Rishi Sunak is under fire from his own MPs after rowing back on plans to lift the salary threshold for a family visa – with some Tories accusing him of “weakness”.
The prime minister said the government was “increasing the salary threshold significantly” to £38,700 in “early 2025” – a change from the original plan laid out by Home Secretary James Cleverly earlier this month.
The threshold for a family visa – which applies to Britons who wish to bring family members to the UK – was due to rise from £18,600 to £38,700 next spring in a bid to reduce legal net migration, which hit a record high last year.
But on Thursday night the Home Office quietly watered down the measure, saying the threshold would first be raised to £29,000 from the spring, and then increased in “incremental stages” – though no timetable was set for when the top figure would be introduced.
David Jones, deputy chairman of the right-wing European Research Group, told the PA news agency it was a “regrettable sign of weakness” while Jonathan Gullis, a Conservative former minister wrote on X that it was “deeply disappointing and undermines our efforts”.
Former minister Sir John Hayes, chairman of the Common Sense Group of Tory MPs, told the BBC the earnings threshold should rise to £38,700 “quickly” to give people “certainty”.
Speaking to reporters while visiting ambulance workers in Lincolnshire on Friday, the prime minister insisted the government was doing “exactly as we said” in terms of raising the salary threshold for a family visa, but that the process would happen in “two stages”.
He confirmed that the threshold would increase from £18,600 to £29,000 from next spring before going to the “full amount” in early 2025.
“So it’s exactly what we said we’re doing, we’re just phasing it over the next year or so,” he added.
Earlier this month Mr Cleverly outlined a five-point plan to reduce legal migration after net migration hit a record-breaking 745,000in the year to December 2022.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:14
Rishi Sunak is spotted buying several boxes of mince pies
Mr Cleverly told the Commons last month the government would “increase the skilled worker earnings threshold by a third to £38,700 from next spring, in line with the median full-time wage for those kinds of jobs”.
It said the plan to hike the family visa salary threshold to £38,700 could mean that “in some circumstances, British workers would face more restrictive rules on family than migrant workers in the same job”.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Labour’s shadow international development secretary Lisa Nandy said the backtracking was “just another example of the tail wagging the dog” and accused the government of “running scared of its own back benches”.
Asked whether the party would allow the rise to go ahead if it wins the next election, Ms Nandy said Labour had been “clear all along that immigration policy has to be aligned with skills” to address shortages here in the UK.
Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said ministers “failed to consult anyone on their new proposals and took no account of the impact of steep spousal visa changes on families next year, so it’s no surprise they are now rowing back in a rush”.
Image: Yvette Cooper
The Liberal Democrats suggested the planned £38,700 threshold had always been “unworkable”, with the party’s home affairs spokesman Alistair Carmichael branding it “yet another half-thought-through idea to placate the hardliners on their own back benches”.
Rwanda policy troubles
As well as seeking to reduce legal migration, the government has made stopping small boat crossings in the Channel a core part of its strategy to reduce illegal migration.
To achieve that aim, the government wants to deport asylum seekers who arrive in the UK by irregular means to Rwanda.
Mr Sunak saw off a rebellion over the plan earlier this month, but further battles are likely to await him in the new year as right-wing Tories demand the bill goes further while those on the moderate wing have warned Mr Sunak that he risks losing their support if he significantly alters the bill to placate the right.
Image: The Rwanda bill was backed by MPs
As well as deporting asylum seekers to Rwanda, the government has sought to manage the high number of people arriving by small boat by housing them in former military bases – including the Catterick Garrison in his own constituency of Richmond.
However, there have been reports in the Times that the Home Office had assessed the garrison as unsuitable for a large asylum facility.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:41
‘Rwanda plan won’t stop crossings’
The prime minister confirmed the Home Office assessment but said it was still his intention to use a military base in his constituency to house refugees from Afghanistan.
He said it was “not right” to suggest his constituency was different from any other constituency when asked why plans for the garrison had reportedly been scrapped.
“More generally taking a step back, stopping the boats is a massive priority of mine,” he said.
“It’s something I said I wanted to do because that’s ultimately the best way to relieve pressure on hotels and other areas and local communities.”
Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller urged policymakers and bankers to stop fearing DeFi and stablecoins, saying they will drive the next wave of innovation in the US payments system.
Two Labour-run councils are considering legal action to stop the use of hotels to house migrants in their areas after Epping council won a temporary injunction.
The leaders of Wirral and Tamworth councils both say they are considering their legal options in the wake of the Epping case, citing similar concerns about the impact of the hotels on their local communities.
Epping Forest District Council won an interim High Court injunction on Tuesday to stop migrants being housed at The Bell Hotel, after arguing its owners did not have planning permission to do so.
Paula Basnett, the Labour leader of Wirral council, said: “We are actively considering all options available to us to ensure that any use of hotels or other premises in Wirral is lawful and does not ride roughshod over planning regulations or the wishes of our communities.”
She added: “If necessary, we will not hesitate to challenge such decisions in order to protect both residents and those seeking refuge.”
Carol Dean, the Labour leader of Tamworth Borough Council, said she understands the “strong feelings” of residents about the use of a local hotel to house asylum seekers.
She pointed out that under the Labour government, the use of hotels has halved from 402 to 210, with the aim of stopping the use of any hotels by 2029.
But in light of the Epping case, she said “we are closely monitoring developments and reviewing our legal position”.
Image: Epping has been the focal point of protests against migrant hotels in recent weeks. Pic: Reuters
Badenoch backs more council rebellions
Other Tory councils are also being encouraged to follow Epping’s lead by party leader Kemi Badenoch.
She has sent a letter to all the councils they control, pledging her support for them to fight migrant hotels.
She wrote: “The Epping hotel injunction is a victory for local people led by a good Conservative council working hard for their community. This is the difference Conservatives in local government deliver. Real plans. Real action.”
Conservative-run Broxbourne Council has announced it is exploring its legal options.
The Reform UK leader of Kent County Council has also said she was writing to fellow leaders in Kent to explore whether they could potentially take legal action.
Image: Police officers ahead of a demonstration outside The Bell Hotel. Pic: PA
Government under pressure
The prospect of more rulings in favour of councils will leave ministers asking where else they might be able to house asylum seekers. Other options may include flats and ex-army bases.
The prime minister and the home secretary are under huge pressure to clear the asylum backlog and stop using hotels across the country to house those waiting for their applications to be processed.
Image: Keir Starmer and Yvette Cooper are under pressure to bring down small boat crossings. Pics: PA
Protests have sprung up at migrant hotels across the country. But The Bell Hotel in Epping became a focal point in recent weeks after an asylum seeker housed there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl.
The council sought an interim High Court injunction to stop migrants from being accommodated at the hotel, owned by Somani Hotels Limited, on the basis that using it for that purpose contravened local planning regulations.
The interim injunction demanded that the hotel be cleared of its occupants within 14 days, but in his ruling on Tuesday, Mr Justice Eyre granted the temporary block, while extending the time limit by which it must stop housing asylum seekers to 12 September.
Somani Hotels said it intended to appeal the decision. Its barrister, Piers Riley-Smith, argued it would set a precedent that could affect “the wider strategy” of housing asylum seekers in hotels.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:18
Asylum hotels: ‘People have had enough’
Epping hotel ‘sidestepped public scrutiny’
A government attempt to delay the application was rejected by the High Court judge. Home Office barristers had argued the case had a “substantial impact” on the government performing its legal duties to asylum seekers.
But Mr Justice Eyre dismissed the Home Office’s bid, stating that the department’s involvement was “not necessary”.
The judge said the hotel’s owners “sidestepped the public scrutiny and explanation which would otherwise have taken place if an application for planning permission or for a certificate of lawful use had been made”.
Reacting to Tuesday’s judgment, border security minister Dame Angela Eagle said the government will “continue working with local authorities and communities to address legitimate concerns”.
She added: “Our work continues to close all asylum hotels by the end of this parliament.”