Lead

A public row between Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood and junior minister Mike Tapp has escalated after Tapp said he “won’t be intimidated” in response to Mahmood’s demand for his sacking. Mahmood demanded that Tapp, the immigration minister, be fired for writing an unauthorised article in the Times calling for overseas care workers to be exempt from the government’s immigration reforms. However, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has so far refused to sack Tapp, with Downing Street saying “no decision” has been made.

Coverage Comparison

The Guardian reported that Tapp used his X account to deliver a defiant response to Mahmood’s demand. He wrote: “Ok, morning all. It’s gone from ‘he broke the ministerial code’ to ‘he stole my idea.’ I have put my views across on a policy I’ve been working on for months (I have the receipts) in an Op Ed in the times. Give it a read, and let’s continue to discuss.” Above a picture of himself, he added: “I won’t be intimidated to drop my views. Stay classy! Oh and I’m at a wedding in San Francisco, but happy to talk more when I’m back (I promise that’s the Golden Gate Bridge hidden by the fog).”

The row is set against the backdrop of senior Labour figures vying for leading roles in Andy Burnham’s prospective administration, which is expected to take power in No 10 as early as 17 July. The Guardian noted that Tapp wrote in the Times that it was his “strong belief” that migrant care workers should not have to wait longer to apply for permanent settlement in the UK. Mahmood was unaware he had written the article, which a source close to her insisted was done “to try to win a job in the new administration.”

The Guardian also reported that the ministerial code states that the principle of collective responsibility requires ministers to be able to express their views frankly in private, while maintaining a united front when decisions have been reached. A source close to Mahmood said: “Mike Tapp is expected to be sacked for breaching the ministerial code. He has taken possible ideas that the home secretary and her team were working on, and briefed them as his own to try to win a job in the new administration.” It is understood Tapp was involved in ministerial discussions about exempting care workers from the proposed reforms to “indefinite leave to remain,” and it is alleged he took an idea from those discussions and attempted to pass it off as his own.

Key Claims

  • Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood demanded the sacking of junior minister Mike Tapp for writing an unauthorised article in the Times calling for overseas care workers to be exempt from immigration reforms.
  • Keir Starmer has not sacked Tapp despite Mahmood’s demand; Downing Street said “no decision” had been made.
  • Tapp used his X account to deliver a defiant response, saying he “won’t be intimidated” and would continue to express his views.
  • The row comes as senior Labour figures tussle for leading roles in Andy Burnham’s prospective administration.
  • Migrant care workers and workers’ rights experts back Tapp’s proposal to exclude care workers from the government’s immigration plans.
  • The proposed change to leave to remain would force care workers to wait longer to apply for permanent settlement in the UK.
  • Analysis by the Home Office and its migration advisory committee estimates that about 200,000 care workers and their dependants will apply for permanent settlement between now and 2030 if the five-year route remains unchanged.
  • The ministerial code says that ministers should be able to express their views frankly in private while maintaining a united front in public.

Perspectives

Home Secretary and allies: Shabana Mahmood demanded Tapp’s sacking, with a source close to her alleging he breached the ministerial code and tried to pass off departmental ideas as his own to secure a role in the new administration.

Mike Tapp: Tapp defended his actions, saying he had been working on the policy for months and would not be intimidated into dropping his views.

Care workers and rights experts: Dr Dora-Olivia Vicol of the Work Rights Centre called the proposed 10-year settlement wait “cruel and unconscionable,” and Gavin Edwards of Unison said it was a “slap in the face” for care workers who had propped up a vital public service.