abolished in the UK in 1998. Asked about his view on the Reform row about banning burqas, he said he had wider concerns about face coverings. He added: 'Do I think in cultural terms the burqa fits in with the British way of life? Not really, no.' Former television presenter Dr Bull was announced as the party's chairman at a press conference in Westminster, as Mr Farage told reporters that his job would be to "give leadership" and "not to get involved with the admin". The appointment of Dr Bull, who previously presented Watchdog, Tomorrow's World and Most Haunted Live! comes after businessman Mr Yusuf resigned from the position last week following an internal row over the party's position on the burqa. Mr Yusuf said he was "hugely excited" that former MEP Dr Bull was taking the role. "This party is no longer a start-up," Mr Yusuf told reporters. "I think it's gone to a scale-up phase ... the reality is what we need now in a chairman is someone who is an incredible communicator, someone who's loved universally across the party ... someone who's going to I think do a better job than me at energising volunteers on the front line." "I wholeheartedly congratulate him and I know he's going to do an incredible job for us," he added. Mr Farage said Dr Bull would come to the chairman's role with "terrific verve, energy, enthusiasm". He described Dr Bull as a "terrific communicator" and that his "job is not to get involved with the admin, is not to get involved in the tech" but rather is to "give leadership to that volunteer army out there of people". Mr Farage also said it is "very good" that the new chairman has television experience, telling reporters that "message delivery and simplicity of message in politics is very important". Mr Yusuf returned to Reform over the weekend, just 48 hours after he quit, saying he had made an "error". His departure followed a row, in which he said the party's newest MP, Sarah Pochin's question to the prime minister about banning the burqa was "dumb".
Wales Online
an hour ago
- Wales Online
Rachel Reeves' £445m is a major victory for Wales, but there is more to do
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info As of yesterday lunchtimes, Wales' First Minister and her cabinet were still in the dark, waiting to hear whether their letters, their lobbying, their pleas, had been heard by Rachel Reeves and Keir Starmer. They knew that if Wales didn't get a big sum, it would be disastrous. Not just politically, as it would provide untold hours of capital for opponents to be able to accuse them of not even having influence with their party colleagues in power in Westminster, but with voters. Voters who have been telling any Labour party member knocking on their door that they were fed up. Fed up of the cuts to welfare payments, fed up of the changes to winter fuel payments, and fed up with services that just aren't good enough. Then in the early evening on Tuesday night, the figure of £445m was starting to circulate, and there was a collective exhale of breath. That is clearly a big sum of money that Rachel Reeves is all but certain to confirm will be spent in Wales when she stands up in the Commons today, and it is specifically to improve rail in Wales. For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter here It will be spent by both governments - because rail is complicated and bits of the network here are controlled by the Welsh Government and other parts of it by the UK government But the bit of the announcement that actually brought particular joy was that the figure before the pound sign was prefaced with two words "at least". There has been a concerted lobbying effort behind the scenes. Labour figures are talking up Jo Stevens' role as Welsh secretary and it is certainly a big win for her. Labour MPs too have been at pains to explain they have been involved, slowly and cautiously bending the ear of chief secretary to the Treasury, Darren Jones, about why it made sense to invest in rail in Wales. WalesOnline has been campaigning since the start of the year. We've given a platform to different voices arguing what should be done to rectify decades of underfunding of the rail network here - and put pressure on politicians to act in a critical year in which the Labour administration at Westminster has two significant opportunities to act. (Image: Marc White / WalesOnline) For politicians, it has been a long game, a careful plan of sending formal letters, of getting public acknowledgement rail had been historically underfunded in Wales. MPs from Wales met with Mr Jones privately to explain why they need this, the benefits it will bring on both an individual constituency level, but to Wales as a nation, and those dire polling numbers won't be far from anyone's minds. This spending review has committed money to improving rail in Wales in the short term, over the next few years. That was one of the asks of our campaign. The other is for the UK Government to put in place a mechanism to ensure fair funding over the long term as well. Keir Starmer's government has an opportunity through its Railways Bill to put in place a system to ensure that the Welsh rail network is never denied fair funding again. This is more complicated than it has ever been before because the Welsh Government has control of the Core Valleys Lines. But the UK government can put in place a system to ensure that both the Welsh Government gets fair funding to maintain and enhance those rail lines and also that a fair share of investment goes into the lines like the main lines in south and north Wales that are still owned and run by Westminster. This is vital because the way the Treasury has historically allocated investment through the Green Book formula - which focuses with tunnel vision on return on investment - has meant that cash has been ploughed into the most populous areas in the south east for decades and decades. WalesOnline's campaign for fair funding Keir Starmer has a historic chance this year to end decades of second-class treatment of the Welsh rail network. Far less money is spent per person on rail in Wales compared to England and that has left us with far less electrified track and without the capacity to build a transport network fit for the nation's needs. This spring Mr Starmer's government is conducting a multi-year spending review which gives him the opportunity to reset the amount of funding allocated to the rail network in Wales. Later on in the year, he's planning a major bit of rail legislation that will be a once-in-a-generation chance to put in place a mechanism to guarantee fairness in perpetuity. Read more about this here. You can help put pressure on him to do use this historic opportunity by signing WalesOnline's petition on the UK government website calling for fair rail funding for Wales. Very simply, we want people in England and Wales to be treated the same when it comes to rail. There are arguments about how this should be done but widespread agreement that things must change. One academic told WalesOnline the Wales always comes at the bottom of the pile and will continue to unless there is full devolution. Another told us there was no appetite in either Cardiff Bay or Westminster for devolution and this lack of ambition was repeating the biggest mistake the Welsh Government had ever made. There are fears that unless there is full devolution, Wales will suffer every time the UK government cuts spending but protects major projects in England, as is happening right now. However the Welsh Government believes fair funding can be delivered without full devolution, which is does not want. And the head of a passenger body told us he didn't care who got the money as long as they did a good job with it, adding more cash could make a huge difference. The result has been that London and the surrounding counties have an extensive, electrified rail network encompassing underground trains, light rail lines, commuter services, dedicated airport lines and express services all serving the UK's most densely populated region. But Wales? We've been left with old stock, reliability issues and overcrowded services we all know too well. In recent years, the Welsh Government has been ploughing in its own money to address some of these problems. But that money has effectively been redirected from the share of public spending on other areas that the Welsh Government gets from Westminster. Today's announcement ensures that there will be a significant sum of funding for rail in Wales that should allow investment in both maintenance and also improvements, such as work on the Burns stations in south Wales and progress towards electrification in the north. Yet we will again be left depending on academics reviewing spending in the years to come to work out just how fair this has been - and whether these millions being spent in Wales are truly a fair share of the millions that will be spent in the same period on the flagship projects in England like HS2, East West rail. The UK government has an opportunity later this year to end the baffling, endless, arguments about how projects are classified, which has left the public utterly befuddled. It has an opportunity to guarantee fairness for posterity. There is a very simple truth that over the coming decades billions and billions are going to be spent in England on massive schemes like HS2, East West rail and the huge plans for trams and trains in the north of England. Although we've been talking about it for years, HS2 is not a historic injustice. It's still largely a future one as most of the money has not been spent yet. There are still 16 more years of spending to come. The widely-misunderstood fact is that the £4bn figure everyone cites is not something Wales has already missed out on - it's the amount Wales will miss out on if nothing is done. That's why it will be slightly misleading if you hear politicians today compare the £445m being announced in today's spending review with that much larger HS2 consequential figure. A fair share of those HS2 billions still can and should come to Wales. Not all of it should go to the Welsh Government, at least not while much of the rail network in Wales is controlled from Westminster. But this argument can be ended by putting in place a formula to guarantee a population-based share of rail funding for Wales for posterity. The lobbying campaign that delivered today's funding announcement should celebrate. But it will have to go again because major bits of rail legislation are few and far between. It is 20 years since the last one and the importance of this opportunity must be hammered home to politicians and civil servants in Westminster. There is a chance for Wales to put baffling arguments about rail classification, like the £6bn East West rail row we wrote about here, behind us. It is accepted by both governments that Wales has missed out in terms of rail. Today is a welcome step in the right direction but Keir Starmer must now take the chance he has later this year to make sure it doesn't happen again.
Edinburgh Reporter
an hour ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Report finds inadequacies and lost emails at the City Chambers
The City of Edinburgh Council will next week discuss a report by former Information Commissioner, Kevin Dunion, which he has presented to them after a four month long investigation. In February the council appointed Mr Dunion to report to them on matters surrounding former Council Leader, Cllr Cammy Day, who had resigned as council leader in December 2024 amid allegations of misconduct against him. In the report Mr Dunion suggests ending Christmas parties held by political groups within the City Chambers, questions the working arrangements of the council where officers work in Waverley Court while councillors work in offices on the High Street, and suggests a refreshed induction and training process for new councillors in regard to the Councillors Code of Conduct, with an annual refresher for existing councillors. Mr Dunion said many of his interviewees suggested the practice of holding such social events in the City Chambers should cease. He reminds councillors that the Code of Conduct revised in 2021 states that each one of the 63 elected in Edinburgh gives a personal undertaking: 'I will meet the public's expectations by ensuring that my conduct is above reproach.' There are also declarations on the part of the councillor that they will not engage in bullying or harassment. Chief Executive Paul Lawrence said: 'I want to thank Kevin Dunion for leading this sensitive review and for his report, not least given the complexity of the brief and tight timescales. 'I know this must have been challenging and a difficult experience for many people and I particularly want to thank those who came forward to be interviewed or provided information to the review. Your input is very much appreciated. 'Subject to approval by councillors next Thursday, we will bring a further report back to the Policy and Sustainability Committee in August, outlining our proposed actions in response to Mr Dunion's recommendations.' The Dunion Report Cllr Day denied any wrongdoing, saying that any communication of explicit photos on dating apps, which was the inappropriate behaviour he was accused of, was his personal business, but he stepped down as leader on 9 December 2024. He was also administratively suspended by the Labour Party. Police Scotland said there was not enough evidence to mount an investigation and the Ethical Standards Commissioner confirmed to The Edinburgh Reporter in April this year that there were no other complaints 'currently being investigated against Cllr Day' (except an historic one regarding a Labour Christmas party and whether booking procedures had been followed correctly). That complaint was made against Cllr Day and five of his Labour colleagues but was dismissed. Mr Dunion was charged with considering whether the allegations against Cllr Day were properly considered and investigated in line with the council's policies and procedures. The allegations involved two whistleblowing disclosures made in 2023, a complaint to the Chief Executive, Andrew Kerr, in December 2023 and an anonymous complaint to the then Council Leader, Cllr Adam McVey, in 2018. Regarding this last complaint Mr Dunion writes: 'The Business Manager [to the Council Leader] at the time said that they would deal with it and responded on 17 May 2018 as follows: 'I am very sorry to read your email and as I handle the Leader's emails, I am responding to ask you to contact the police as we cannot take any action on such a serious allegation. Also, I am concerned that you need to approach someone or an organisation to help support you through this.' According to the former Council Leader, he did not see this response sent by his Business Manager until it was published online in 2024.' In relation to the 2018 allegation the finding is that the former council leader (Cllr McVey) 'now accepts that he should, at the least, have informed the Monitoring Officer'. He confirmed reading the email and discussing it with staff. Emails from 2018 – despite extensive investigations by an IT consultancy – could not be recovered, as the Council Leader's Business Manager had left the council by then, and that email account was removed. Although Cllr McVey mentioned the matter to a Chief Superintendent with whom he had a regular meeting, he was told that unless there was someone named (victim or perpetrator) then nothing could be done by the police. Despite allegations on social media and in the press of the content of the complaint, the handling of this is defined by Mr Dunion as inadequate – mainly due to the insufficient records kept by the council. Mr Dunion conducted interviews with 29 people and received 20 written representations from current and former councillors and council staff. All councillors had been invited to interview. Chief Executive Paul Lawrence said in his report to next week's council: 'As part of the remit all elected members and colleagues were invited to participate in the process.' SafeCall The whistleblowing procedure SafeCall deals with allegations of misconduct among council staff, and Mr Dunion suggests extending that to councillors as it might 'discourage unacceptable behaviour'. There is also a suggestion this confidential service could be extended to members of the public who could then use it to retain their anonymity. Mr Dunion said in the report: 'Even if Safecall advised them to go to the police, as the Business Manager did, at least a record of the complaint would exist, and the Monitoring Officer would have been aware of it. Consideration should be given to routing complainants to Safecall for the purpose of confidential information gathering and advice.' Leaks Mr Dunion was also asked to consider apparent leaks of confidential emails to the press and whether safeguards in the council are sufficient to prevent any instances of behaviour such as that alleged against the former council leader. He speculates that leaks may be politically motivated: 'Unfortunately, however, as has occurred there may be a temptation to leak details to cause political or personal embarrassment.' A confidential email from the Chief Executive to political group leaders found its way into the Daily Record in December 2024. As well as this, Mr Dunion found that text from a confidential report dating from May 2024 to the Whistleblowing Sub-Committee was leaked by someone who had access to the report – and who concluded that the unnamed senior individual in question was Cllr Day. Mr Dunion appears quite frustrated by this leak and said: 'I have interviewed the members of the Sub-Committee. They clearly understand the confidentiality requirements placed upon them regarding the reports they receive, as well as the verbal updates and discussions at committee. I have individually challenged each one over the leak, as to whether they are directly responsible for providing it to The Times or have disclosed the information to someone else who may have done so. All have denied doing so. Many have expressed a view on this however there is no evidence which would allow an assertion to be made by me. Nor are there any proportionate means within the limited capacity of this review to do more. 'There is no doubt however that this constitutes an egregious breach of the confidentiality requirements of Councillors Code of Conduct and undermines confidence in the whistleblowing process. It calls into question whether whistleblowing complaints regarding councillors should be investigated or whether the Whistleblowing Sub-Committee has to be provided with information regarding such investigations.' Mr Dunion has also suggested that the council uses the 2025 staff engagement survey for feedback on speaking up and raising concerns about possible bullying and harassment from councillors. Cllr Cammy Day was elected as Council Leader in 2022 Christmas parties The report mentions in particular the Christmas parties held by all political groups within the City Chambers when alcohol is served. There is a council policy on alcohol for staff, but not for councillors, and it advises staff not to allow themselves to become intoxicated or their judgement impaired. If they do then there is a clear warning of disciplinary action. After a 2023 party it is alleged that a young Ukrainian man made a complaint of sexual harassment to a councillor who communicated it to councillors in another political party. 'It referenced unsolicited messages and images being sent through social media which continued even after asking for the behaviour to stop. The recipient was said to be feeling extremely harassed.' There is a complex timeline regarding this complaint and one other which were made anonymously or semi-anonymously. Neither were followed up on by the complainants, with the first unable to provide evidence. As is usual, nothing of these whistleblowing complaints was communicated to Cllr Day until December 2024. The report states: 'The complained of councillor is not mentioned by name in the email exchanges. However, in conversation prior to the formal email being submitted, the Chief Executive was made aware that it related to Councillor Day.' The Chief Executive did raise this matter with police, but they deemed there was insufficient evidence for any investigation to take place. In regard to this complaint Mr Dunion was content that proper procedure had been followed. Mr Dunion has now presented the report in which he outlines in some detail what happened since December 2024, and makes recommendations as to what the council will do about his findings. Recommendations Mr Dunion has made 14 recommendations: (i) Review procedures currently in place for dealing with potentially inappropriate behaviour by Councillors. Clarify and expand routes of complaints. (ii) Ensure, whatever the source, that a record of complaints, and responses to them, are maintained, even if it is informally addressed or resolved, to reflect the Councillors Code of Conduct provisions regarding Bullying and Harassment. (iii) Distinguish between the source of complaints. For staff members, the response should seek to align with HR policies and have a clear escalation and feedback route, as well as consideration of recording and monitoring to allow actions to be agreed and implemented. (iv) Review and communicate safeguarding arrangements for those who raise complaints. (v) Ensure that Council staff, line managers, Speak Up Supporters, Trade Unions and Colleague Networks are aware of the provisions at (iii) and (iv) above. (vi) Where appropriate, details in relation to specific managerial response or handling of complaints to be passed to Service Director – HR for consideration of potential actions in line with relevant HR Policy. (vii) Consider inclusion of relevant speaking up and raising concerns questions to gain wider staff feedback as part of colleague engagement survey due to be conducted during 2025 to allow further actions to be considered. (viii) Review the Whistleblowing policy and the extent to which complaints against councillors from the public will be accepted for information gathering and escalation. (ix) Consideration should be given to referring complainants to Safecall for the purpose of information gathering and advice. (x) Review the scrutiny function of the Whistleblowing Sub-Committee, as to whether or to what extent it can propose operational actions to resolve complaints. (xi) In the event it is decided to accept Whistleblowing complaints against councillors, consider measures to avoid conflict of interest and reduce the prospect of breaches of confidence, such as restricted information being provided to the Whistleblowing Sub-Committee. (xii) Refresh induction and training process for new councillors and undertake annual refresher training for existing Councillors on Councillors Code of Conduct, incorporating the Protocol for Relationships between Councillors and Employees and Advice Note for Councillors on Bullying and Harassment, as well as any other relevant City of Edinburgh Council specific guidance or procedures, including that when agreed at (i) above. (xiii) As part of wider culture and fostering trust, consider the impact of the current working locations, and relationship and networking opportunities with Councillors and staff. (xiv) Consider the appropriateness of social events and hospitality arrangements. Edinburgh City Chambers. Photo: © 2022, Martin P. McAdam Like this: Like Related
