Keir Starmer gears up to fight Nigel Farage at election as he launches immigration crackdown
On Monday the PM will announce a visa crackdown to wean Britain off foreign labour by saying migrants will need to have higher qualifications and better English to come here.
2
2
It comes after Reform UK wiped the floor with Labour and the Tories in the local elections - sparking calls from panicked Labour MPs for a reset in No10.
Speaking exclusively to The Sun on Sunday while on a trip to Kyiv, the PM said the next race for No10 is likely to be a dust-up between him and Nigel.
He said: 'Certainly we were planning on the basis we were likely to be facing Reform at the next election in any event. So that coincides with our thinking.'
Tearing into Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, he went on: 'I think the Tory Party is a busted flush.
"They haven't learnt the lessons of the last general election. They have no idea where they are heading.
'And they have got a leader who is showing no leadership.
'But what I take out of those election results is that we need to deliver change.
'We have already delivered significant change with the NHS waiting lists coming down and wages going up quicker than prices, minimum wage is going up, interest rates are coming down.
'But we need to make sure people feel that change in their pockets and in their everyday lives. That is what I am intent on delivering.'
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper will unveil Labour's long-awaited plan to bring down record immigration tomorrow.
There will be strict time-limits and restrictions on recruitment for jobs with critical skills shortages.
Farage promised an earthquake & he delivered - Labour are badly bruised & Tories face being brushed aside as opposition
And employers will also be told they must train workers in the UK.
Ministers want to drive down the reliance on foreign workers while getting soaring numbers of unemployed young Brits into jobs.
They are setting up groups with the Department for Work and Pensions to look at how this can be done.
Ministers want to drive down the reliance on foreign workers while getting soaring numbers of unemployed young Brits into jobs.
The Prime Minister added: 'Sun readers know this country's migration system is broken.
"A population the size of Birmingham arrived in just four years.
'No control, business hooked on cheap labour, and Brits' wages undercut. This failed experiment stops. I'm shutting down the lab.
'By clamping down on abuse of the system, tightening time limits on visas, and boosting training for Brits we'll make our borders secure, the system fair, and Brits better off. This is the change I was elected to deliver.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
4 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Revealed: Chagos deal to cost 10 times what Starmer claimed
Sir Keir Starmer's Chagos Islands deal will be 10 times more expensive than he has claimed, official figures reveal. The Government's own estimate of the cost of giving away the British Indian Ocean Territory to Mauritius is almost £35bn, according to documents released under the Freedom of Information Act – far higher than the £3.4bn figure Sir Keir has previously used in public. Labour ministers now face claims that they misled Parliament and the press with an 'accountancy trick' to hide the size of the bill from taxpayers. Under the terms of Sir Keir's deal, the UK will give up the Chagos Islands by the end of this year and lease back the Diego Garcia military base, a facility built there in the 1970s that has been used by UK and US forces. The cost of the agreement has been fiercely disputed. Sir Keir claimed in May that it would cost £3.4bn over 99 years, accounting for inflation and other discounts, but the Conservatives said it would total £30bn. An official document produced by the Government Actuary's Department shows the cost of the deal was first estimated at 10 times Sir Keir's figure, at £34.7bn, in nominal terms. It explains how the cost was lowered by the Government using inflation estimates, then reduced again under a controversial accounting method sometimes used by the Government for long-term projects. The total cost, which ministers refused to release to Parliament, is equivalent to 10 Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers, or more than half the annual schools' budget. Sir Keir now faces accusations that he misled Parliament, because he told MPs in February that cost estimates between £9bn and £18bn were 'absolutely wide of the mark' and suggested the true figure was lower. The document shows that civil servants were first instructed to lower the cost of the deal on paper to £10bn, to account for an estimated annual inflation rate of 2.3 per cent over 99 years. Then it was reduced again by between 2.5 and 3.5 per cent per year using the Treasury's Social Time Preference Rate, a principle that money spent immediately is more value than funds earmarked for future spending. The final figure was calculated to be 90 per cent lower than the cash value of the payments the UK will make to Mauritius over the next century, in what critics say was a deliberate attempt to mislead the public. Writing for The Telegraph (read the article below), Dame Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, said: 'Instead of owning up to the costs, Labour have used an accountancy trick to claim the amount was only a mere £3.4bn. 'We've all known it's a terrible deal with huge costs to hard-pressed British taxpayers. But for months, ministers in public and Parliament have sought to cover up the true amounts.' Foreign Office sources insisted ministers had used a 'standard' calculation for long-term government spending, and denied accusations that it was part of a 'cover-up'. However, other projects announced by Labour have not used the same method, which has allowed ministers to advertise higher spending on popular policies. Angela Rayner has since launched a 10-year affordable homes plan that included inflation-level increases in government spending as part of the cost of the policy – a method not used with the Chagos deal. The calculations behind the deal were revealed in response to a freedom of information request submitted by the Conservatives. MPs have previously requested the document in Parliament but ministers have refused to release it, in an apparent breach of government transparency rules. Darren Jones, a Treasury minister, said in June that it was 'not normal practice' for the Government to release 'corresponding financial analysis' alongside policy announcements. Official guidance by the Cabinet Office says any information subject to FOI should also be released to MPs, while the ministerial code states that departments 'should be as open as possible with Parliament and the public'. Dame Priti is expected to demand a correction and apology over the 'cover-up' from Sir Keir when MPs return from their summer break on Sept 1. Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, said: 'It's bad enough that Starmer and Reeves' economic mismanagement has created a £50bn black hole in the public finances, prolonging the cost of living crisis. 'Now our research has uncovered the Government's own figures showing Labour's Chagos surrender is costing the country another £35 billion. Add that to their £50 billion black hole, and it's clear – when Labour negotiates, Britain loses.' A Government spokesman said: 'The Diego Garcia military base is essential to the security of the UK and our key allies, and to keeping British people safe. 'The average cost is £101 million per year, and the net present value of payments is £3.4 billion – this is less than 0.2 per cent of the annual defence budget. 'The deal is supported by our closest allies, including the US, Canada, Australia and Nato. The costs compare favourably with other international base agreements, and the UK-US base on Diego Garcia is larger, in a more strategic location and has unparalleled operational freedom.' Starmer has been caught red-handed lying to the public Keir Starmer and David Lammy have been caught red-handed lying to the British public over the costs of Labour's Chagos surrender deal, writes Dame Priti Patel. This pair of diplomatic dunces have left Britain humiliated, weak, and the laughing stock of the international community. We've all known it's a terrible deal with huge costs to hard-pressed British taxpayers. But for months, ministers in public and Parliament have sought to cover up the true amounts. Even when the treaty was published and we could see the payments schedule, Labour tried to pull the wool over our eyes and deny the costs. When it was asked questions about the cash payments over the 99 years of the deal, it refused to answer. And when reports suggested the cost of the deal could be from £9 billion to £18 billion, Starmer claimed this was 'absolutely wide of the mark' whilst the Foreign Office tried to claim it was 'entirely inaccurate and misleading'. In fact, instead of owning up to the costs, Labour has used an accountancy trick to claim the amount was only £3.4bn – still a vast waste of money. But now we know the costly truth, having dragged the figures out of Government, kicking and screaming, through a freedom of information request. It's an mind-blowing £35bn. That's almost double the entire annual policing budget. Ten brand new aircraft carriers, 70 hospitals or a 5 per cent income tax cut. New prison places to lock up criminals, funding for social care, and millions upon millions of potholes could be fixed, with the £17bn local highways maintenance backlog covered twice ever. The list goes on. Every single Labour minister is complicit in this cover-up. Instead of paying for front line services in Britain and reducing our tax burden, these payments have lead to Mauritius being able to pay down its debt, cut income tax and slash VAT. Just think, as Rachel Reeves plots tax rises in the autumn to cover her catastrophic financial mismanagement, Labour is forcing you to pay for tax cuts in a foreign country. Is it any wonder the Mauritian prime minister has been bragging about how he secured concession after concession from Labour? From more money up front to the removal of a unilateral right to renew the proposed lease on Diego Garcia to the exercise of sovereign rights over the crucial military base, time and time again Britain backed down in negotiations. It's not just Starmer and 'Calamity' Lammy who are to blame for this diplomatic humiliation. Starmer's friend Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, and Jonathan Powell – Tony Blair's top advisor during the last Labour government's dodgy dossier scandal – have both been involved in these negotiations. They must be the worst team of negotiators in history. And it gets worse. Labour has manipulated parliamentary process to deny the House of Commons a meaningful debate and vote. So frightened are they of democracy that they have wilfully misled Parliament and ignored long-standing parliamentary conventions on holding debates and votes on treaties. The scale of the financial cost is bad enough, but Labour's Chagos surrender deal has profound and serious consequences for our national security and defence. This isn't just about paying for the privilege of something we owned last month. This is a critical strategic asset. In a world that is becoming increasingly dangerous, giving away a military base to a friend of our enemies is a supreme act of self-harm. Under the terms of the treaty, we need to disclose key information to Mauritius about the movements of UK, US and our allies' vessels and aircraft around Diego Garcia, and any military strikes we take from there. This is deeply concerning as, in recent years, Mauritius has grown closer to our key strategic threats – China, Russia and Iran – forging new partnerships, including one with Russia just days before the treaty was signed in May. This means that sensitive information risks being handed over to a friend of our enemies. Again, rather than facing up to the truth of what they are doing to our national interest, Labour ministers, including the Prime Minister himself, attempt to baselessly lie their way out of it. Starmer has tried to claim China, Russia and Iran were against the deal and it was necessary for our national security. That could not be further from the truth. China has welcomed the treaty since it was signed, while Iran and Russia have issued supportive statements towards Mauritius securing sovereignty over the Chagos Islands. Senior Mauritian officials have also publicly thanked China and Putin for their support. Starmer and Lammy must think the British public are gullible to swallow their lies. But we all know the truth. Labour has recklessly undermined our national security just because it wants to appease the whims and demands of its Left-wing lawyer and activist friends, and non-binding opinions issued by obscure international bodies few in Britain have heard of. As a result of Labour's stupidity, lies and incompetence, British taxpayers face a huge £35bn cost, our national security and defence capabilities have been damaged, and it has undermined our standing in the world. When Labour negotiates, Britain loses, and friend and foe alike have seen how feeble Labour is at negotiations over the Chagos Islands and will take advantage of us for years to come. Today, it has become all the clearer why Labour's Chagos surrender deal must be ripped up and consigned to the rubbish bin of history – and that Starmer and Lammy are incapable of understanding, let alone defending, the British national interest. Throughout this whole sorry saga, it is only the Conservative Party that has been fighting against Labour's Chagos surrender. We've challenged the Government in Parliament and in the public to the point where ministers are complaining about the pressure we're putting them under. And we'll keep on exposing Labour's lies and failures as we do all we can to oppose this deal, stand up for hard-pressed British taxpayers and fight for our national interests to be put first.
Times
6 minutes ago
- Times
Dancing on Alex Salmond's grave does Nicola Sturgeon no favours
Revenge, as we all know, is a dish best served cold; retaliation is even better when your enemy is already dead and buried and can't answer back. Nicola Sturgeon says she debated with herself over whether or not to include in her autobiography Frankly a chapter on the sexual allegations against Alex Salmond, who died last year. No contest. Of course she was going to use this opportunity to dance on her former mentor's grave. • Alex Salmond and the truth behind our fallout, by Nicola Sturgeon Harsh? Not as harsh as her remarks about the former first minister of Scotland. She accuses Salmond of a concerted attempt to 'destroy' her and says he privately admitted 'the substance' of the sexual harassment charges of which he was acquitted in 2020. Salmond isn't around to rebut all this, which is convenient. He believed, on the contrary, that there was 'a deliberate, prolonged, malicious and concerted effort amongst a range of individuals within the Scottish government and the SNP to damage my reputation, even to the extent of having me imprisoned'. This group, known to Sturgeon, even if she didn't collude with them, made a series of extremely serious allegations which were rejected by the highest court in the land. But the way she tells it, it was all about a big bad man trying to ruin her. She even suggests that it was Salmond who leaked the original allegations of sexual impropriety to the Daily Record in August 2018. Well, even the journalist who broke the story, the Record's political editor at the time, David Clegg, told the BBC Sunday show that this was 'not credible'. Would Salmond have used the Labour-supporting tabloid as a conduit? The Record front page screamed 'Alex Salmond accused of 'touching woman's breasts and bum in boozy Bute House bedroom encounter''. An odd way to 'control the narrative', as Sturgeon claims. 'At a stroke,' she goes on, 'he was able to cast himself as the victim.' I don't think Record readers would have thought that. Sturgeon says the Scottish government dropped its defence against Salmond's subsequent judicial review when they realised that the official in charge had had prior contact with the complainers. What she doesn't say is that the Scottish government was warned by its own legal adviser, Roddy Dunlop KC, in August 2018 that they hadn't a snowball's chance of winning. Yet they ploughed on right up to the moment in early 2019 when the Court of Session ruled that the process that accused Salmond was unlawful, unfair and 'tainted with apparent bias'. Why they persevered with this hopeless case is a mystery. It led to Salmond winning £512,000 in costs and to utter humiliation for the Scottish government. Sturgeon suggests in extracts in The Sunday Times that the 'botched' process was the fault of Leslie Evans, the head of the civil service at the time. 'It was not unreasonable,' the former first minister writes, 'to say that the buck stopped with her.' Some might argue that the buck stopped with the person who authorised the botched disciplinary process in the first place back in December 2017. This was one Nicola Sturgeon. The first minister was responding to claims by the lawyer Aamer Anwar that he had a 'catalogue of sexual harassment cases' going uninvestigated in Holyrood. • Nicola Sturgeon: My miscarriage, sexuality and the day I was arrested Hardly had Salmond walked out of the Court of Session after his victory in January 2019 than the police arrested him and charged him with 14 counts of attempted rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment. The timing of this is highly suggestive. Police Scotland launched their criminal investigation the previous September. Did the Scottish government expect Salmond to be arrested before the judicial review even arrived in court? Who knows? Sturgeon writes that if Salmond's conspiracy claim was true: 'It would have required criminal collusion between them [the women accusers], senior ministers and civil servants.' What is not in doubt is that the criminal complaints came from a group of SNP politicians, party workers and Scottish government officials. Sturgeon accepts that there was discussion among these people accusing Salmond of criminal misdeeds but denies that this amounted to collusion. It was just that 'women who considered themselves victims of his behaviour were seeking support and comfort from each other'. It is also on record that Evans pinged a text after the judicial review debacle saying, 'Battle may be lost but not the war'. According to Sturgeon, however, there was no war; it was all about Salmond refusing to accept his guilt. She seems to think that his very defence was an act of violence against women. 'He was prepared to traumatise, time and time again, the women at the centre of it all.' So, should he not have contested these charges because the women who made them might be upset? In her Times extract, Sturgeon somehow fails even to mention that Salmond was acquitted of all the criminal charges by a female-dominated jury before a female judge, Lady Dorrian, in March 2020. Nor does she record that key complainers never wanted the police involved in the first place. Salmond was exonerated in the eyes of the law but not in Sturgeon's. His very court victories, she suggests, were expressions of his 'animus' toward her. 'Eventually … I had to face the fact that he was determined to destroy me. I was now engaged in mortal political combat with someone I knew to be both ruthless and highly effective.' Well, that much is true. Salmond never gave up trying to clear his name and expose his accusers. Even as he died in North Macedonia, he was pursuing a claim of 'misfeasance' against the Scottish government and apparently seeking damages of £3 million. Salmond's family and Alba Party supporters had been considering whether or not to continue with this case. One suspects that after Sturgeon's self-pitying demolition job they'll be more determined than ever. It was 'frankly' ill-advised to launch this attack when Salmond can't give his side of the story. What was she thinking? Everyone knows what the former first minister was like personally. His own defence counsel, Gordon Jackson KC, called him an 'objectionable bully'. But that didn't make him a criminal. Sturgeon should have left it at that. Her tendentious and self-justifying account simply revives speculation about her involvement in this dark affair. It is never a good idea to speak ill of the dead.
The Guardian
32 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Companies aiding Trump's immigration crackdown see ‘extraordinary' revenues
The tech, surveillance and private prison providers arming Donald Trump's massive expansion and weaponization of immigration enforcement are running a victory lap after reporting their latest financial results. Palantir, the tech firm, and Geo Group and CoreCivic, the private prison and surveillance companies, said this week that they brought in more money than Wall Street expected them to, thanks to the administration's crackdown on immigrants. 'Well, as usual, I've been cautioned to be a little modest about our bombastic numbers,' said Alex Karp, the Palantir chief executive, in an investor call earlier this week. Then he crowed about the company's 'extraordinary numbers' and his 'enormous pride' in its success. Private prison company executives, during their respective calls, could barely contain their excitement, flagging to investors opportunities for 'unprecedented growth' in the realm of immigration detention. Palantir saw 53% growth in revenue from US government contracts in the second quarter of 2025 compared with the same period the year prior and surpassed $1bn in total quarterly revenue for the first time. Analysts had expected the company to bring in $939.4m in revenue. The company, which connects and analyzes disparate sets of data to enable its customers to build products with that information, brings in the majority of its revenue from government contracts. Its biggest US customer is the Department of Defense, where the US army, which announced a $10bn agreement with Palantir last week, is housed. On the immigration side, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has deepened its partnership with Palantir since the start of the Trump administration, which it's been working with since 2011. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice), the agency primarily engaged in arresting, detaining and deporting immigrants, most recently announced a $30m contract with Palantir to build a database that makes its deportation and detention machine more efficient. 'Palantir gets attacked just because we help make this country even better, because we support the values, because we defend it,' Karp said. 'And us being able to win while having an opinion does have an impact on the world, if only because the people who think we are wrong are not good, have to be a little jealous and suffer.' While Palantir is making it easier to deport immigrants, private prison corporations GeoGroup and CoreCivic are bringing in more money than expected helping detain them. GeoGroup reported $636.2m in revenue this quarter, beating analyst predictions of $623.4m, while CoreCivic announced $538.2m in the second quarter of this year, a 9.8% increase from last year's second quarter. George Zoley, the GeoGroup company chief executive, said its detention facilities are fuller than they've ever been, with Ice using 20,000 beds across 21 GeoGroup detention centers, about one-third of the estimated 57,000 beds in Ice detention centers across the country. GeoGroup executives also said in the call they have begun exploring detention centers at US military sites, one of the many 'unprecedented growth opportunities' Zoley spoke of during the call. While there has been a big boost to GeoGroup's detention business, its surveillance subsidiary is not yet seeing the massive growth company executives predicted earlier this year. Executives said they expected the Intensive Supervision Appearance Program (ISAP) – an immigrant monitoring initiative run by the company's subsidiary BI Inc for 20 years – would expand beyond its previous peak of 370,000 immigrants being monitored. The number of immigrants who are currently being surveilled by Ice has hovered around 183,000 for the past few months. '[ICE hasn't] communicated at this time the expansion of ISAP,' Zoley said on the investor call. 'Their focus is intensely on scaling up the detention capacity.' That said, the company expects ISAP numbers to start increasing next year once 'detention capacity is maximized'. The Trump administration has signaled a desire to increase the number of immigrants surveilled by ankle monitors. Many immigrants have described ISAP surveillance as intrusive, at times physically painful and inefficient. In the call with investors, CoreCivic executives revealed they have offered Ice around 30,000 beds to detain immigrants throughout the company's nationwide network. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act legislation was passed by Congress and signed by Trump last month, providing DHS a massive influx of cash. Ice was given $45bn to expand its detention network. Sign up to TechScape A weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives after newsletter promotion Ice currently has funds for around 41,500 beds but is currently detaining around 57,000 people throughout its detention network. With the incoming influx of cash, the agency will have the funds to likely detain thousands upon thousands more – and private prison contractors are ready. 'Our business is perfectly aligned with the demands of this moment,' said Damon T Hininger, the CEO of CoreCivic, during Thursday's call with investors. 'We are in an unprecedented environment, with rapid increases in federal detention populations nationwide and a continuing need for solutions we provide.' As the office of management and budget readies the finances from the spending package, private prison companies have wasted no time in selling their services to immigration officials. 'As we know, budgets are moral documents, and last month Congress decided to fully fund cruelty aimed at immigrant communities at the expense of vital programs that serve all Americans,' said Setareh Ghandehari, advocacy director for the Detention Watch Network. 'Private prison companies have been giddy since last November about the prospect of making money at the expense of all of us.' Since Trump took office again this year, CoreCivic has modified, extended or signed new contracts to detain immigrants at eight different facilities, according to company financial disclosures. Geo Group has done the same with five different facilities. The earning calls from the two companies come as immigrant rights organizations and human rights groups criticize conditions inside immigration jails nationwide. Setareh added that private prison companies' profits come from 'the destruction of human lives as directed by the Trump administration and made possible by the majority Congress'. A CoreCivic facility in New Mexico where immigrants and federal prisoners are detained, the Cibola correctional facility, is currently under investigation by the FBI for an 'epidemic' of drug trafficking, as the Guardian recently revealed. At least 15 people have died inside that facility since 2018. Last September, the company pitched Cibola to Ice as an ideal place to detain more immigrants.
