
Scottish care sector chief rips into Keir Starmer's immigration plans
Starmer said the UK risks becoming an 'island of strangers' without further controls on immigration.
He also said the Labour Government would 'take back control of our borders' and close the book on a 'squalid chapter' for politics and the economy.
The UK Government is set to close the care worker visa route as part of new restrictions which aim to cut the number of low-skilled foreign workers by about 50,000 this year.
READ MORE: Keir Starmer to close legal route that allowed Palestinians to settle in UK
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has said it is "time to end that care worker recruitment from abroad" and rules will change this year - instead requiring firms to hire British nationals or extend visas of overseas workers already in the country.
MacAskill said the care sector in Scotland had not been consulted about the announcement.
He told The National the language used by Starmer has echoes of Enoch Powell, who in 1968 criticised the rapid influx of immigrants from the Commonwealth to the UK in his 'Rivers of Blood' speech.
The Scottish Care CEO said Starmer's approach will create a 'hostile environment' for care workers, making it harder for the sector to hang on to international workers.
He told The National: 'The phraseology of the prime minister is extremely negative and almost reaches a level of anti-immigrant rhetoric which is really playing into the hands of some of our more negative voices in the political area.
'That means holding onto the thousands of care workers that come from international communities, who are delivering care and part of our communities today, will be increasingly difficult because it's creating a hostile environment.
'As a bit of student of political history I cannot but conclude that it has echoes of Powell at his worst. It is deeply regrettable that using language that plays into negative stereotypes around the contribution of migrants will lead to a devaluing of their contribution.
'The skills and the abilities of our international colleagues are excellent and we have to hold onto our colleagues. We have to get the UK Government to reconsider.
(Image: NQ) 'I want Mr Starmer to answer me – where are we going to get these workers if not internationally?'
MacAskill (above) is not the first to make the comparison between Starmer and Powell, with MP Zarah Sultana also saying he "imitated" the Rivers of Blood speech with his words.
"That speech fuelled decades of racism and division. Echoing it today is a disgrace," she said.
MacAskill said even if every pupil coming out of Scottish schools were to go into the care sector, there would still not be enough people to deliver care and support.
The Prime Minister imitating Enoch Powell's 'Rivers of Blood' speech is sickening.
That speech fuelled decades of racism and division. Echoing it today is a disgrace. It adds to anti-migrant rhetoric that puts lives at risk.
Shame on you, Keir Starmer. pic.twitter.com/rQcMf6T1eo — Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) May 12, 2025
He said the plan announced by Starmer failed to recognise the problem Scotland faces of an ageing workforce, adding it has become clear the nation needs to have powers over immigration.
'The rhetoric which is about at the moment, that all we need to do is train those who are economically inactive, is absolutely naïve,' said MacAskill.
'There is this perception that care is low-skilled any anybody can do it with a bit of training and it's absolutely false.'
READ MORE: Keir Starmer branded 'pound shop Farage' in immigration crackdown
He went on: 'We need an immigration system which is based on sector need, and that is clearly the case in Scotland, and secondly a system that is based on geographical priorities and I would argue there is a very strong case for a distinct approach in Scotland to the rest of the UK.
'Similar systems exist in Canada and Australia, and very effectively. It's because the question of nationalism becomes associated with this that we haven't got the maturity of political debate to enable a recognition that parts of Scotland, parts of Wales and indeed parts of the south-west of England do need a different approach to immigration.'
Immigration expert Emile Chabal, a professor of contemporary history at Edinburgh University, has also said the Labour Government's approach could lead to a dismantling of the care sector.
'The care sector has for a long time relied on cheap foreign labour and this overwhelmingly has come from non-EU migrants in the last two decades,' he told The National.
(Image: PA) 'So there's a very real risk of the bottom falling out of that sector.
'The problem is the lag – it takes time to recruit people, it takes time to train people, and if this legislation is implemented it will make it much more difficult for those in the care sector to employ people quickly.'
Under the white paper proposals, migrants will have to spend 10 years in the UK before being able to apply for citizenship, but so-called 'high-contributing' individuals such as doctors and nurses could be fast-tracked through the system.
Language requirements will be increased for all immigration routes to ensure a higher level of English.
Rules will also be laid out for adult dependants, meaning that they will have to demonstrate a basic understanding of the language.
READ MORE: UK media given handbooks after 'normalising Israel's genocide in Gaza'
Meanwhile, skilled worker visas will require a university degree, and there will be tighter restrictions on recruitment for jobs with skills shortages.
Ministers are looking to bring down net migration figures, which stood at 728,000 in the year to mid-2024.
Chabal said there is a 'real problem' with how successive UK governments have become 'hostage' to net migration figures, making him doubt if Starmer's plan is realistic.
He said: 'I think it's a double edge sword – on the one hand successive governments have been using net migration targets to try and show they are doing something, they're trying to signal 'we can bring this down, we have a metric we can use to show you we're doing something'.
'But by emphasising migration targets that focuses public attention on the figures and actually, those are much more difficult to control than most governments are willing to admit and that's a real problem.
'So whether any of these policies will be effective, I'd be concerned about that.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New Statesman
37 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Are we entering a new era of left-wing infighting?
Photo Credit: Peter Nicholls / Getty Images After occupying a supporting role over the past five years, the radical left of British politics has been suddenly thrust into the spotlight. For a while, attention has largely focused on Zack Polanski, the 'eco-populist' vying to be elected leader of the Green Party in September. (He currently stands as the favourite.) An influx of interviews, clever comms and his outgoing personality took Polanski from a relative unknown to being anointed by some as the leader of the modern left-in-waiting. Late last Thursday evening (July 3), everything changed. After months of speculation, the British left's worst-kept secret was abruptly made official: Zara Sultana MP announced that she would resign from Labour and start a new, left-wing party alongside former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. (Sultana was suspended from Labour last July after voting against the two-child benefit cap.) There are still a lot of questions to be answered of this new left alliance: most pertinent of all concerning Corbyn – who was reportedly 'furious and bewildered' about the sudden announcement – and his involvement. 'Join us. The time is now,' Sultana urged in her declaration on X. Could this mean that Polanski and the Green party's riding of the new-left alternative wave is over? It could've turned out so differently. Another whisper doing the rounds at the same time as the Sultana-Corbyn party was the former having discussions with Polanski and potentially defecting to the Greens. 'I have thought about rolling out the red carpet for people like Zarah Sultana,' Polanski told my colleague Megan Kenyon in May. Talks happened, but the prospect of joining the Greens back in the spring never truly appealed to Sultana. Nor, does it seem, from her summer announcement, that Sultana is interested in any collaboration or pact with Polanski and his party. 'Billionaires already have three parties fighting for them. It's time the rest of us had one,' Sultana's statement read. It's very obviously a dig at the interests of Labour, the Conservatives and Lib Dems – but also a more implicit slight on the Green Party and its current (and future) ability to advance a progressive agenda. Despite getting rebuked by Sultana, Polanski's – public – reaction to the new party-slash-rival is one of a diplomat: 'Anyone who wants to take on the Tories, Reform and this failing Labour government is a friend of mine. Looking forward to seeing what this looks like in practice.' The left, in pursuit of its goals, often meets a persistent, often impenetrable force: the left. Left-on-left infighting isn't new, but should history repeat itself in today's political climate, it could detract from the shared aim of both Sultana and the Greens: to stop Nigel Farage's Reform Party and its lead in the polls. Exclusive polling shared with the New Statesman by More in Common found that a 'new Corbyn-led party' would receive 10 per cent of votes if an election was held today. Rather than harm, this analysis suggests, it would bolster Reform's lead in the polls (currently 27 per cent) by splitting the 'left' vote by cutting Labour's share by three points (from 23 per cent) and the Greens by four (from 9 per cent). The hard-yards earned by the Greens over the past year – from quadrupling its Parliamentary representation at last year's election, to building on its presence in regional government in May's local elections – could be lost with the inception of a new Sultana-Corbyn led party. Still, all hope is not lost for the Greens. Especially for Polanski: membership of the Green Party has reportedly risen at least 8 per cent since May (when he launched his leadership bid), in what some have described as a 'Polanski surge'. The findings from Novara Media suggest that the party (which has not officially declared its latest figures) has at least 65,000 members, a smidge behind its 2015 peak of 67,000. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe If a week's a long time in politics, then a year is a lifetime. When I followed the outgoing Green co-leader Carla Denyer on the campaign trail in Bristol last year, she told me that the overwhelming priority for the party, nationally, was to highlight its own merits – rather than just being seen as the logical place for Corbynistas to go following Labour's 'return to form' towards the centre of British politics. She raised the 2019 election, when she missed out on the Bristol seat she later won in 2024. The difficulty wasn't in winning the argument, Denyer told me, but of national circumstances: 'The challenge [in 2019] was that constituents wanted the Conservatives out, and they felt that they had to vote Labour to do that. We had people saying: 'We agree with you more… [but we] have to vote Labour this time.'' With Reform currently leading the polls as it is, perhaps history may repeat itself – only with the Tories being recast by Farage and Reform. That will be a challenge the Greens, a Sultana-Corbyn party and indeed Labour will have to contend with. But an ever more divided left could make that challenge extremely difficult to overcome. Related

Leader Live
43 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Wrexham MP compares UK parental leave to European countries
MP for Wrexham Last week the UK Government announced a long-awaited review into the pay and leave that new parents can get after the birth of a child. The system has not been reviewed for years and in that time, peoples' working habits and families have changed. The Women and Equalities Committee recently reported that the UK's parental leave system was "one of the worst in the developed world" with "fundamental flaws". According to the campaign group The Dad Shift, one in three fathers take no paternity leave at all (paternity leave is currently 2 weeks in the UK) and despite shared parental leave being available, UK Government data shows that it is rarely taken. The UK system is also confusing to navigate with eight different types of parental leave available. Statutory maternity pay is less than half of the weekly National Living Wage for example. There are some interesting comparisons and approaches across Europe. In Spain for example, fathers can have 16 weeks at full pay, including for those who are self-employed. There is no cap on the salary paid. It means parental leave is now equal between parents in Spain. In Denmark, fathers including those who are self-employed, can take up to 24 weeks off work at full pay supported by the state. After eleven weeks, the remaining 13 weeks can be transferred to the birth partner to be used as extra maternity leave. Parents also have the option to postpone up to 13 weeks of parental leave until their child is aged nine. Research by the Centre for Progressive Policy found that there was a 4% decrease in the gender wage gap in countries with more than 6 weeks of paid paternity leave. Furthermore only 18% of people they surveyed felt that 2 weeks of paternity pay in the UK was enough. So, there is plenty to work on and to consider. The review is expected to take 18months. If you would like to raise anything with me about this issue or any other, please contact my office on 01978 788854 or email


Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Britain's parliament doesn't need to hear from Emmanuel Macron
If ever a French president needed a state visit to Britain, it is Emmanuel Macron. All the pomp and ceremony will brighten his soul and help him forget the mess he has made of his own country. This week's visit, which starts today, is the first of its kind to Perfidious Albion since Nicolas Sarkozy was a guest of the late Queen in 2008. These days, of course, there is nothing perfidious about Britain. It is one of the very few countries where Macron knows he will be treated with the courtesy he demands. The allure of the youngest president of the Fifth Republic has long since faded around most of the world. He is mocked in the United States, Russia and China, scorned by the Algerians and ignored by many central African leaders. The derision has even spread to South America. Last week, Macron had what the French press described as 'a tizzy' after he was criticised by Gustavo Petro, the president of Colombia during a conference in Spain. 'I demand respect,' declared Macron, angry at the remarks of Petro about European policy. Macron will get that respect in Britain, from the moment he and his wife arrive at RAF Northolt this morning. The Prince and Princess of Wales will be there to greet them, and they will accompany the presidential couple to Windsor. The King will formally welcome the Macrons on a special royal dais before a carriage procession through the town to the Castle. Lunch will be taken in the State Dining Room and in the evening there will be a grand state banquet. In between those two feasts, Macron will travel to Westminster to address members of both Houses assembled in the Royal Gallery of the House of Lords. It will be the most interesting moment of the state visit. What advice could Emmanuel Macron possibly impart to the British parliament, the 'cradle of democracy'? The president's approval rating is down to 21 per cent. True, it's five percent more than his prime minister, Francois Bayrou, but their unpopularity is a stark indication of the crisis enveloping France. A fortnight ago the country's public debt soared another €40 billion (£35 billion) to over €3.35 trillion (£2.8 trillion) – 114 per cent of GDP – and more and more economists are warning that France is teetering towards bankruptcy. Many of France's business leaders gathered in Aix at the weekend for an annual economic forum, and the mood was one of pessimism. 'We are in a situation of absolute urgency,' one admitted. 'Nothing has happened for a year.' It is almost a year to the day since the second round of the snap parliamentary election called by Macron. The president had taken the extraordinary decision to dissolve parliament after June's European elections. His centrist party had been humiliatingly rejected by the people, hammered by Marine Le Pen's National Rally. They took 30 per cent of the vote, a score they replicated in the first round of the parliamentary election on 30 June. In between, the first and second round, Macron's flailing centrists formed a desperate coalition with a ragtag bunch of Socialists, Communists and Greens, not forgetting Jean-Luc Melenchon's far-left la France Insoumise, the party that sends a shudder through France's Jewish community. Their 'Republican Front' worked, denying Le Pen victory and effectively silencing the voices of 37 percent of the people who voted for her. The left-wing coalition's triumphalism was soon strangled by Macron. Ignoring the fact they took the most seats, and that Le Pen won the popular vote by a country mile, the president engineered the appointment of a centrist government. By the end of 2024, he was on his fourth PM of the year. This year has been little better, and the country is a shambles, prompting more and more calls for his resignation. Among them is Christophe Gomart, a former army general and now an MEP in the centre-right Republicans. 'France is destabilised, it carries less weight internationally,' he said last month. 'We're still paying for the consequences of the dissolution…Emmanuel Macron is putting on a show, but Narcissus has to give up power. That will give the French the chance to vote again for a president and give France a new lease of life.' Macron said as much himself in 2019 during a discussion with a group of academics at the Elysee Palace. 'The President of the Republic should not be able to stay (in office) if he had a real rejection in terms of a majority,' he announced. Macron's centrist Renaissance party won 314 of the 577 seats in the 2017 parliamentary election; they are now down to 99. If Macron was a man of his word he should have resigned last year. But he has said he has no intention of stepping down before 2027. As a consequence, France is condemned to two more years of inertia. A bitterly divided parliament can't agree on anything. The government is arguing among itself on everything from the wearing of the hijab to immigration to energy policy. Last week, Macron felt obliged to rebuke some of his ministers for their public squabbling, demanding that they act with more 'discipline'. If Macron can't even control his own ministers – let alone his country – one wonders what pearls of wisdom he will have for parliament today.