My thoughts on the Home Sec's immigration speech @ippr.org
The Home Sec believes in control + compassion. It's the right ambition.
But her plans may struggle to tackle small boat crossings and risk making integration harder.
I make the case instead for a more focused approach to migration reform
🌍 NEW REPORT: Britain is entering a decade of danger. The post-war order is fracturing, US leadership is uncertain, and Europe is re-arming.
In this paper, Mark Leonard makes the case for a new grand strategy.
Read here: www.ippr.org/articles/bri...
🏘️ | NEW BLOG: Planning reform alone won’t make housing affordable. England needs the right mix of homes in the right places or ambitious supply targets risk leaving people behind. Read the latest from us here 👉 www.ippr.org/articles/wil...
Delighted to see IPPR's @emmanorris.bsky.social recognised in Politics Home's 100 Women in Westminster. Well-deserved recognition of "the think thankers think tanker", who we are proud to call a colleague www.politicshome.com/in-focus/wiw...
Grateful to the wise @jydenham.bsky.social for engaging with my work on nationalism with Parth Patel for @ippr.org. Much I agree with.
www.ippr.org/articles/rec...
🚨 | NEW BLOG: How could the government deliver a controlled and compassionate immigration system?
1️⃣ Deeper cooperation with France on small boat crossings
2️⃣ Get a grip on asylum hotels
3️⃣ Renewed strategy for community cohesion
🔗 bit.ly/4b5DBe5
At IPPR today, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood set out her vision for a “compassionate but controlled” immigration system.
The ambition is right — but the test will be whether the policies deliver control, fairness and stronger integration.
It is in this spirit that we host this event today.
IPPR has long been a place where progressives come together to grapple with the big questions facing the country - a space to debate, to put arguments to the test and hold power accountable – all in the pursuit of a stronger, fairer Britain for everyone.
That is why we are so delighted to be hosting today's conversation. So we can hear directly from the Home Secretary on these important questions.
Will they really prove more effective than efforts of previous governments to achieve similar aims? Do they really strike the right balance between compassion and control? What will they mean for other government goals such as economic growth and child poverty?
But questions have been raised, including by IPPR, about some of the policies being pursued to deliver on those goals.
We agree with the gov on the key principles of control, contribution and compassion. In our view, striking that balance is the only way progressives can secure lasting public confidence at a time when many communities, up and down the country, feel insecure and populists are seeking to exploit this.
And the communities across the country, where people from every background are - despite moments of tension - doing their best to rub along together.
That is why immigration policy is so important.
It is about the hundreds of thousands of people in our immigration system, working in the NHS or in social care, and making their way towards settlement and citizenship.
The tens of thousands of people waiting for the outcomes of their asylum claim, anxious about their future.
At a time when ethnonationalism is on the rise globally, and when fundamental norms of tolerance and decency are at risk from extreme rhetoric, it is more important than ever than this debate is approached with seriousness and care.
After all, migration is ultimately about people.
Migration is one of the foremost priorities of the public. It is an area where trust is low, after years of broken promises from past governments.
We are delighted to welcome the Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood today.
Tune in here 👇
www.youtube.com/live/6yFLnx5...
Lovely to be named one of this year's 100 'Women in Westminster', and proud to to be alongside such an incredible group of women helping to shape policy and politics for the better.
#wiw100
www.politicshome.com/in-focus/wiw...
No news is good news.
Despite the crisis in Iran driving up energy prices, the Spring Statement didn’t require tax rises or spending cuts. But, the Chancellor could use fiscal headroom to ease the cost of living and help bring inflation down.
📺 @carsjung.bsky.social on Sky News 👇
⏰ | NEW BLOG: If progressives won’t talk seriously about nationhood, the populist right will keep owning the argument.
Former minister John Denham writes on why civic slogans and better “delivery” won’t be enough: www.ippr.org/articles/rec...
New forecast: Over the next 4 years, the Treasury will be transferring £18 billion per year to reimburse the Bank of England for its losses from QE. Down slightly but still huge. Neither the ECB nor the Fed do this. Undoing this could free up £5bn per year for the rest of this parliament.
If we get a sustained energy price shock, the government should learn the lessons from the past and act early, to put a lid on inflation. See below 4 policy areas to start 👇
Good news for wages: OBR expects economic growth to be driven relatively more by productivity increases & investment, and less reliant on low wage labour.
UK - heading for another energy induced CoL shock? Maybe but not huge 🤞
1) It's at the moment an oil price issue not yet gas. We'll pay more at the pump. ~2/3 of UK oil comes from US/Norway, more expensive but not threatened.
2) Gas prices don't really track oil. 40% of UK gas is imported...
Read the full analysis from @henryippr.bsky.social here 👇
www.ippr.org/articles/stu...
This could be better targeted:
4.5% up to £50k, then 9% above.
That would cap the maximum gain at £969/year for £50k+ earners — reducing cost while protecting lower and middle earners.
3️⃣ Cutting the repayment rate
Halving it from 9% to 4.5% would have the clearest impact:
• £40k earner saves £519/year
• £100k earner saves £3,219/year
Total boost: £5.8bn in 2026/27.
2️⃣ Raising the repayment threshold
If the threshold rose from £29,385 to £35,000:
• £30k earners gain £138/year
• £35k earners gain £588/year
Above £35k, everyone gains the same cash amount — limiting how progressive it is.
1️⃣ Cutting interest rates
Over 3 million graduates see their debt rise each year despite repayments.
But because repayments are income-based, not balance-based, cutting interest wouldn’t reduce monthly deductions.
Only higher earners who repay in full would benefit, and only years down the line.
