Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour Party, is under intense scrutiny following his recent crackdown on immigration, which has sparked a significant backlash from within his own party.
This controversy comes as the Prime Minister’s office rushes to deny any comparisons to the infamous rhetoric used by Enoch Powell, a Conservative politician known for his divisive 1968 “Rivers of Blood” speech.
As tensions rise, various Labour figures have distanced themselves from Starmer’s language, with some accusing him of fueling division.
The PM’s Language Under Fire from Key Figures
Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, was quick to reject the controversial phrase used by Starmer, “island of strangers,” which many interpreted as a reference to Powell’s divisive words.
Khan made it clear that this wasn’t the kind of language he would use, emphasizing the need to celebrate the contributions immigrants make to the multicultural fabric of the country.
He suggested that Starmer’s comments were a response to promises made by Brexiteers and the increasing levels of migration, not a reflection of the positive contributions of immigrants.
In Wales, Labour leader Baroness Morgan also avoided fully endorsing Starmer’s statements, reiterating that Wales prides itself on being a welcoming nation.
She emphasized the positive impact of immigration on local communities and public services, rejecting any divisive language.
This growing discomfort with Starmer’s rhetoric highlights a deeper divide within the party on how to approach immigration.
The Labour Party’s Response to Starmer’s Immigration Plans
Starmer’s recent speech, outlining a new immigration policy, has drawn criticism not only from within his party but also from political opponents.
The White Paper proposed stricter immigration controls, including higher skills thresholds for visas, the closure of the care work route, and longer waits for citizenship.
These measures are seen as a drastic shift in Starmer’s previous stance, which was more open and inclusive.
However, while the proposals are expected to reduce net immigration significantly, Starmer has avoided setting firm caps or targets, instead promising a “significant” reduction by the next election.
The Migration Advisory Committee estimates that long-term immigration could fall from over 700,000 annually to below 300,000.
While this is a welcome step for some, it has drawn ire from others who feel it mirrors the rhetoric of the far-right.
Criticism from Labour MPs and Concern Over Far-Right Influence
Within the Labour ranks, some MPs have raised alarms about the potential consequences of Starmer’s words.
Labour MP Olivia Blake questioned whether the Prime Minister’s language risked legitimizing far-right views, pointing out that migrants should be seen as integral members of the community rather than outsiders.
Nadia Whittome, another Labour MP, accused Starmer of attempting to mimic the approach of the Reform Party, a stance she deems harmful and dangerous for British society.
Furthermore, Sarah Owen, the Labour MP for Luton North, warned against “chasing the tail of the right.”
She stressed the importance of investing in communities rather than creating divisions between them.
Owen expressed pride in the contributions of immigrants, including her own mother, and argued that such rhetoric only harms the fabric of the nation.
The PM’s Official Defense and Denial of Comparisons to Enoch Powell
The Prime Minister’s spokesperson has firmly rejected any comparisons between Starmer’s recent language and Enoch Powell’s notorious 1968 speech.
The spokesperson emphasized that Starmer was simply acknowledging the need to manage immigration in a way that ensures the system is fair and controlled, rather than opening the door to unchecked migration.
This defense highlights the government’s focus on control, but it also underscores the delicate balance they are attempting to strike in addressing immigration without alienating key voters.
Public Backlash and the Dangers of Divisive Language
The backlash against Starmer’s speech reveals a broader concern about the impact of divisive rhetoric on the political climate.
The increasing use of such language risks creating further tensions within society, particularly as issues surrounding immigration continue to dominate the political agenda.
As the Labour Party grapples with internal divisions, it remains to be seen how Starmer will navigate this controversy and whether his approach to immigration will change in response to the growing backlash from both his party and the public.
The debate is far from over, and with the next election on the horizon, the way forward for Labour’s stance on immigration will likely play a significant role in shaping public opinion.