The UK government’s latest immigration reforms have sparked a heated debate, with Labour Party figures divided over Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s recent remarks warning that Britain could become “an island of strangers.”
While some MPs see the phrase as a troubling echo of Enoch Powell’s infamous 1968 speech, others insist it is being taken out of context.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper stepped in to defend the prime minister’s choice of words, arguing that Starmer’s message bore no resemblance to Powell’s controversial “rivers of blood” speech. Speaking on Tuesday, Cooper said the comparison was unfair.
“I don’t think it’s right to make those comparisons, I think it’s completely different. The prime minister said yesterday, I think almost in the same breath, he talked about the diverse country that we are, and that being part of our strength.”
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper
She added that too much focus was being placed on individual phrases.
“Everybody always gets caught up in focusing on different phrases … if you look at what the prime minister said yesterday, he talked about people who came after the war to work in the UK, to build some of our services, and how important that was. But he also talked about how immigration has to be properly controlled and managed, and it hasn’t been. I actually think it’s OK to have both those views.”
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper
However, London Mayor Sadiq Khan offered a more cautious interpretation, noting that he would have chosen different language to express similar concerns.
“The sort of language I use is different to the language used by others. That’s not the sort of words I would use.”
London Mayor Sadiq Khan
Phrase Sparks Backlash And Deep Division
The controversial phrase comes as the government unveiled its new immigration white paper, which introduces sweeping measures to curb legal migration. Among its proposals are bans on new overseas recruitment for care sector jobs, raising skills thresholds for foreign workers to degree level, and lengthening the time it takes to qualify for British citizenship from five to ten years.
There are also stricter English language requirements across all visa types, including for dependents. However, migrants who contribute significantly to the UK economy or society, such as NHS workers, engineers, and volunteers, will be eligible for fast-tracked residency.
While Starmer emphasized that “migrants make a massive contribution to the UK, and I would never denigrate that,” some Labour MPs expressed discomfort with the tone of the new policy and its potential social repercussions.
Sarah Owen, chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, was particularly vocal. Of Malaysian-Chinese descent, Owen warned that “chasing the tail of the right risks taking our country down a very dark path.”
She argued that unity, not division, is key to preventing the UK from becoming what Starmer described. “The best way to avoid becoming an ‘island of strangers’ is investing in communities to thrive, not pitting people against each other.”
Despite criticism, Cooper also stood by the decision to end the social care visa. She argued that the visa, introduced by the previous Conservative government, had created roles that either did not exist or failed to meet acceptable standards.
According to Cooper, 40,000 care workers who had arrived on visas were displaced after their sponsoring companies were deregistered. She said existing care firms should aim to hire from this pool and that “they can also extend existing visas.”
Labour MP Jake Richards, representing Rother Valley and a prominent voice within the party’s “red wall” faction, supported the prime minister’s stance.
“The prime minister is absolutely right to warn of the risk of becoming an ‘island of strangers.’ Millions of people across the country have similar concerns. This theme must be central to missions across immigration, employment, work and tackling neighbourhood deprivation, etc.”
Jake Richards
As debate over immigration and integration continues to dominate the national discourse, Starmer’s balancing act has ignited one of the most emotionally charged debates even within the Labour Party.
