Rightwing Tory MPs criticise Rishi Sunak’s ‘weakness’ over family visas U-turn – as it happened | Politics
Conservative MPs express concern at Rishi Sunak’s U-turn
Good morning. The political year is more or less over, but it’s never too late for a U-turn, and the Home Office slipped one out last night that may have repercussions going into the new year.
Just over two weeks ago the government announced a series of measures to limit legal migration which it estimates will reduce numbers by 300,000. It was a muscular package with significant impacts for the economy, and it was broadly welcomed by Conservative MPs, particularly rightwingers who are alarmed at figures showing net migration at record levels.
But one aspect of the plan attracted considerable controversy – the proposal to raise the minimum income for family visas from £18,600 to £38,700, meaning any Briton who marries a foreigner would have to be earning that amount to actually live with them in the UK. This plan was only expected to reduce migration numbers by a figure in the tens of thousands (out of 300,000), but it was the proposal with the biggest direct impact on the Telegraph-reading classes (or, to be more accurate, their children), and Rishi Sunak soon came under pressure to change his mind.
As Peter Walker reports, the Home Office responded in an announcement that came quite late yesterday. The family visa threshold is going up to £29,000 in the spring next year. The government says it is still planning to increase it to £38,700 at some point. But it is not saying when, which is leading many people to conclude that the timetable it has in mind is “never”, or at least “not before the election”.
The increase from £18,600 to £29,000 is still significant, and will still stop thousands of couples who thought they would be able to live together in the UK from being able to do so. But it will not be seen in those terms by rightwing Tory backbenchers who already had their doubts about Sunak, and some of them have been speaking out.
Jonathan Gullis, a prominent member of the New Conservatives faction, posted a message on X saying this was “deeply disappointing”.
Legal migration to the UK is too high and unsustainable.
That is why the Government was right to introduce tough and necessary new measures to get numbers down, and demonstrate control of our borders.
This decision is deeply disappointing and undermines our efforts. https://t.co/59GjmtOx9W
— Jonathan Gullis MP (@GullisJonathan) December 21, 2023
Sir John Hayes, chair of the Commons Sense group of Tory MPs, told the Today programme he wanted to see the government raise the threshold to £38,700 quickly. He said:
The policy remains to increase the threshold to £38,000, what they’re talking about is implementing it in phases …
What I’m saying is that needs to be done very quickly because you need certainty, you need certainty for individuals, certainty for employers. And if we’re going to £38,700, which seems to be very sensible, then that needs to be done with speed so that people know where they stand.
David Jones, the deputy chair of the European Research Group, told Politico the announcement was “alarming”. And, as Dan Bloom reports in his London Playbook briefing for Politico, a spokesperson for Robert Jenrick, who recently resigned as immigration minister, said the plans announced by the Home Office at the start of the month should be “implemented now, not long-grassed to the spring or watered down”. The spokesperson added: “More measures are needed, not less.”
The other main news today is the revised growth figures for the third quarter of the year, showing the economy shrank. Previous figures showed zero growth in the July to September period. Phillip Inman has the story here.
If you want to contact me, do try the “send us a message” feature. You’ll see it just below the byline – on the left of the screen, if you are reading on a laptop or a desktop. This is for people who want to message me directly. I find it very useful when people message to point out errors (even typos – no mistake is too small to correct). Often I find your questions very interesting, too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either in the comments below the line; privately (if you leave an email address and that seems more appropriate); or in the main blog, if I think it is a topic of wide interest.
Key events
Early afternoon summary
Photograph: James Manning/PA
Richard Tice, leader of Reform UK, the new version of the Brexit party which is challenging the Tories from the right, has claimed that the family visa threshold U-turn shows that James Cleverly, the home secretary, “lied” about his immigration plans.
Tories lied again on reducing immigration@JamesCleverly misled House of Commons, he promised family income threshold would rise to £38,700 next Spring. Now lowered to £29,000
Only @reformparty_uk will stop mass immigration
Keir Starmer is likely to introduce a mandatory retirement age for members of the House of Lords, Patrick Maguire reports in his Times column today. This, and other measures that would cut the size of the chamber, may well be as far as Lords reform goes under Keir Starmer.
Even though Labour last year published a report from Gordon Brown’s Commission on the UK’s Future proposing the replacement of the Lords with an “assembly of the nations and regions”, many people at the top of the party view this as a perilous legislative distraction.
Maguire says:
I hear it is Starmer’s five missions for government and measures that can be passed “quickly and effectively” that will be prioritised. The clear implication is that open-heart surgery on parliament, as envisioned by Brown, does not tick those boxes. Instead we can expect keyhole procedures to cut the upper house’s 800-strong headcount quickly, and statutory powers for the toothless House of Lords Appointments Commission to guard against another “lavender list”.
First against the wall are the 92 remaining hereditary peers, 51 of them Conservatives, themselves a hangover from the last Labour government’s abortive attempts to democratise the chamber. They will go: either gradually, via the abolition of the byelections that replace the dead, or in one fell swoop. I understand that a new mandatory retirement age, probably around 80, is also likely.
Those two measures could reduce the overall membership of the Lords to about 600, fewer than the 650 MPs, by the following election – and should also redress the party imbalance that has left Labour with far fewer peers (175) than the Tories (270). The 26 Church of England bishops, however, will almost certainly stay: not least because a couple of dozen reliably leftish legislators is seen as preferable to a long debate over disestablishment or the prospect of appointing new peers from other faith groups.
Starmer is more keen on the decentralisation measures in the Brown report, which will form the basis of a “take back control” bill.
Humza Yousaf, Scotland’s first minister, is trolling the UK government. In a post on X this morning, he has offered his services as a mediator in the dispute between the UK government and junior doctors. He says he can do this because the Scottish government negotiated a pay deal acceptable to the BMA.
The current junior doctors’ strike – which is in its third and final day today – only affects England.
Yousaf said:
In Scotland, we have avoided NHS strikes by agreeing a fair pay deal with Junior Doctors.
I reiterate our offer to the UK Government that we’re willing to mediate in their dispute, so no more days of NHS activity are lost to strike.
Disrespectful from the UK Health Secretary.
In Scotland, we have avoided NHS strikes by agreeing a fair pay deal with Junior Doctors.
I reiterate our offer to the UK Government that we’re willing to mediate in their dispute, so no more days of NHS activity are lost to strike. https://t.co/P6NsnqrNUS
— Humza Yousaf (@HumzaYousaf) December 22, 2023
Unison has welcomed the government’s clarification yesterday that foreign care workers already living in the UK will not have to send dependants home when they renew their visas.
But it has said the government should have made this clear at the start of the month, when it announced the package of immigration restrictions that will include a ban on people on care worker visas bringing dependants with them to the UK. At the time the government did not say what the policy was for renewals.
Gavid Edwards, head of social care at Unison, said:
Ministers should have been clear from the start. Overseas care staff could have been spared weeks of worry.
The muddled and chaotic approach points to panic at the heart of government. It remains the case that ministers’ reckless changes to immigration policy spell disaster for social care.
Migrant care workers are now more likely to shun the UK in favour of parts of the world where their skills and families will be more welcome.
This will be the last Politics Live blog of 2023. Blogs are pointless without readers and so I would just like to offer the usual end-of-year thanks to everyone who comes here for news. It is a privilege writing for a big audience, and we are never complacent about trying to produce excellent reporting. This blog is unusual because it has a very, very active commenting community, and I’d like to thank everyone who leaves comments below the line (BTL), or who messages me direct. I find this invaluable, and without your questions – and your criticisms too – this blog would be a lot less good. And I’d like to thank everyone who contributes to the Guardian financially, as a subscriber or a supporter. We don’t charge for our online journalism because we think it’s a public good that should be available to everyone. But it doesn’t come for free, and it would not happen without help from readers.
I’ll be wrapping up the blog in an hour or two.
In the meantime, merry Christmas and a happy new year.
A reader asks:
On the issue foreign spouses would I be incorrect in assuming that the net effect upon immigration is zero as just as many Brits married to foreign partners will move abroad as foreign partners would move to Britain, more or less.
Good question. If it were the case that, for every foreigner who does not enter the UK as a result of the new family visa threshold, there is a Briton (their spouse?) who decides to leave and go and live abroad instead, then you would be right. And there must be some cases where this will happen. But I don’t know of any figures backing this up, and family life can be complicated; in other cases, couples will remain separated, or relationships will fall apart.
Yesterday the Home Office published its detailed assessment of the impact of all the new migration measures on immigration numbers. It does not consider at all the possibility that the new family visa threshold might lead to an increase in emigration. It says it is hard to be sure what impact the new rule will have, but it estimates that it will cut immigration by between 10,000 and 30,000 a year.
Rail fare increases for 2024 in England to be capped at 4.9%, Department for Transport says
Regulated rail fares in England will rise by nearly 5% in March, PA Media reports. PA says:
The Department for Transport has set a cap of 4.9% for increases to most fares regulated by the government, which include season tickets on most commuter journeys, some off-peak return tickets on long distance routes and flexible tickets for travel around major cities.
July’s RPI measure of inflation, which is traditionally used to determine annual fare rises, was 9.0%.
The previous cap on increases in regulated fares was 5.9%.
The DfT has also said that fare rises for 2024 will not come into force until 3 March, which is later than normal.
Commenting on the rise, Mark Harper, the transport secretary, said:
Having met our target of halving inflation across the economy, this is a significant intervention by the government to cap the increase in rail fares below last year’s rise.
Changed working patterns after the pandemic mean that our railways are still losing money and require significant subsidies, so this rise strikes a balance to keep our railways running, while not overburdening passengers.
We remain committed to supporting the rail sector reform outdated working practices to help put it on a sustainable financial footing.
Yesterday was a bit of a nightmare for many people trying to travel by rail. But at least for our hedgehog friends, the Department for Transport has some good news. The DfT has shown a good understanding of what makes an appropriate story for the news drought over Christmas and announced changes to road signage rules to better protect small animals.
Mark Harper, the transport secretary, has been tweeting about it this morning.
Here is an extract from the news release summarising the changes.
The current hedgehog sign will be updated following feedback from the sector to make it clearer for drivers. Alongside this, rules around the small wildlife warning signs will be relaxed to make it easier for local authorities to put up small wildlife warning signs, helping to better protect hedgehogs and other small animals.
Changes made by the Department for Transport (DfT) will ensure local authorities are able to place small wild animal warning signs where they are needed most rather than having to apply to DfT on a case-by-case basis.
And here is the new “watch out for hedgehogs“ sign which, as Dan Bloom from Politico points out, is a clear improvement on the old one from the Chris Grayling era.
Department for Education says it will make ‘further changes’ to how Ofsted inspects schools in light of Ruth Perry inquest
Richard Adams
The government will make “further changes” to the way Ofsted inspects schools in England, following the coroner’s report on the death of the Reading headteacher Ruth Perry, the education minister Lady Barran told the Lords.
In response to a written question from the Labour peer Lord Watson of Invergowrie, Barran replied:
The death of Ruth Perry was the most awful tragedy. The inquest has now concluded and it is clear that lessons need to be learned. The (Department for Education) is working with His Majesty’s chief inspector to look closely at the coroner’s findings.
The department and Ofsted will make further changes beyond those already announced in June 2023 where these are needed to make sure that the inspection system supports schools and teachers, and ultimately secures Ruth Perry’s legacy.
Reading’s senior coroner concluded that Ofsted’s inspection of Perry’s school contributed to her death earlier this year. On Tuesday the coroner issued a “prevention of future deaths” report to be considered by Ofsted and the DfE, highlighting the “almost complete absence of Ofsted training or published policy” on dealing with staff distress during inspections.
Ofsted and the government have until 7 February to respond to the coroner’s report.
Hunt says possible interest rate cuts in 2024 could be moment ‘to throw off our pessimism about economy’
Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, has said 2024 should be the year when “we need to throw off our pessimism and declinism about the UK economy”.
He made the comment in an interview with the Financial Times in which he suggested that the Bank of England would start cutting interest rates next year.
Asked if people would feel better off by the end of 2024, he told the paper:
There’s a reasonable chance that if we stick to the course we’re on, we’re able to bring down inflation, the Bank of England might decide they can start to reduce interest rates.
That probably is the moment when people will begin to have more confidence about their own personal prospects and the prospects of their family.
Miriam Cates, co-chair of the New Conservatives, a group of rightwing Tory MPs who want lower migration, tax cuts, and socially conservative policies, has also spoken out against the family visa threshold U-turn. As the Times reports, she said:
Immigration into the UK is far, far too high, putting pressure on our economy, public services and our democracy. In order to bring numbers down, the government has to take decisive action, limiting the number of visas given out to foreign workers, students and dependants. Reducing the threshold for spousal visas so soon after promising a crackdown does not bode well.
Mark Drakeford defends his record as Welsh first minister, saying he’s done ‘challenging and radical things’
Mark Drakeford has defended his five years as first minister in Wales, saying he hopes people will recognise that his government has done “challenging and radical things”. He used the phrase in an interview with Steven Morris. Here is an extract.
When he became first minister in 2018, Drakeford promised to do radical things. He conceded that the Covid pandemic got in the way of some ambitions. “But I think, I hope, people will see this as a period when we did some of those challenging and radical things.”
One of the first was to scrap the M4 relief road, which supporters believed would relieve congestion on the motorway and boost the economy but critics said would cause huge environmental damage, not least to the precious Gwent Levels.
“The conventional thing would have been to give it the go-ahead. I felt that if we were to be serious about the challenges facing us, (the) changing climate, the burning platform we are creating around the globe, we couldn’t go on doing things in the way we had.”
Drakeford suggested one of the most radical things his regime had done was to give local authorities the power to use planning laws to stop local people selling up to would-be second homeowners. “That is a significant intrusion into the way people normally live their lives but it’s part of our determination to stop parts of Wales becoming social deserts where nobody actually lives. It’s not popular with some people.”
The first minister said he did not believe another of his government’s controversial moves, the introduction of a Wales-wide 20mph limit for most built-up areas, was as radical as the reaction to it suggested.
He compared the 20mph limit with the introduction of a smoking ban in enclosed public places, which Wales did before England. “I remember what a huge issue that was, but who would go back to that now? You run into people who are attached to the status quo. I think in time people will say, what was the fuss about 20mph?”
And here is the full article.
According to a report by Matt Dathan in the Times, Rishi Sunak has performed another migration-related U-turn. Dathan reports:
The prime minister said in March that he was “showing leadership” by including the Catterick Garrison barracks in his Richmond constituency in North Yorkshire on a list of sites to be repurposed to accommodate thousands of migrants. The site was due to be used as a general accommodation site for asylum seekers who would not be detained and would be free to come and go …
However, the Times has learnt that Sunak has ordered the Home Office no longer to use it as a large-scale asylum facility.
A government spokesman confirmed the Catterick barracks had been assessed as unsuitable for a large asylum facility and that the government was reviewing “alternative uses for the location”.
London Underground workers will stage a series of strikes in the new year in a dispute over pay, PA Media reports. PA says:
Members of the Rail, Maritime and Transport union (RMT) have voted overwhelmingly to take industrial action over a 5% pay offer.
Engineering and maintenance workers will be taking action over January 5-6, with no rest-day working or overtime until 12 January.
London Underground control centre and power/control members will be taking action over January 7-8, and fleet workers will stop work on 8 January.
Signallers and service controller members will take action on 9 January and 12 while all fleet, stations and trains grades will stop work on 10 January.
U-turn over family visas ‘regrettable sign of weakness’, says deputy chair of European Research Group
David Jones, deputy chair of the European Research Group, which represents hardline Brexiter MPs, has described the U-turn over family visas (see 9.30am) as “a sign of weakness”. He told PA Media:
The latest net migration figures very starkly showed the extent of the crisis we face. Increasing the threshold was absolutely necessary to address that crisis.
The government should have stuck to its guns. Yesterday’s decision was a regrettable sign of weakness, made worse by the fact that parliament was not sitting and therefore was unable to interrogate ministers on the reasons for the decision.
Conservative MPs express concern at Rishi Sunak’s U-turn
Good morning. The political year is more or less over, but it’s never too late for a U-turn, and the Home Office slipped one out last night that may have repercussions going into the new year.
Just over two weeks ago the government announced a series of measures to limit legal migration which it estimates will reduce numbers by 300,000. It was a muscular package with significant impacts for the economy, and it was broadly welcomed by Conservative MPs, particularly rightwingers who are alarmed at figures showing net migration at record levels.
But one aspect of the plan attracted considerable controversy – the proposal to raise the minimum income for family visas from £18,600 to £38,700, meaning any Briton who marries a foreigner would have to be earning that amount to actually live with them in the UK. This plan was only expected to reduce migration numbers by a figure in the tens of thousands (out of 300,000), but it was the proposal with the biggest direct impact on the Telegraph-reading classes (or, to be more accurate, their children), and Rishi Sunak soon came under pressure to change his mind.
As Peter Walker reports, the Home Office responded in an announcement that came quite late yesterday. The family visa threshold is going up to £29,000 in the spring next year. The government says it is still planning to increase it to £38,700 at some point. But it is not saying when, which is leading many people to conclude that the timetable it has in mind is “never”, or at least “not before the election”.
The increase from £18,600 to £29,000 is still significant, and will still stop thousands of couples who thought they would be able to live together in the UK from being able to do so. But it will not be seen in those terms by rightwing Tory backbenchers who already had their doubts about Sunak, and some of them have been speaking out.
Jonathan Gullis, a prominent member of the New Conservatives faction, posted a message on X saying this was “deeply disappointing”.
Legal migration to the UK is too high and unsustainable.
That is why the Government was right to introduce tough and necessary new measures to get numbers down, and demonstrate control of our borders.
This decision is deeply disappointing and undermines our efforts. https://t.co/59GjmtOx9W
— Jonathan Gullis MP (@GullisJonathan) December 21, 2023
Sir John Hayes, chair of the Commons Sense group of Tory MPs, told the Today programme he wanted to see the government raise the threshold to £38,700 quickly. He said:
The policy remains to increase the threshold to £38,000, what they’re talking about is implementing it in phases …
What I’m saying is that needs to be done very quickly because you need certainty, you need certainty for individuals, certainty for employers. And if we’re going to £38,700, which seems to be very sensible, then that needs to be done with speed so that people know where they stand.
David Jones, the deputy chair of the European Research Group, told Politico the announcement was “alarming”. And, as Dan Bloom reports in his London Playbook briefing for Politico, a spokesperson for Robert Jenrick, who recently resigned as immigration minister, said the plans announced by the Home Office at the start of the month should be “implemented now, not long-grassed to the spring or watered down”. The spokesperson added: “More measures are needed, not less.”
The other main news today is the revised growth figures for the third quarter of the year, showing the economy shrank. Previous figures showed zero growth in the July to September period. Phillip Inman has the story here.
If you want to contact me, do try the “send us a message” feature. You’ll see it just below the byline – on the left of the screen, if you are reading on a laptop or a desktop. This is for people who want to message me directly. I find it very useful when people message to point out errors (even typos – no mistake is too small to correct). Often I find your questions very interesting, too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either in the comments below the line; privately (if you leave an email address and that seems more appropriate); or in the main blog, if I think it is a topic of wide interest.
