Andy Burnham is facing fresh pressure from the TUC to overhaul Shabana Mahmood’s migration reforms, with union leaders warning that longer waits for settled status could deepen the social care staffing crisis and risk feeding far-right politics.
Speaking before the TUC’s annual congress in Brighton next week, general secretary Paul Nowak said he shared the “sense of optimism” surrounding the prime minister’s new government, but argued that urgent action was needed on migration, living costs and public services.
At the centre of the dispute is a Home Office consultation on plans that would require more than 300,000 low-paid workers to wait 15 years before gaining a legal right to remain in the UK. Many are care workers who came to Britain after the Covid pandemic to fill vacancies, having been told they would be able to apply for indefinite leave to remain after five years.
Care sector faces “fundamentally unfair” rules
Nowak said changing the terms for people who had already built their lives around one set of expectations risked leaving workers in limbo, particularly in social care, where staff shortages remain acute.
“I think it is fundamentally unfair to change the rules when people came to this country with one set of expectations,” he said. “I hope we can think again on that.”
He pointed to the scale of the problem facing the care system, which has struggled to recruit and retain staff despite rising demand from an ageing population.
“There are 111,000 staff vacancies in social care at the moment,” Nowak said. “I want us to train up as many Brits as possible to do those jobs. But I suspect in a growing economy with an ageing population, we are still going to need people to come and live and work in the UK and work in sectors like social care.”
The warning places Burnham, who reappointed Mahmood as home secretary after becoming prime minister in July, in a delicate position. The government has argued that tightening settlement routes is necessary to show the public that migration is being controlled, while still allowing access to workers who make a significant contribution to the economy.
Nowak warns long waits could undermine integration
Nowak also criticised the broader proposal to introduce 10- or 15-year qualifying periods for many new arrivals, saying it could make it harder for migrants to plan, settle and feel part of British society.
Drawing on his own family history, he said the idea cut against the country’s long tradition of welcoming people who come to work, raise families and contribute to national life.
“Both my granddads came to this country after the second world war – one came from Hong Kong, one came from Poland. Both raised their families here,” he said. “The idea that you could be here for the next 10, 15 years and you’d still have no legal right to remain in the country … how the hell do you plan? Can you buy a house? What does that mean for your employment? Do you have kids? Do you send them to school? I mean, it cuts across any effort to integrate at all.”
His comments come as Labour figures who support tougher migration rules argue they may help reassure voters worried about pressure on housing, jobs and public services. Some also see the approach as a way of limiting the appeal of Reform UK and other populist forces.
But Nowak warned that the opposite could happen. By leaving people uncertain about their status for years, he said, the government risked creating resentment rather than social cohesion.
“I tell you where you end up: you end up with Reform claiming that a woman who was born in Somalia and has lived here for most of her life and worked hard and contributed to our society, somehow isn’t fit to hold elected office in this country.”
The remarks follow controversy involving Reform UK’s home affairs spokesperson, Zia Yusuf, who was accused by Labour of “straightforward racism” after questioning whether the party’s frontrunner to replace Keir Starmer in the Holborn and St Pancras byelection, former child refugee Sagal Abdi-Wali, was British.
Living costs, not migration alone, should be Labour’s answer to Reform
Nowak acknowledged that some trade union members had backed Reform in recent local elections, reflecting a wider public frustration with the pace of change and the cost of living. But he suggested Nigel Farage’s appeal may be weakening as voters see more of him.
“Our members are a broad cross section of the British public,” he said. “Of course, large numbers of them voted Reform, like other people did. But certainly the evidence that we’re getting fed back from unions is that just like the British public, the more they see of Nigel Farage, the less keen they are.”
He was more forceful about the tactics of some anti-migration activists, saying there was a “direct line” from the rhetoric of Farage and his allies to what he called the “proto-fascism” of balaclava-clad vigilantes who blocked infrastructure in Dover and tried to stop migrants arriving in Portsmouth last weekend.
Instead, Nowak said Burnham should focus on delivering the economic and social improvements voters expected when they backed Labour in July 2024. He argued that a government seen to be acting on the issues that matter most to households would do more to reduce the pull of right-wing populism than further restrictions on migrants already living and working in Britain.
“The most important thing that Andy Burnham can do is to deliver the change that people voted for back in July 2024,” he said. “If people feel that the government is taking the stuff that matters to them seriously and is delivering on it, I think it cuts the legs from underneath that rightwing populism.”
Ahead of the budget on 28 October, Nowak called for a “social tariff” to reduce energy bills for lower-paid households, funded by a windfall tax on banks. He said such a move would help families struggling with heating costs while also easing inflationary pressures.
“As well as delivering a boost to hundreds of thousands of households up and down the country, it will help bear down on the cost of inflation,” he said.
He added: “The public bailed the banks out in 2008. For those families who are worried about turning on the heating this year, asking the banks to pay their fair share isn’t unreasonable.”
A Home Office spokesperson said: “last November, we set out reforms to double the standard qualifying period for settlement to 10 years for most migrants, with shorter routes for those who contribute most to the UK.
“A consultation on elements of those reforms has now closed, and we will set out our response in due course.”
Why it Matters
The debate goes to the heart of a question facing Burnham’s government: how to manage migration in a way that is seen as firm by the public, fair to workers already contributing to the country, and sustainable for public services. If the care sector cannot recruit enough staff, the impact will be felt by elderly and vulnerable people, their families and overstretched local services. But if the state creates a class of long-term residents with no clear route to belonging, the social consequences could be just as serious.
