Ministers are said to be working behind the scenes with backbenchers to water down Shabhana Mahmood’s immigration reforms.
The news raises fresh questions about whether Keir Starmer’s overhaul of the asylum and settlement system will survive intact.
More than 100 Labour MPs, peers and union leaders have joined a revolt against the package, with some warning the changes risk triggering a Windrush-style scandal, and others comparing the threat of forced removals to Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement tactics.
A Home Office spokesperson said the Government’s position had not changed, adding: “The privilege of living here forever should be earned, not automatic.”
The Guardian reported that ministers are consulting with backbenchers on further exemptions, but Downing Street has declined to confirm it stands by all aspects of the package, saying only that reforms would be “fair and compassionate”.
What are the reforms?
The Government is pursuing two distinct strands: an overhaul of the asylum system and new rules on permanent settlement.
On asylum, the most significant shift is that refugee status will now be granted for 30 months at a time rather than being effectively permanent from the outset. When a refugee applies to extend their stay, the Home Office will review whether they still need protection. Those whose home countries are deemed safe will be expected to return.
The Government has also introduced a “visa brake” for nationals of Afghanistan, Cameroon, Myanmar and Sudan, blocking access to student visas. Afghan nationals will additionally be barred from Skilled Worker visas.
Mahmood announced in March a pilot scheme offering 150 families whose asylum claims had been rejected up to £40,000 each to leave the country voluntarily, or face forcible removal. Families were given seven days to decide whether to accept the offer.
Separately, Mahmood is pursuing reforms to indefinite leave to remain – the legal status that gives migrants the right to live permanently in the UK.
Under the current system, most migrants qualify after five years. The proposed changes would see the default qualifying period double to ten years. Those in higher-skilled jobs – defined as earning above £50,270 – or working in public sector healthcare and teaching could still qualify after five, while those in medium-skilled roles such as care workers could wait up to 15 years.
What is the Labour revolt about?
The most contentious question is whether the settlement changes will apply to people already living in the UK – and whether children and families could face detention and removal.
Tony Vaughan, the Labour MP for Folkestone and Hythe, organised a letter signed by 100 colleagues warning the proposals undermined the Government’s commitment to integration.
He said the changes meant “moving the goalposts for people who have upended their lives to work in and for our country”.
The government currently plans to double the length of time migrants need to spend in the UK before they have the right to live here permanently. (Photo by Oli Scarff/Getty Images)Angela Rayner, the former deputy prime minister, said in March that the retrospective element was “un-British” and a “breach of trust”, warning that Labour was “running out of time” to raise its game.
The forced removal element has drawn particularly sharp criticism. Sarah Owen, a leader of the Tribune group of soft-left Labour MPs, said on social media that the prospect of deporting children “mimics Trump’s ICE detention of children”.
Stella Creasy, the MP for Walthamstow, raised the spectre of a Windrush-style scandal, warning that Ukrainians, Iranians and Afghans would “live in a perpetual state of limbo, not able to plan any kind of life either here or in their home nation”.
The Home Affairs Select Committee warned in a March 2026 report that the settlement changes could force care workers either to leave the sector or remain in the UK at “prolonged risk of poverty and exploitation”.
How serious is the opposition?
Downing Street has declined to say whether it stands by all aspects of the package. When asked directly, a spokesman for Starmer said only that reforms would be “fair and compassionate” and that the 200,000 responses to the Home Office consultation were still being reviewed.
Starmer himself has signalled sympathy with some critics, telling the Sunday Mirror last month that people wanted “clear rules, but they also want compassionate and fair rules”.
Public opinion offers the Government little clear direction. A BMG Research poll of 1,507 GB adults conducted for The i Paper between 25 and 26 March found 39 per cent backed extending the qualifying period from five to ten years, with 26 per cent opposed.
But support becomes more conditional when the changes are applied retrospectively. Just 36 per cent back imposing the tougher rules on migrants already in the UK, with 30 per cent opposed.
Among past Labour voters the split is tighter still – 41 per cent in favour, 36 per cent against.
What could the Government change – and when?
The main concession being sought by rebel MPs is that the changes should not apply retrospectively.
One leading backbench rebel told The Guardian they believed that exemption alone would be enough to calm most opponents, though Emily Thornberry, chair of the foreign affairs select committee, has called for broader changes including to the earned settlement framework itself.
The finalised settlement policy is not expected until autumn 2026.
Some asylum changes – including the move to 30-month refugee status – came into force on 26 March, applying to those who claimed asylum on or after 2 March.
Hence then, the article about everything you need to know about the revolt brewing over labour s migration reforms was published today ( ) and is available on inews ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Everything you need to know about the revolt brewing over Labour’s migration reforms )
Also on site :