Mahmood’s controversial asylum reforms could cause a political hurricane

The home secretary has put forward a series of asylum reforms both bold enough to take on Nigel Farage and extreme enough for the leader of Reform UK to give them his backing. Will she tear the Labour party in two, asks Simon Walters

There are a number of possible outcomes to Shabana Mahmood’s radical shake-up of the asylum system and her highly unorthodox manner of defending it.

On the one hand, it could be abandoned because of the fierce Labour backlash with the home secretary’s credibility destroyed by a combination of poor judgement and reckless use of bad language.

Far at the other end of potential scenarios, she may have set the scenes for the biggest reshaping of battle lines in British politics for years and secured her position as a future prime minister.

Everything about Mahmood’s proposals caused a shock. Labour MPs struggled to believe a Labour home secretary could put forward such far-reaching curbs on migrants that they would be endorsed by the likes of Nigel Farage and Tommy Robinson.

Just as shocking was defiant Mahmood’s response to critics. When a Lib Dem MP accused her in the Commons of fuelling division her answer drew gasps of astonishment from fellow MPs. Defiantly standing by her proposals she shot back: “Unlike him, unfortunately, I am the one that is regularly called a f****** P*** [Mahmood used the actual words] and told to go back home.”

No cabinet minister in history has used language like that from the parliamentary despatch box. It was soon clear it was not an aberration, prompted by a brief moment of frustration. Challenged in a television interview over Farage’s tongue in cheek invitation to join Reform UK, Mahmood said he could “sod off”. She gave the same sweary rebuff when pressed over backing from Tommy Robinson.

‘For now, Mahmood has the support of Starmer, who knows that failing to tackle the asylum crisis is the single biggest threat to his long-term survival as prime minister’ (Getty Images)

The moment Sir Keir Starmer replaced mild-mannered Yvette Cooper at the Home Office with outspoken Mahmood in September it was plain a big change was coming in substance and style.

Shielded in part against charges of racism by her background as the daughter of parents who came to the UK from Pakistan, Mahmood made it clear she intended to take a much tougher approach to “stop the boats”. She has gone even further than expected.

For now, Mahmood has the support of Starmer, who knows that failing to tackle the asylum crisis is the single biggest threat to his long-term survival as prime minister. But former work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall thought that she had the backing of the PM when she proposed major welfare reforms at Starmer’s behest. When Labour MPs rebelled, he crumbled and Kendall was dropped in the September reshuffle.

The stakes are even higher this time. Ambitious Mahmood is made of sterner stuff than Kendall. Unlike the welfare reforms, even if Labour MPs try to block the immigration changes, the unthinkable could happen in the form of the Conservatives – and who knows, even Reform – offering to help Starmer force them through. Kemi Badenoch has already indicated she sympathises with Mahmood’s aims.

If that were to happen it would trigger an existential crisis for Starmer’s Labour. He already faces a threat from a breakaway party led by Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana. Mahmood’s asylum revolution could make more left-wing Labour MPs defect to Corbyn.

Conversely, it could strengthen Labour’s position in the so-called red wall parliamentary seats where its historic support from white working-class voters has haemorrhaged to Reform.

The whole purpose of Starmer putting Mahmood in charge of immigration was to see off the threat from Farage. Her package may do that. But it could be at the expense of breaking Labour in two.

Obviously, Farage’s comment about inviting Mahmood to join Reform was mainly in jest. But it cannot be denied her policy could easily have been drawn up by Reform. And it isn’t just Mahmood’s populist policy that is mimicking him, it is also her populist style.

One of the reasons for his appeal to ordinary voters is his plain talking approach. In using the f-bomb in the Commons – albeit to describe racist abuse against her – Mahmood was imitating him. Indeed, she later went on to deploy it against him personally, telling him to “sod off” for accusing her of aping Reform. “I’m not interested in anything Nigel Farage has to say. I’m not going to let him live in my head rent free.”

That is more akin to the language of the saloon bar where Farage poses for photos than to the holder of one of the great offices of state.

It is not the kind of language Keir Starmer would ever use, though it is precisely why Mahmood’s supporters, like the Labour peer Maurice Glasman, founder of the Blue Wall campaign group set up to win back working-class support for the Party, rate her appeal.

But Mahmood’s swearing cannot hide the fact that while the jury is still out on whether her new immigration proposals command public support, she is closer to Farage than to her own back benches. He said her asylum blueprint read like “an audition to join Reform”.

A summary of her opinions on key issues of the day do indeed read like an application to join Farage’s party: she supported JK Rowling’s stance on the definition of a woman; she cited Margaret Thatcher as political role model; she was among the first Labour MPs to speak out on the grooming gang scandal; she called for restrictions in teaching primary school children about LGBT+ issues; and as justice secretary she unveiled a pilot project for the voluntary chemical castration of sex offenders.

With views which are anathema to many Labour MPs and activists, it is hard to see how, if Starmer ceased to lead the party, Mahmood could win enough support to succeed him. For her part, she dismisses party politicking and says making a success of her immigration plans matters more to her than Labour winning the next election.

Another of her Labour fans, Charles Falconer, who was lord chancellor in Tony Blair’s government, says Mahmood is a “very defined politician with a real instinct for the times”.

The rapid rise of Reform and resurgence in the Greens, alongside the dramatic slump in the last 18 months of both the Labour and Conservative parties, has shown that the winds of change in politics blow more strongly and faster than ever in these times.

Whether Mahmood’s plan succeeds or fails, it could turn those winds into a hurricane.