Starmer mocked by Farage for ‘learning a great deal' from Reform UK after immigration backlash
It came after the prime minister's claim that the UK risks becoming an 'island of strangers' as a result of migration was compared to inflammatory language used by Enoch Powell in his 'rivers of blood' speech.
The 1968 speech whipped up a frenzy of anti-immigration hatred across the UK after it imagined a future where the white population in Britain 'found themselves made strangers in their own country'.
The Reform UK leader – who urged Sir Keir to 'go further' on his sweeping migration reforms – taunted the prime minister: 'We at Reform - a party that is alive and kicking - very much enjoyed your speech on Monday. You seem to be learning a great deal from us.'
But speaking at Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs), Plaid Cymru MP Liz Saville-Roberts questioned Sir Keir's change in stance, pointing out that he used to speak of 'compassion and dignity' for migrants.
'Is there any belief he holds that survives more than a week in Downing Street?', the MP for Dwyfor Meirionnydd asked.
Critics have linked the change to Labour seeking to challenge the rise of Reform.
But Sir Keir denied he was reacting to any political party and said he was introducing the new measures because 'it was the right thing to do'.
The Commons clash came as Reform released voter intention calculations based on this month's local elections, which they claim reveal that a raft of leading Labour and Tory MPs would lose their seats to Farage's party.
This includes Labour energy secretary Ed Miliband in Doncaster North, Dover MP Mike Tapp, and minister and Lincoln MP Hamish Falconer. For the Tories, shadow environment secretary Victorian Atkins and shadow chancellor Mel Stride would be among those who would lose to Reform. Even Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle could be under threat in Chorley, they said.
However, Labour MPs, trade unions and charities have taken aim at the prime minister, after he said that the number of people entering the country is causing 'incalculable damage'.
Senior Labour backbencher, Clive Lewis, told The Independent the PM's language 'doesn't just alienate communities, it drives people away from our country altogether'.
'If those at the top think this is a clever tactic to win another five years by rolling out the red carpet for Nigel Farage, they're mistaken. We are losing far more progressive voters than we are gaining from Reform UK', he said.
MP Nadia Whittome said the language was 'shameful and dangerous', and accused the PM of 'mimicking the scaremongering of the far right".
Meanwhile, Sheffield Hallam MP Olivia Blake suggested the phrase could 'risk legitimising the same far-right violence we saw in last year's summer riots'.
But hitting back, Cabinet minister Pat McFadden said the backlash was 'way overblown'.
Pressed on whether he would use the language himself, he told LBC: "It depends on the context. I mean, I might, because what the prime minister was talking about was, we need a society with rules. We need a society with responsibilities and obligations. And that's absolutely right. We all believe in that.'
Meanwhile, Sir Keir's official spokesman said on Tuesday that the prime minister stands by his words and rejects comparisons with Enoch Powell.
'The prime minister rejects those comparisons and absolutely stands behind the argument he was making that migrants make a massive contribution to our country, but migration needs to be controlled', the official said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
25 minutes ago
- The National
Tell voters we will hold new indyref no matter what Westminster says
For Labour to win with a candidate they were so embarrassed by that they wouldn't let him speak in public is a low point in recent Scottish politics. But, more importantly, from an SNP perspective, it was another signal that we are not doing enough to enthuse our potential voters. The SNP have a record to be proud of in government. From free tuition to the Scottish Child Payment, we continually show that even with one hand tied behind our back we are the most progressive and efficient government in the UK. However, we have now been in power for 18 years and the public see things such as free prescriptions and the Winter Fuel Allowance as the norm and expect them to be there in perpetuity, not really understanding that if any of the Unionist parties take control of Holyrood these benefits will disappear like snow aff a dyke. READ MORE: Glasgow's new skyscraper guidelines sparks split over city's skyline future Where I believe we have failed as a government is in not making clear to the people of Scotland the real risk they run every time they vote for a Starmer/Sarwar Labour Party of seeing these things go. Have a look at the mess they've made of Wales's NHS or their continual attacks on the poorest, the elderly and the infirm in the UK. We have to get the message out loud and clear about how much money we spend mitigating the right-wing social policies of the previous Conservative government and, shamefully, of this Labour Government. There is no doubt that we are the best party to run Scotland. The alternatives simply do not bear thinking about. But, as I say, familiarity breeds contempt, and I think that's where we are in the minds of the Scottish people. The beauty is, though, that unlike the other political parties, we hold a trump card and that is, of course, the cause of independence. I have written this before and said it a million times: if we don't have independence front and centre then we simply become another party seeking power to do what it can for the people it represents under the constitutional settlement available to us. That in itself is a good thing but after 18 years in government we end up where we are. However, we know – the proof is there in our record in government – only with independence can we ensure we will be able to continue to take a different path from the rest of the UK and start to make things even better. So what now? Well for a start we have to make independence the centrepiece of every leaflet, every piece of campaign material and manifesto we deliver. We have to show the people of Scotland that independence is not just something we want for its own sake but because it's the route to a healthier, wealthier, happier Scotland – and we have to find a way to do this that bypasses the mainstream media. If last week showed us anything its that our two primary TV channels either don't understand the Scottish political make-up or they understand it only too well. How else can we explain why a Debate Night programme the night before the by-election can have three Labour representatives on it, along with a token Tory and one SNP politician? This is either rank idiocy/ignorance or a blatant attempt to assist one party out of what looked at the time like a political quagmire. You can make up your own minds which you think it is, but either way for us to expect to get a fair hearing on either of these two channels is naïve beyond belief. We must make this forthcoming Holyrood election the Independence Election. We must tell the people of Scotland that if there is an independence-supporting majority government, we will immediately inform the Westminster government that we are taking steps to hold an independence referendum. We should suggest that the best way to do this is with a Section 30 order but either way we will go ahead with one as that is what the people of Scotland have demanded. We should then go back to the Scottish Parliament, ask it to reconfirm the desire to hold the referendum and then set a date. As for the Unionist parties? Democracy is about making available the means for people to participate in the process. If they choose not to do so then they have still used their democratic right. WE then move forward based on the results of the referendum. We cannot continue with the same old, 'give us a mandate, then we'll ask for a Section 30, then we'll voice our disappointment when refused' and then wait for the next election to repeat the process. The last referendum was more than 10 years ago; even in the Unionist calendar that is a political generation. Disagree? Well, they don't. They wrote it into the Good Friday Agreement that seven years was the period between any potential referendums taking place regarding the unification of Ireland. The difference here? Fear of losing Scotland, colonial arrogance and rank hypocrisy. Regarding the indy movement, I think a couple of things have to happen. First of all,please stop pretending that the SNP don't care about independence – you have no idea how ridiculous and insulting that is. Secondly, we all need to put our differences aside and agree that the one thing that matters between now and 2026 is that we get an independence-supporting majority in the Scottish Parliament. The rest can be dealt with after that. Without independence we are not in a position to seriously change the things we want to change. And for SNP members, can we stop begging for a change of leader every time we don't get the result we want. John Swinney has been a member of the SNP and a fighter for independence for well over 30 years. He has constantly shown he knows how to win elections and is someone people tend to trust. Yet every time we lose a by-election or an opinion poll goes against us, we get a clamour for some other politician, usually an MP, who will never have run a department or chaired a parliamentary committee, to become the party leader because they are good in the media or with a witty quip at Prime Minister's Questions. It takes more than that to win a battle of this size. This is not an attack on any of my colleagues at Westminster. There are a number of very talented and able people there, Some of them have put themselves forward to stand in the Holyrood election and that is extremely welcome, but between now and the forthcoming Scottish Parliament election, every member of the SNP should be right behind John. All I ask is that you continue to pressure the leadership to ensure that independence is front and centre of all that we do. It's where it belongs. It's what we are all about.
The National
25 minutes ago
- The National
‘At least we're not those guys' is a strategy lacking in inspiration
Proud socialist and trans ally Christina McKelvie will be succeeded in Holyrood by a member of a right-wing and viciously transphobic Labour Party – and Reform UK came a close third with more than 7000 votes, solidifying proof that Nigel Farage's party will undoubtedly return a number of MSPs at next year's Holyrood election. Ultimately, though, the most depressing element of all was the utter lack of inspired campaigning from the two biggest parties. The SNP's campaign relied entirely on the premise of 'we're not Reform', while Labour's was all about 'we're not the SNP'. Successive front pages of the Daily Record featured messages from John Swinney telling voters that Labour can't win, so vote SNP to stop Reform, and Anas Sarwar telling voters that Reform can't win, so vote Labour to stop the SNP. READ MORE: Glasgow's new skyscraper guidelines sparks split over city's skyline future Swinney's proved to be far more embarrassing, in that it was ultimately exposed as completely untrue – Labour ended up taking the seat and Davy Russell is Holyrood's newest MSP. (Image: Jane Barlow/PA Wire) But the messaging from both the SNP and Labour throughout this campaign was that of two parties devoid of hope or inspiration or any real meaningful ideas to actually improve people's lives. Both relied on telling voters 'at least we're not those guys'. And consequently both parties lost thousands of votes compared to 2021. Many both within and outwith the SNP have remarked in the days since the by-election that it was a mistake for John Swinney and his party to stake their campaign solely on being the anti-Reform party, and I think they're partially right. Regular readers of my column will know that I'm a strong advocate of parties on the left – particularly my own party, the Scottish Greens – tackling Reform UK head-on by offering a genuine alternative to the far-right bile and duplicitous snake oil being put out by Farage and his team. At next year's Scottish Parliament election, it'll be the Greens who are best placed to stop Reform from returning MSPs via the regional lists, and I believe we should be shouting this from the rooftops. Nonetheless, this strategy only works if the alternative on offer is one voters genuinely believe in. It only works if voters who are scunnered with mainstream parties selling them false promises election after election believe that the party they're voting for will materially improve their lives. It's not good enough to just say 'it's between us and Reform' – especially if that turns out to not even be true – you have to build an alternative to Reform that voters can be excited to get behind. It's also not good enough to just talk the talk – you have to walk the walk as well. That means being able to enact meaningful change in the Scottish Parliament (which, for smaller parties like the Greens, means co-operating with other parties and striking deals to implement our policies). But it also means living by your principles and refusing to vote for budgets and other motions which will hurt the people you're supposed to represent. It's a fine line to balance, but a crucially important one to ensure voters trust you to get things done, and that you'll also stand up for them when the going gets tough. Beyond just 'we're not Reform', the SNP had very little substance to offer in this by-election campaign. The party's billboards in the constituency celebrated the return of Winter Fuel Payments – a worthy and important policy after the payments were cut by the Labour Westminster government, but that's merely a return to what last year was just the status quo, it's not a way the Scottish Government is actually making things better for people. The SNP can't keep pointing to free prescriptions and tuition forever – voters in Scotland don't want to know how their lives are better than those of their neighbours south of the Border, they want to know how they are better today than they were five years ago. It's a genuine struggle to think of any policies the SNP has implemented in the current parliamentary term that have genuinely improved the lives of people across Scotland which didn't come from the Scottish Greens. So it's little wonder that, in a constituency crying out for change, the message of 'it's us versus Reform' failed to resonate. The fact is, Reform are on the rise whether we like it or not. We'll have Reform MSPs elected across Scotland this time next year, and the way things are going Farage will be prime minister come 2029. It's not good enough for us to just sit back and let that happen just so we can say 'we told you so' – we have to do everything we can to stop the rise of the far-right because it's no exaggeration to say that people's lives will depend on it. But the way we do that has to be by offering a genuine alternative. We need to use the full powers of Holyrood to tax the rich and redistribute wealth to fund our public services. We need to return our NHS – one of the greatest successes of socialism in the history of the UK – to its original purpose of free, publicly funded, accessible healthcare for all. We need to desperately reform the regressive council tax system to radically reduce the amount paid by ordinary people and increase that paid by land barons and millionaires. All of these are policies well within the competence of the Scottish Parliament, if only our politicians had the ambition to get on with it. Not only would they genuinely improve people's lives across Scotland, but by demonstrating competent government and a real alternative we could build a far more sturdy case for independence – the real key to unlocking the even more radical changes needed to transform our society.
The National
25 minutes ago
- The National
The referendum didn't just spook the British establishment
This after First Minister John Swinney had been insisting the only way to beat Reform UK – who won more than 7000 votes and were in touching distance of the two main parties – was to vote SNP. It all turned into a somewhat embarrassing affair. But it did go to show that the SNP's rather cynical electoral ploy came a cropper earlier than anticipated. The idea was to centre the threat of Reform in their communications, and discipline their base into mobilising to vote. It would also, in theory, have fragmented the Scottish Labour campaign, especially given how susceptible the party has been, the party lost votes to Reform south of the Border last month. READ MORE: Glasgow's new skyscraper guidelines sparks split over city's skyline future And, while motivating its ailing activist base, this would also provide a neat way to avoid talking about the lack of tangible change the SNP have delivered for working-class Scots despite their long years of political dominance. But any strategy that makes sense on paper is only worth its salt if it meets the challenges posed in reality. This didn't. And we know the SNP special advisers at least partly agree, because in the days following, the First Minister started talking about independence again. That is a word that was barely uttered during the by-election. Indeed, it has been near absent from the SNP's public platform for quite some time now. Many in the independence movement, quite naturally, point to this as yet more evidence that the party cannot deliver on what is supposed to be its reason for existence in the first place. At the same time, it is also true to say that the national question is not exactly at a high watermark. Nevertheless, there will now be an attempt to 'push the independence button' once again. But herein lies the rub: independence has been reduced to a phrase, rather than struggled for as a cause. The blame for that lies not with Unionist opponents, but with the SNP leadership, who over the years since the referendum have sought to sanitise the issue and to exert control over a once-vibrant movement. It was wheeled out like a party trick in the run-up to elections, with empty proclamations about a coming referendum. This worked for a period, but was already reaching its limitations before the Supreme Court ruling – itself a product of strategic misadventure – brought the false promises to a conclusion. Thus, there is a healthy dose of cynicism among the electorate that the SNP have a plan to deliver independence, not least among those who support national self-determination. It doesn't end there. Precisely because it had been utilised as a mechanism to marshal support at the ballot box and little else, the issue has not been properly developed over the last 10 years. Any work on the prospectus via the Growth Commission was shown to be contradictory on its own terms. It was widely discredited, as well as being repudiated by independence campaigners themselves. Disastrously, even the crucial questions like currency have been run into a cul-de-sac. Even now the official position is for sterlingisation, which effectively leaves monetary control with the Bank of England for an indefinite period. In the meantime, the Scottish Government has been busily selling off key assets and parts of Scotland's future industrial base to the lowest – yes, the lowest – bidder. And that is not to mention the integration of freeports, which are subnational tax havens, over which the Scottish Government has no ability to intervene. In essence, it's a kind of paint-by-numbers neoliberalism, where the only point of governing is to administer on behalf of, and to outsource to, the corporate sector. It is often said that the independence movement of 2014 gave the British state a fright. It did. But it also spooked the Scottish establishment. This is why it was always seen as a problem to be contained, rather than an asset to be nourished, by the SNP leadership. It is why, in the months after the referendum, the whole issue was syphoned off into a cult of personality around then-first minister Nicola Sturgeon. And let's be clear: blame for that goes two ways. Yes, the SNP leadership worked with some skill to defenestrate any challenges that might emerge from below. But the independence movement, in its majority left critical thinking at the door too. This was an unfortunate product of the No vote, which submerged the radical and irreverent energies imbued in the Yes campaign. It means that today independence has become divorced from the big questions around living standards, public services and so forth. It's a far cry from 2014, when quite organically, people understood that a vote for independence was a vote against the failed legacy of New Labour and Conservative austerity. Now that class dimension has been lost, thanks to years of turning independence into a substance-free phrase. And Swinney is not going to be able to bring it back. Even if he wanted to, his political instincts are that of the consummate manager, and the steady-as-she-goes technocrat. Those are sensibilities which have been drummed into the party hierarchy too. Any turn to independence will have an air of desperation about it, and sense of it being built upon quicksand, rather than on the strong foundations which many independence supporters will feel should have been installed well before now. You can never extrapolate too much from a by-election. As of now, the SNP remain on track to win in 2026, according to polling. But there are deeper problems of ideology, purpose and strategy that are not going to go away. That goes for the whole movement. Unless and until there is a genuine intellectual rehabilitation of the meaning and purpose of independence, it will remain that way.
