Reform UK has unveiled a controversial plan targeting firms that employ illegal workers, proposing severe financial penalties and prison terms for business leaders. The party’s home affairs spokesman, Zia Yusuf, declared that under their proposed legislation, employers would face fines amounting to 10% of their global revenues, even if they claim ignorance of their employees’ immigration status. This initiative, referred to as the ‘Deliveroo law,’ seeks to address the growing concerns surrounding illegal immigration and its implications for the UK economy.
Stricter Penalties for Employers
In a bold declaration, Yusuf stated that should Reform UK ascend to power, the nation would implement the harshest penalties worldwide for companies hiring illegal migrants. He emphasised that company executives would not be spared from imprisonment, stating, “Bosses of companies employing illegal migrants will be sent to prison, and their companies fined 10% of their global revenues.” This approach stands in stark contrast to the current legal framework, which imposes fines of up to £60,000 per illegal worker but does not hold employers accountable if they are unaware of their employees’ immigration status.
The announcement follows recent government actions aimed at curbing illegal working, particularly in the gig economy and delivery sectors. In July, the Home Office reported the arrest of 10 Evri workers, bringing to light the ongoing issues surrounding immigration compliance within the industry. Figures from earlier this year revealed a staggering increase in enforcement activity: visits and arrests linked to illegal working climbed to 12,791 in 2025, marking a 57% rise from the previous year.
Government’s Stance on Illegal Employment
A Home Office spokesperson addressed the rising issue, stating, “Illegal working undermines honest business, exploits vulnerable individuals and fuels organised immigration crime.” The government is actively working to close loopholes that enable illegal employment, extending right-to-work checks across the gig economy. Current legislation allows for severe penalties, including substantial fines, business closures, and prison sentences of up to five years for non-compliant employers.
The government’s crackdown coincides with Reform UK’s proposal, raising questions about the effectiveness of existing measures and the potential for overlapping policies. Critics argue that the new reforms could lead to unintended consequences, such as driving illegal work further underground or placing undue burdens on legitimate businesses.
Controversial Political Developments
In a separate political episode, Jewish community leaders have rejected a meeting with Joshua Bonehill-Paine, a former internet troll with a history of antisemitism, who has been selected as a Conservative council candidate in Crewkerne South for the upcoming May elections. The Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council (JLC) declined the opportunity to engage with Bonehill-Paine but expressed willingness to discuss the Conservative Party’s candidate selection process. Bonehill-Paine, previously incarcerated for racially aggravated harassment, has sparked significant backlash, with calls for his removal from the candidacy.
Meanwhile, the government faces scrutiny over its handling of the release of PC Andrew Harper’s killers under an early prisoner release scheme. Justice Minister Jake Richards acknowledged the pain experienced by the victim’s family but defended the government’s approach, asserting that maintaining a functioning prison system necessitates difficult decisions. The Police Federation has indicated a potential legal challenge, reflecting the growing tensions surrounding criminal justice policies.
Why it Matters
The proposed reforms by Reform UK could reshape the landscape of employment law in Britain, introducing unprecedented accountability for employers regarding immigration compliance. As the government grapples with rising illegal working, the implications of such stringent measures extend beyond mere financial penalties; they raise critical questions about the balance between economic integrity and human rights. The political ramifications of these proposals, especially within the context of broader immigration debates, underscore the urgent need for a nuanced approach that addresses the complexities of the labour market while safeguarding vulnerable populations.