Labour MPs Soften Their Criticism as Mahmood Waters Down Care Worker Settlement Rules

When Shabana Mahmood stood up in the House of Commons to set out revised rules on settlement, she was dealing with a problem the government had long regarded as a potential banana skin. By the end of the day, the view inside government was that she had stepped over it.

The trouble dated back to last year, when the home secretary announced her first set of changes to the settlement system. Many Labour MPs, among them Angela Rayner, now the housing secretary, voiced concern. Sir Keir Starmer's government appeared determined to press ahead, and Mahmood herself repeatedly stressed how important she thought the reforms were.

The change of prime minister over the summer altered the mood. Unhappy Labour MPs saw fresh hope of forcing the Home Office to move on two points. The first was social care workers, many of whom would have faced a 15-year wait before becoming eligible for settlement under the original plans. The second was the retrospective nature of the scheme. Some MPs were uncomfortable that a person who came to the UK expecting to qualify after five years could then be made to wait longer. Rayner called that "un-British" and said the government should not be shifting "the goalposts."

Rayner returned to cabinet as housing secretary under Andy Burnham, and repeated those criticisms in an interview during the Labour Party conference in September. That was read as a sign that the argument about diluting the plans was still running at the top of government. Other Labour MPs, particularly those in Brexit-supporting areas, wanted Mahmood to hold firm, and some in government worried about handing what they saw as catnip to Reform and the Conservatives. It was one of the harder decisions since Burnham arrived in Number 10.

The outcome is a partial retreat. Care workers who arrived before May 2025 and earn at least £25,000 a year will qualify for settlement after five years. The retrospective element, the one Rayner objected to, has not changed.

Even so, most Labour MPs pulled their punches during Mahmood's Commons statement. Rachael Maskell, who dislikes the retrospective element, offered perhaps the strongest pushback. John McDonnell and Diane Abbott, from the party's left, were critical but not scathing. The mood outside the chamber was similar. One would-be critic said they still had personal concerns but believed the home secretary had taken the political sting out of the situation for now. They described the campaign by MPs and unions as a "big win" for social care workers, while expecting to hear from constituents hurt by the new rules. A Number 10 source praised Mahmood's "take no prisoners" performance, said she had "found the right balance," and judged that the announcement had landed as well as could be expected with Labour colleagues.

The human scale remains large. Under the revised plans, around 500,000 people will have their path to settlement delayed, down from about 800,000 under last year's version.

Opposition criticism is still to come. Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, accused Mahmood of a significant U-turn and recalled her earlier claim that letting care workers reach settlement faster could cost the UK £10bn. In a BBC interview, Mahmood would not say what financial burden the watering down would create, and she declined to confirm whether Burnham had directly asked her to do it. Those questions will follow her in the coming weeks, though the general view in government is that this hurdle has been cleared.