Minister rejects Rayner’s claim Home Office plan to make migrants wait longer for settled status ‘un-British’
Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Cabinet Office minister, argued in interviews this morning that people in government agreed with Angela Rayner about wanting to deliver change quickly. (See 8.52am.)
But he would not accept her criticisms of Shabana Mahmood’s plan to make most immigrants wait much longer until they can apply for indefinite leave to remain. Rayner said this was “un-British”, because the new rules will apply to people already in the UK, which she argued did not amount to fair play. Thomas-Symonds said he disagreed.
He told Times Radio:
No I don’t think that the changes Shabana Mahmood has announced are un-British.
I think what they are doing is trying to strike fairness and a balance between, in the first instance, control of our borders, and also people who are here still having the opportunity then to gain a settled status, but also being fair to everybody.
Key events
Danny Sriskandarajah, the chief executive of the New Economics Foundation, is introducing Polanski now. He says this is an event to mark the NEF’s 40th anniversary.
He says NEF was set up to challenge the orthodoxies of “growth economics”.
This chimes with Green party thinking. As the Economist pointed out in a recent article about the Green party’s economic policies, the Greens, unlike other parties, are not preoccupied with growth. The Economist said:
Molly Scott Cato, the Green Party’s economy spokesperson, has long had a simple prescription for growth: stop pursuing it. In 2006 she published “Market Schmarket”, an ecological critique of capitalism that bemoaned the sacrifices made “at the altar of the growth fetish”. Amid tips to get an allotment and buy Fairtrade coffee, private-sector workers are encouraged to “cut [their] hours of work at least by half” to weaken the capitalist system.
This anti-growth mindset continues to suffuse Green thinking. The party’s manifesto for the 2024 general election devoted only one paragraph to economic growth, arguing that its damage to the planet “is actively undermining our well-being”. (The Labour manifesto mentioned growth nearly 50 times.)
Zack Polanski gives speech on economy
Zack Polanski, the Green party leader, is about to give a speech on the economy. It is his first major speech on the subject since he became Green leader, and he is speaking to the New Economics Foundation thinktank.
Here is Peter Walker’s preview story.
Tories defend shadow minister Nick Timothy after he claimed mass prayer by Muslims in London ‘act of domination’
A member of the shadow cabinet has defended Nick Timothy, the shadow justice secretary, after he was criticised for saying he objected to Muslims taking part in a mass prayer event in Trafalgar Square.
In a post on social media yesterday, Timothy complained about Muslims engaging in mass prayer at an event in Trafalgar Square. “Mass ritual prayer in public places is an act of domination,” he claimed.
Too many are too polite to say this.
But mass ritual prayer in public places is an act of domination.
The adhan – which declares there is no god but allah and Muhammad is his messenger – is, when called in a public place, a declaration of domination.
Perform these rituals in… pic.twitter.com/PIfJAgb7Zk
— Nick Timothy MP (@NJ_Timothy) March 17, 2026
In response, the Labour MP Sarah Owen posted this on Bluesky.
Wait until he sees Trafalgar Square during Christmas, Hanukkah, Holi, Lunar New Year, PRIDE, Vaisakhi and the passion of Jesus.
Trafalgar Square really is for everyone.
Nick Timothy either knows that and is deliberately stirring up hatred or he isn’t that bright.
Either way, he should do better.
Dominic Grieve, the former Tory attorney general (who subsequently quit the party over Brexit, posted this.
This is a very odd post from a Conservative who says he believes in freedom of expression under law and is a principal spokesman of the Free Speech Union.
I appreciate that he does not like Islam and there is no reason why he should. As a Christian it is not my faith.
But the use of Trafalgar Square ( with permission) for religious events Christian and other goes back a long way. There have been prayers and hymns, chants and religious events performed there in the past. If such an event ‘shouldn’t happen again’ it raises the question of whether this is to apply to all religious events or just to Muslim ones. If to all, then we are moving like France to imposing secularism as a norm and it is contrary to our national tradition and does not seem to have helped develop social cohesion there.If just to Muslims then it is an act of discrimination against them without any lawful basis. To achieve it you would have to enact discriminatory legislation targeted at Muslims. Is this what Nick Timothy is advocating ?
And on Bluesky Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, a thinktank focusing on race and cohesion, has posted examples of various other faith events taking place in Trafalgar Square which don’t seem to have upset Timothy (they did not involve Muslims). Katwala says:
If the Shadow Lord Chancellor says “it should not happen again”, is it now Conservative policy to ban an Iftar in a public square in London, or elsewhere?
– What current/new law?
– Or to make it an offence to pray in public? or to limit the number doing so, for a specific faith, or several/all]?
On Sky News this morning, Richard Holden, the shadow transport secretary, said he agreed that Trafalgar Square belonged to everyone. But if they were being used by religous groups “to try and dominate”, that was wrong, he said.
He said there was a place for religion in the public sphere. “But when it is used as a weapon to oppress people, I think that’s wrong,” he said.
Asked if he thought mass ritual prayer was always an “act of domination”, Holden replied: “It can be, in certain circumstances … for all sorts of different groups.”
Minister rejects Rayner’s claim Home Office plan to make migrants wait longer for settled status ‘un-British’
Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Cabinet Office minister, argued in interviews this morning that people in government agreed with Angela Rayner about wanting to deliver change quickly. (See 8.52am.)
But he would not accept her criticisms of Shabana Mahmood’s plan to make most immigrants wait much longer until they can apply for indefinite leave to remain. Rayner said this was “un-British”, because the new rules will apply to people already in the UK, which she argued did not amount to fair play. Thomas-Symonds said he disagreed.
He told Times Radio:
No I don’t think that the changes Shabana Mahmood has announced are un-British.
I think what they are doing is trying to strike fairness and a balance between, in the first instance, control of our borders, and also people who are here still having the opportunity then to gain a settled status, but also being fair to everybody.
Angela Rayner’s speech last night came a day after the Financial Times ran a report saying she had been speaking to City investors telling them they did not need to worry about a Labour government. Both interventions will be seen as evidence that she is preparing for a leadership bid at some point in the not-to-distant future.
In their FT story, Ian Smith, Katie Martin and Jim Pickard said:
Angela Rayner joined a call with City investors in which the bookies’ favourite to replace Sir Keir Starmer as prime minister offered reassurance that Labour would not lurch to the left.
Investors on the call, hosted by French bank BNP Paribas this month, said the former deputy prime minister pledged the party would stick to its manifesto and not resort to a borrowing blitz to fund greater spending.
A Rayner ally told the FT that, as a senior MP, Rayner had been engaging with the business community for years.
This is from Aubrey Allegretti from the Times, quoting an unnamed Labour MP furious about Angela Rayner’s speech.
Rayner’s remarks already causing fury…
A senior Labour MP texts: “It might help if those vying for [the] leadership at least try to understand the policy they are attacking. There is absolutely no intention to not let people stay, it’s about delaying access to welfare and benefits after unprecedented levels of migration – the public expect their government to run the country in a way that does not put more strain on our services, whilst also remaining compassionate.
“It took the Tories 10 or so years to descend into chaos – if egos in the party think they can cause chaos and challenge the leadership after 18 months and not get the blow back they are wrong. Get a grip and deal with your tax.”
Burnham says Labour should listen to Angela Rayner after she warns party ‘running out of time’ to deliver change
Good morning. Keir Starmer has been handling the Iran war reasonably well, according to the consensus view at Westminster, and certainly better than Nigel Farage and Kemi Badenoch, who have been in contortions over whether they do or do not support Donald Trump. But this has not altered the fundamental, big-picture assessment of British politics, which is that he is deeply unpopular with voters and that Labour can’t win the next election if he remains in charge. This may be a flawed analysis – consensus views often are – but it is what many Labour MPs think, which is why a question mark hovers over Starmer’s leadership.
And that is why Angela Rayner’s speech last night, at a private meeting with the soft-left Mainstream group, are so significant. She did not explicitly call for new leadership, but she did convey that message implicity – and more bluntly than in any of her other interventions since she resigned as deputy PM in September last year.
Here is our overnight story by Nadeem Badshah.
In her speech Rayner said:
It is down to us to rebuild this nation and this party – the question is are we up for this fight? I know we in this room are.
As a party, and as a movement, we cannot hide, we cannot just go through the motions in the face of decline. There’s no safe ground and we’re running out of time.
The change that people wanted so desperately needs to be seen, it needs to be felt. And we have to show that it is a Labour government that will deliver it.
And she said the government was “running out of time” to show it can deliver the change that the public needs.
She also included a passage in the speech highly critical of the plans from Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, to significantly increase the amount of time migrants in the UK have to wait until they can get indefinite leave to remain (ILR). She was particularly scathing about the proposal for the new rules to cover people in the UK already in the queue for ILR. She said:
We cannot talk about earning a settlement if we keep moving the goalposts. Because moving the goalposts undermines our sense of fair play. It’s un-British.
Let us be a country that has sustainable economic migration rules, but one that upholds the British values we want all who live here to respect. Not special treatment. But the stability and a fair pathway forward after the sacrifices many have made to build a lawful life in the UK.
If we suddenly change that, it pulls the rug from under those that have planned their lives and commitments, and they’re contributing to our economy and to our society.
That would not just be bad policy, but a breach of trust. The people already in the system who made a huge investment now fear for their future. We cannot talk about earning a settlement if we keep moving the goalposts because moving the goalposts undermines a sense of fair play. It’s un-British.
These remarks seemed designed to kill off a policy already unpopular with many Labour MPs.
Mainstream is associated with Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester, who, like Rayner, is seen as a leading contender to replace Starmer as Labour leader. Burnham was on the Today programme this morning, and he offered qualified support for what Rayner said, but without sounding overtly disloyal. Asked about her remarks, he said Labour “would always do well to listen to what Angela has got to say”. He went on:
We’ve got to, all of us, haven’t we, work together to pull together a plan that turns the country around …
I understand the frustration people feel. We heard that at the by-election, and of course, Angela is reflecting some of that.
But what I do feel that the signs are becoming really clear that there is a higher ambition, particularly for the north of England.
In particular, Burnham praised the plans for fiscal devolution announced by Rachel Reeves yesterday. That was “exactly what we want to see”, he said.
Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Cabinet Office minister, has been the government voice on broadcast news programmes this morning. Asked abour Rayner’s speech, he said Keir Starmer and his team were also impatient for change. He told Sky News:
I think where I would agree, and I think everybody across government would agree, is sharing an impatience with the pace of change, and that applies to every single one of us.
And I get the sense, I haven’t read the full context of Angela’s remarks, but I get the sense that that frustration is actually what is running through her remarks. It absolutely runs through every government minister as well.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10.30am: Zack Polanski gives what is being billed as his first big speech on the economy since becoming Green party leader. Here is Peter Walker’s preview.
Noon: Keir Starmer faces Kemi Badenoch at PMQs.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (between 10am and 3pm), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And 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 BTL or sometimes in the blog.
