www.theguardian.com
Charities condemn Reform UK’s migration plans as ‘sadistic’ and ‘abhorrent’ – as Tories claim Farage’s plans same as theirs
The Conservative party has claimed that Reform UK’s plans to deport hundreds of thousands of people who are in the UK illegally are much the same as theirs.
In a statement issued after Zia Yusuf set out the Reform plans in a speech, Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said:
Reform’s home affairs spokesperson has nothing new to offer beyond copying and pasting Conservative plans.
Reform are a one man band. Only the Conservatives have a credible plan to control our borders through leaving the ECHR, deporting all illegal immigrants within a week and banning asylum claims from illegal entrants.
In a summary of its plans, Reform UK said it would set up a UK Deportation Command, with “the capacity to detain 24,000 migrants at a time and deport up to 288,000 annually”.
The Conservatives say, under their borders plan, they would set up a removals force to deport 150,000 illegal immgrants a year.
But others are less positive about the Reform UK plans.
Max Wilkinson, the Lib Dem home affairs spokesperson, said:
Reform’s Trump-inspired plans for an ICE-style force will only bring chaos and disorder to Britain’s streets, not the order and control our immigration system needs.
It’s nonsense to claim that ripping up the European convention on human rights – a largely British creation – will bring more control. It will undermine the cooperation we need to tackle the problem, and deprive British people of hard-won rights and freedoms too.
Dora-Olivia Vicol, CEO of the Work Rights Centre, a charity that works with migrants, was particularly critical of the Reform plan, not just to deport people in the UK illegally, but to abolish indefinite leave to remain, the status that allows foreigners who have lived in the UK for a period of time to stay for good. Vicol said:
We have watched in horror as Ice attacked migrant communities and citizens in the US – yet this is what Reform wants to base their immigration policies on? This is a sadistic vision of UK families and communities being ripped apart, money being wasted, and the government turning against its own people.
Cancelling the immigration status of people who have settled and built their entire lives here would not only be callous, but actively hurt our economy and public services. People who hold ILR [indefinite leave to remain] are our partners, neighbours, friends, teachers, NHS workers, and include high tax contributors. There is absolutely no reason to terminate their status other than for Reform’s own self-serving goals of division and chaos.
Amnesty International UK also criticised the Reform UK plans. Referring to the way Yusuf claimed that the UK was experience an immigrant “invasion”, Kerry Moscogiuri, Amnesty chief executive in the UK, said:
Language that frames migration as an ‘invasion’ poisons the public debate and emboldens ideas many believed we had left behind generations ago. Appealing to racism or aggressive nationalism as a shortcut to power is reckless and dangerous.
The UK does not need or want a British version of Ice. Proposals to mirror the United States through mass detention and rapid deportations risk unleashing a system built on fear, aggressive raids and discrimination, where enforcement operates with sweeping powers and too little accountability. That is not security. It is a blueprint for division, harm and lasting damage to our freedoms.
And Nathan Phillips, head of campaigns at Asylum Matters, also criticised Reform UK – while pointing out that Labour too is not committed to protecting the ILF status quo. Referring to the Yusuf speech, he said:
This is an utterly abhorrent, terrifying proposal that would destroy individual lives, our communities and our economy. It’s hard to believe anyone could look at the violent abductions and state-sponsored murders taking place in the US and conclude that’s what we need here.
What’s most disturbing is that this extremist policy isn’t an outlier. Our current government is condemning Reform’s plan to end indefinite leave to remain, while actively planning to deny thousands of people the right to claim ILR, and make even more people, including refugees, wait decades to achieve that security. It’s broadcasting its own Ice-style TikTok videos while calling newcomers to this country “strangers”.
Key events
Keir Starmer opens investigation into Josh Simons over targeting of reporters
Keir Starmer has opened a formal investigation into a Cabinet Office minister involved in falsely accusing journalists of having links to pro-Russian propaganda, Henry Dyer reports.
Reform UK accused of having ‘un-Christian’ migration policy – as it claims it would defend UK’s Christian heritage
For the record, here is the Reform UK summary of eight policies announced by Zia Yusuf in his speech this morning. (See 2.32pm.)
-Deliver net negative immigration by ending the era of mass immigration and deporting all illegal migrants from the United Kingdom, with the party stating that it would expect to deport over 600,000 in its first term.
-Apply visa bans on countries that refuse to take back their illegal migrants, including the likes of Pakistan, Somalia, Eritrea, Syria, Afghanistan and Sudan who all have large illegal migrant populations in the UK.
-Deliver Operation Restoring Justice by leaving the European convention on human rights immediately, derogating from every international treaty that has been used to frustrate the deportation of those who have no right to be here, immediately commencing the rapid construction of secure detention capacity for 24,000 illegal migrants, and establishing UK Deportation Command to identify, detain and deport illegal migrants.
-Deploy stop and search to get knives off our streets by changing the law to allow Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, which currently allows senior police officers to authorise stop and search to an area for 24 hours, extendable for a further 24 hours, to be extended by up to 30 days to enable the police to disrupt impending crime in hotspots.
-Protect Britain’s Christian heritage by preventing churches being turned into places of worship of other faiths by automatically listing historic churches, preventing alterations affecting their historic character, requiring their upkeep and restricting change of use. Reform UK would also create a new planning use class for churches to prevent them being converted into places of worship for other religions.
-Introduce the “Polanski Law” to make aiding and abetting illegal entry into the UK a criminal offence, regardless of intent. This will close the loophole in the current law by making it a strict liability offence for people to perform any act that assists or encourages illegal entry, punishable by up to two years’ imprisonment. This will stop the Green Party endorsed charity industrial complex from facilitating large scale illegal entry under the guise of humanitarian or charitable action. The legislation will not impede lifeboats saving those in genuine distress at sea.
-Overhaul the PREVENT programme so it is focused on the real threats Britain faces, especially Islamist terrorism, and mandate home searches in cases of repeat referrals. Where an individual is referred by three separate corroborating authorities, they will automatically and without exception be subject to a thorough physical search of their homes.
-Proscribe Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and the Muslim Brotherhood to begin ridding the UK of extremist organisations.
While there is a lot of overlap between Conservative policy and Reform UK, the Tories are not proposing to ban churches being converted into mosques, and Reform UK are definitely putting more emphasis on protecting the UK’s “Christian heritage”. There is something quite American about this; in the US, rightwing white nationalism has a distinct religious component that is much less common in Europe.
Sunder Katwala from the British Future thinktank says this is an irony in claiming to be Christian as a party while promoting a migration policy that is distinctly un-Christian.
Zia Yusuf’s rhetoric of protecting Christianity, rhetorically, is combined with an indecent threat to deport many tens of thousands of Christians, including those here 5-20 years with permanent status, as well as recent arrivals, from across the Commonwealth and elsewhere outside Europe
The 600k settled residents (non-EU) threatened with deportation + > million newer arrivals mostly non-white & less likely to have no religion than median white Briton. Many tens of thousands of Christians, as well as Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs & others of no faith. (But Yusuf isn’t deporting most Poles)
The policy of revoking past grants of permanent settlement to deport settled migrants om a scale unprecedented in any democracy is fairly described as un-Christian in values, & also inhumane from a humanitarian perspective, in its indecent treatment of people of all faiths Inc Christians & of none.
Here is the text of Bridget Phillipson’s speech this morning launching the schools white paper.
Lindsay Hoyle, the speaker, will confirm that MPs can debate Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, even though parliamentary rules mean the conduct of members of the royal family is not normally a matter for debate, Steven Swinford from the Times says. The Liberal Democrats want to hold a debate on Andrew in the Commons tomorrow and Hoyle is expected to clarify what is allowed.
Hoyle first told MPs earlier this month that Andrew was no longer protected by the Commons convention about debating royals saying that, because he was no longer a prince, the rule did not apply.
Charities condemn Reform UK’s migration plans as ‘sadistic’ and ‘abhorrent’ – as Tories claim Farage’s plans same as theirs
The Conservative party has claimed that Reform UK’s plans to deport hundreds of thousands of people who are in the UK illegally are much the same as theirs.
In a statement issued after Zia Yusuf set out the Reform plans in a speech, Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said:
Reform’s home affairs spokesperson has nothing new to offer beyond copying and pasting Conservative plans.
Reform are a one man band. Only the Conservatives have a credible plan to control our borders through leaving the ECHR, deporting all illegal immigrants within a week and banning asylum claims from illegal entrants.
In a summary of its plans, Reform UK said it would set up a UK Deportation Command, with “the capacity to detain 24,000 migrants at a time and deport up to 288,000 annually”.
The Conservatives say, under their borders plan, they would set up a removals force to deport 150,000 illegal immgrants a year.
But others are less positive about the Reform UK plans.
Max Wilkinson, the Lib Dem home affairs spokesperson, said:
Reform’s Trump-inspired plans for an ICE-style force will only bring chaos and disorder to Britain’s streets, not the order and control our immigration system needs.
It’s nonsense to claim that ripping up the European convention on human rights – a largely British creation – will bring more control. It will undermine the cooperation we need to tackle the problem, and deprive British people of hard-won rights and freedoms too.
Dora-Olivia Vicol, CEO of the Work Rights Centre, a charity that works with migrants, was particularly critical of the Reform plan, not just to deport people in the UK illegally, but to abolish indefinite leave to remain, the status that allows foreigners who have lived in the UK for a period of time to stay for good. Vicol said:
We have watched in horror as Ice attacked migrant communities and citizens in the US – yet this is what Reform wants to base their immigration policies on? This is a sadistic vision of UK families and communities being ripped apart, money being wasted, and the government turning against its own people.
Cancelling the immigration status of people who have settled and built their entire lives here would not only be callous, but actively hurt our economy and public services. People who hold ILR [indefinite leave to remain] are our partners, neighbours, friends, teachers, NHS workers, and include high tax contributors. There is absolutely no reason to terminate their status other than for Reform’s own self-serving goals of division and chaos.
Amnesty International UK also criticised the Reform UK plans. Referring to the way Yusuf claimed that the UK was experience an immigrant “invasion”, Kerry Moscogiuri, Amnesty chief executive in the UK, said:
Language that frames migration as an ‘invasion’ poisons the public debate and emboldens ideas many believed we had left behind generations ago. Appealing to racism or aggressive nationalism as a shortcut to power is reckless and dangerous.
The UK does not need or want a British version of Ice. Proposals to mirror the United States through mass detention and rapid deportations risk unleashing a system built on fear, aggressive raids and discrimination, where enforcement operates with sweeping powers and too little accountability. That is not security. It is a blueprint for division, harm and lasting damage to our freedoms.
And Nathan Phillips, head of campaigns at Asylum Matters, also criticised Reform UK – while pointing out that Labour too is not committed to protecting the ILF status quo. Referring to the Yusuf speech, he said:
This is an utterly abhorrent, terrifying proposal that would destroy individual lives, our communities and our economy. It’s hard to believe anyone could look at the violent abductions and state-sponsored murders taking place in the US and conclude that’s what we need here.
What’s most disturbing is that this extremist policy isn’t an outlier. Our current government is condemning Reform’s plan to end indefinite leave to remain, while actively planning to deny thousands of people the right to claim ILR, and make even more people, including refugees, wait decades to achieve that security. It’s broadcasting its own Ice-style TikTok videos while calling newcomers to this country “strangers”.
NEU teachers’ union welcomes ‘ambition’ of Send plans, but insists ‘real additional resources’ needed
The National Education Union, the largest teachers’ union in the UK, has said that it welcomes the “ambition” behind the government’s Send plans. Like other organisations, it has called for more funding, but its overall response is notable more positive than the NASUWT’s overnight one. (See 9.36am.)
This is from Daniel Kebede, the NEU’s general secretary.
The National Education Union welcomes the government’s ambition to reshape the Send landscape to ensure it works for all children. All children must have ready access to special needs support from their school without a long bureaucratic process and mainstream schools will have more access to specialist services.
The NEU has been calling for funding for more resources for inclusion in mainstream schools, so we welcome the announcement of the inclusion grant. However, it is too small. It only equates to a part-time teaching assistant for the average primary school and two teaching assistants for average secondary schools. This is not enough to make schools more inclusive.
The Experts at Hand specialists will need capacity and resource but will provide schools with the additional support and advice that we have long been calling for. (See 9.50am.)
The NEU is pleased that the government intends to tackle the profiteering by independent special schools who have been charging exorbitant fees for poor quality provision and draining resources from the system …
For these reforms to be successful the government must work with the profession and schools. They must listen to parents’ concerns, and they must make sure that there are enough resources available. Schools are running on empty. The government must not put more expectations on schools without real additional resources – and the funding currently announced is not enough.
‘Nothing off the table’ in UK response to latest Trump tariffs, No 10 says
“Nothing is off the table” in the UK’s response to US President Donald Trump’s threats that he will impose 15% global tariffs, Downing Street has said.
As the Press Association reports, at the Downing Street lobby briefing No 10 left open the possibility that the UK could impose reciprocal trade levies on American goods and services, but insisted that it was focused on “constructive engagement” with the Trump administration as a trade war would harm businesses.
Trump said on Saturday he would be imposing a 15% global tariff “effective immediately” after the supreme court overturned his previous import taxes policy in a ruling on Friday, PA reports. It triggered condemnation from the British Chambers of Commerce, which warned the change would mean an extra 5% increase in tariffs on a “wide range” of exports to America, except those covered under a transatlantic trade deal.
Asked how the government planned to respond to Trump’s announcement, the PM’s spokesperson told reporters:
Our approach to the US has always been pragmatic.
We continue to have productive conversations with them … and those discussions are happening at all levels, but nothing is off the table at this stage.
Industry doesn’t want to see a trade war where both sides keep escalating the situation, and that’s why our focus is on constructive engagement with our US counterparts to retain the UK’s competitive advantage.
There will be one urgent question and three ministerial statements in the Commons this afternoon. They are:
3.30pm: A Cabinet Office minister will respond to a Tory UQ about “the Cabinet Office review into Labour Together and APCO Worldwide”.
After 4pm: Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the PM, makes a statement about the planned release of documents relating to Peter Mandelson.
After 5pm: Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, makes a statement about the Every Child Achieving and Thriving white paper, including the Send reforms.
After 6pm: Steve Reed, the local government secretary, makes a statement about local government reorganisation.
Reform UK sent out a detailed preview ahead of Zia Yusuf’s speech this morning in his new role as the party’s home affairs spokersperson. Here is Jessica Elgot’s overnight story.
And these are from Peter Walker, who was listening to Yusuf’s press conference.
Nigel Farage is setting out his migration plans, which would involve retrospectively removing permanent UK residency for hundreds of thousands of non-European people, arguing this the only way to defeat a “really worrying, dangerous form of extreme right ethno-nationalism”.
Farage: “Nobody over the last quarter of a century has done more to defeat the genuine, intolerant, abhorrent, extreme, far right than me.”
You can argue he has kept the openly far right out of his parties, but this is arguably at the expense of absorbing and sanitising many of their arguments.
As an example, Zia Yusuf says at the start of his speech: “English girls were raped on an industrial scale while those in authority looked the other way.” That’s a way of explaining the grooming gangs issue in terms that could be fairly described as far right
I’d argue that setting out the retrospective stripping of ILR, and plans for mass, ICE-style arrests, detentions and deportations, is a moment of some risk for Reform, despite immigration being their main policy focus, if and when voters realise what it will mean in practice.
The fairly extreme nature of the policy, and the very obvious association with what is happening under Trump in the US, is also likely to focus minds when people who don’t like this sort of thing vote tactically at the next election.
Yusuf: “When Nigel is prime minister, there will not be a judge in the country that will be able to prevent flights from leaving.”
Worth noting that the political precedents for saying, ‘The judiciary cannot in any way check the powers of the executive’ is not a happy one.
The other political risk for Reform with all this is that Zia Yusuf is not in any way a cuddly or reassuring figure. He delights in sounding as draconian as he can. That will appeal to some, but arguably not so much to the voters beyond the 30%-ish core support Reform need to win an election.
As an aside, Yusuf is also not an especially good public speaker. He goes on far too long and can seem hectoring and lecturing.
Martin Lewis ambushes Badenoch on Good Morning Britain over student loans plan
Kemi Badenoch has faced what could be described as the stuff of nightmares for a UK politician being interviewed about a personal finance policy: being ambushed and contradicted live on air by Martin Lewis. Peter Walker has story.
How DfE expects proportion of children going to independent special schools to fall under its plans
The Department for Education has also published a document with projections for what is expected to happen to EHCPs and special needs placements under the government’s plans.
Here is the chart illustrating the point highlighted by Kiran Stacey in his story – about how the plans could lead to around 270,000 fewer young people getting EHCPs.
And this chart shows the percentage of children expected to be in special placements under the government’s plans over the next decade. A significant increase is expected in the proportion of children being placed in “specialist bases” in mainstream schools. But the proportion going to special schools, including independent special schools, is expected to fall.
This is what the Commons education committee said in its report last year about the use of independent special schools.
The NAO estimates that an independent special school place costs £61,500 to compared to £23,900 in an equivalent state special school.455 We heard that in some cases, such costs can be explained by the specialised provision they offer, particularly where provision for low-incidence needs may not be available in local state special schools.456 However, such a significant gap in cost raises questions about cost-effectiveness in other contexts. A number of our witnesses highlighted that the independent specialist sector is increasingly being “dominated” by independent schools owned by private equity firms.457 Concerns were raised that these organisations are capitalising on the shortage of state specialist places and the gaps in local provision, with some reportedly charging up to £100,000 per pupil per year and operating at profit margins as high as 25 per cent.
3 layers of Send support available under new system, and how tribunal system would operate
Under the current Send system many parents go to tribunal to force their local authority to agree to provide their child with a education, health and care plan (ECHP) because this is seen as the only way of guaranteeing an adequate special needs educational provision. As the Commons education committee set out in a report on this last year, parents have a 99% success rate when they take these cases to tribunal. That reflects the fact that the provision often being offered routinely not met children’s needs. It also suggests that there are many more children who would qualify for an EHCP if their parents were prepared to go through the lengthy, cumbersome and potentially expensive tribunal process. (Parents do not need a lawyer to take a case to tribunal, but many of them do anyway, because they conclude it will help.)
As Kiran Stacey explains in his story, under the new plans parents will still be able to go to tribunal if they think their child needs an EHCP. But there will be restrictions on what the tribunal can mandate, compared to now. Stacey says:
If parents feel they have been unfairly denied an EHCP, they can appeal to a tribunal. But unlike under the current system, the tribunal will not be allowed to demand that local authorities send a child to a particular school, giving councils far more control over where Send children are educated.
Under the plans, children in year 2 and below who have EHCPs will be assessed under the new system when they move from primary school to secondary. The assessment could result in the plans being removed from thousands of children if they are not deemed to meet the new criteria.
The new ISPs will be administered by schools rather than local authorities, and parents who are unhappy with them will be asked to appeal to the school itself. If they still feel their child’s needs are not being met, they can appeal to a local authority or the Department for Education. But they will not be given recourse to a tribunal, as those fighting for EHCPs can.
This chart, from the DfE’s consultation paper, explains what three levels of support will be available under the new system.
And this chart from the document shows how the tribunal system would operate.
Phillipson says Send reforms needed ‘even if money were no object’ because current outcomes not good enough
At her press conference Bridget Phillipson admitted that the number of children receiving education, health and care plans (EHCPs) is expected to rise. But she claimed the investment the government was making in early years provision would make a difference. She said:
Part of the reason is all of the unmet need that we’ve seen develop over many, many years. If you’re a society that doesn’t have support when children are young and if where that support has been pulled away, as we saw in the past, then that does make a big difference to children as they arrive at school. It’s part of the reason that so many children arrive not ready to learn.
Phillipson said the government’s plans were “not about targets or numbers or cutting costs”. These plans were about “investment upfront to deliver better life chances for children”, she said.
Even if money were no object, even if the system was not experiencing some of the challenges we see at the moment, we would need to make this change happen because the outcomes for children are just not good enough.
UPDATE: Here is the clip.
‘Isn’t a lot of this about saving money?’ @SarahCorkerNews asks the education secretary
Launching long-awaited special needs reforms, Phillipson insists ‘if money were no object, we’d need to make this system work better for children because the outcomes are not good enough’ pic.twitter.com/KqtSNYIA3k
— ITVPolitics (@ITVNewsPolitics) February 23, 2026
DfE publishes consultation paper on Send reforms
Here is the DfE consultation paper setting out the Send reform plans.
Phillipson says plan to double duration of full maternity pay for teachers will make ‘huge difference’ to retention
Q: How are you going to ensure that you have the staff available to deliver this extra help?
Phillipson said that the white paper being published today showed how the government intends to recruit another 6,500 teachers, as Labour promised in its manifesto.
She says the retention rates for women were at their highest level since 2010.
And she said the plan announced last week to double the duration of full maternity pay for teachers would make “a huge difference”.
Phillipson says reforms will lead to ‘expansion’ in rights for Send children because of new ISPs
Phillipson said that her plans to would lead to “an expansion” of the rights for Send children. She said:
We will see an expansion in the rights that children have. So more children will get support than is the case right now through individual support plans (ISPs).
So an expansion in children’s rights and making sure that more children are able to get that specialist support that at the moment can only be accessed through an education, health and care plan (ECHP).
Phillipson seeks to reassure parents worried getting EHCPs will get harder, saying they shouldn’t be ‘only way’ to get help
Phillipson took questions from journalists after her speech.
Q: What is your message for parents?
Phillipson said:
My message today to parents is that we are going to take away that fight that so many parents have had over such a long period of time to get the support that should be much more readily available to their children.
Q: What reassurance can you give to parents who are worried that they will no longer be able to get an EHCP for their children. (See 11.09am.)
Phillipson said:
So I spent a lot of time speaking with parents, with young people, and with those who support children to understand what needs to change. And what I’ve heard time and again, is that increasingly, EHCPs have become the only way to get what your child needs, the only way to get that support. And we have to change that. We have to make much more support available far more quickly, including specialist provision like speech and language support and educational psychologist support to.
Phillipson also said the new system would be introduced gradually, coming into force from 2030.
