Angela Rayner described the approach as "un-British".
Labour MPs opposed to Shabana Mahmood’s immigration reforms are threatening to expose the party’s divisions by forcing a symbolic vote in Parliament unless ministers back down.
The proposals would double the time most migrants must wait for indefinite leave to remain (ILR) from five to 10 years.
The changes would also extend waiting periods for care workers and refugees, prompting concern across Labour’s parliamentary ranks.
According to the Home Office, the reforms do not require primary legislation, meaning they can be implemented without a formal vote in Parliament.
However, critics are now exploring procedural mechanisms to trigger a non-binding vote, aiming to publicly highlight opposition within Labour.
Settlement, or ILR, grants individuals the right to live, work and study in the UK indefinitely, as well as access benefits if eligible.
Government figures show net migration added 2.6 million people to the UK population between 2021 and 2024.
Projections suggest around 1.6 million people could gain settlement between 2026 and 2030 under current trends.
Ministers have partly based the reforms on policies pursued by Denmark’s Social Democrats, which officials believe helped reduce migration levels.
The decision to apply the new rules retrospectively has drawn sharp criticism.
Labour’s former deputy leader Angela Rayner described the approach as “un-British”.
Downing Street has since indicated that “transitional arrangements” could be introduced, potentially softening the impact on migrants already in the UK.
But opposition within Labour appears to be hardening rather than easing.
Folkestone MP Tony Vaughan, who organised a letter signed by 100 MPs, said adjustments would not resolve deeper concerns.
He said the objections were more “fundamental” and insisted the government should abandon the ILR changes entirely.
Until now, many Labour MPs have voiced concerns privately.
One MP said it was wrong to “renege on promises” by making people who “uprooted their lives to come here” wait longer for permanent residency.
Another described their opposition as “non-negotiable”, adding the reforms should be “binned” rather than diluted.
A former minister said the issue surfaced during the recent Gorton and Denton by-election campaign, which Labour lost.
A long-standing critic added: “It is better to cringe and do a U-turn than do the wrong thing”.
While some MPs support elements of the reforms, including proposals for new safe and legal migration routes, the ILR changes have sparked the strongest backlash.
Multiple sources said they are preparing to use rarely deployed parliamentary procedures to force a vote in the coming months.
A debate in the House of Lords is also expected.
Any vote would be symbolic and not legally binding.
However, rebel MPs believe it would still carry political weight by exposing internal divisions on a sensitive issue.
The Home Secretary has defended the reforms as necessary to restore confidence in the immigration system and address the impact of high migration levels.
A Home Office spokesman said: “The privilege of living here forever should be earned not automatic.
“We must be honest about the scale and impact of hundreds of thousands of low-skilled migrants getting settlement rights.”
Opposition parties remain divided on the issue.
The Conservatives have suggested the reforms do not go far enough but could support the ILR changes.
The Liberal Democrats oppose the proposals, while Reform UK has said it would abolish ILR altogether if elected.
Within Labour, tensions extend beyond those opposing the changes.
Some MPs in marginal constituencies fear that abandoning the reforms could damage the party electorally.
One MP facing pressure from Reform UK said if ministers backtrack, “my seat will never be Labour again”.
They added: “I have seen the polling and the immigration policies are popular. Some people will never vote Labour unless we get a grip.”
Another long-standing Labour figure criticised internal dissent, saying:
“The Left are always telling us we need to be bold. Well, Shabana [Mahmood] is bold on immigration and they don’t like it.
“They don’t get out enough – they are deluded if they think the changes are unpopular.”
Loading ...