Leaders Criticize Sir Jim Ratcliffe for Immigration Comments

Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who co-owns Manchester United, has said the UK has been "colonised" by immigrants. This has caused many leaders, including government ministers and the Mayor of Greater Manchester, to speak out. They say his words are not true and are hurtful.
By Newsroom | Politics, Business |

A public disagreement has emerged involving Sir Jim Ratcliffe, co-owner of Manchester United and founder of Ineos, following his recent comments suggesting the United Kingdom has been "colonised by immigrants." These remarks have drawn sharp criticism from government ministers and the Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, who have accused Ratcliffe of hypocrisy and divisive language.

Minister and Burnham escalate row with ‘hypocritical’ Ratcliffe over claim UK colonised by immigrants – politics live - 1

Escalating Row Over "Colonised" Remark

The controversy began when Sir Jim Ratcliffe, in an interview with Sky News, stated that the UK has been "colonised" by immigrants. He further suggested that addressing immigration requires leaders willing to be unpopular. These comments quickly triggered a strong reaction from various political figures.

Minister and Burnham escalate row with ‘hypocritical’ Ratcliffe over claim UK colonised by immigrants – politics live - 2

  • Prime Minister's Stance: The Prime Minister has publicly condemned Ratcliffe's remarks, calling them "offensive and wrong" and urging him to issue an apology.

  • Government Ministers' Response: Justice Minister Jake Richards was a prominent voice among ministers, echoing the Prime Minister's condemnation. Richards specifically questioned Ratcliffe's standing to comment on immigration, pointing to his relocation to Monaco to reportedly save £4 billion in taxes. He characterized Ratcliffe's statements as "hypocritical" and suggested that Ratcliffe might not be the "patriot" he portrays himself to be. Richards also argued that Ratcliffe's claim of the UK being "colonised" by immigrants is factually incorrect and "offensive."

  • Mayor Andy Burnham's Criticism: Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, strongly condemned Ratcliffe's comments, describing them as "inaccurate, insulting, and inflammatory." Burnham emphasized that such language contradicts the traditional values of Manchester, a city he described as a place where people of all backgrounds have historically united to build its institutions. He highlighted the positive contributions of immigrants to the city, including those in the NHS and other industries, as well as footballers who have enhanced Manchester's cultural landscape. Burnham also drew a parallel between Ratcliffe's tax arrangements and his comments on immigration, calling the former "hypocritical."

Accusations of Hypocrisy and Divisive Language

A central theme in the criticism directed at Sir Jim Ratcliffe is the accusation of hypocrisy, particularly concerning his move to Monaco.

Read More: MDMK Wants More Seats to Get Official Recognition

Minister and Burnham escalate row with ‘hypocritical’ Ratcliffe over claim UK colonised by immigrants – politics live - 3

  • Tax Arrangements: Ministers and Mayor Burnham have repeatedly referenced Ratcliffe's relocation to Monaco, stating it was to avoid significant tax liabilities. This move, they argue, makes his pronouncements on national issues like immigration appear disingenuous. Jake Richards explicitly stated that Ratcliffe, who does not reside in the UK, is in no position to lecture others on immigration.

  • Impact on Society: Critics argue that Ratcliffe's use of terms like "colonised" is not only inaccurate but also promotes harmful divisions. The Manchester United Supporters Trust and the anti-discrimination group Kick It Out have voiced concerns that such language could legitimize prejudice and exacerbate existing societal tensions, especially given the rise in hate crimes against minority communities. They contend that comments from figures associated with a prominent institution like Manchester United should foster inclusion, not division.

Ratcliffe's Defence and Wider Context

Sir Jim Ratcliffe has not directly apologized for his remarks but has defended his right to express his opinions. He also offered context for his views on immigration and leadership.

Read More: Amazon Prime Was Faster and Saved People Money in 2025

Minister and Burnham escalate row with ‘hypocritical’ Ratcliffe over claim UK colonised by immigrants – politics live - 4

  • Meeting with Nigel Farage: In the same interview where he made the controversial "colonised" remark, Ratcliffe mentioned meeting with Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK. Ratcliffe described Farage as an "intelligent man" with "good intentions," and drew a parallel to Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour Party, suggesting both could be seen in a similar light. This association has drawn further political attention.

  • Leadership and Unpopularity: Ratcliffe linked the challenges of addressing major issues like immigration to the need for leaders willing to be unpopular. He cited his own experiences at Manchester United, where he has implemented changes that have been met with resistance from some fans, as an example of making difficult decisions.

  • Broader Immigration Debate: While the current row focuses on Ratcliffe's specific phrasing, the underlying issue of immigration levels remains a subject of public and political debate. Government ministers have acknowledged the legitimacy of discussing immigration policy but maintain that Ratcliffe's language was inappropriate and inaccurate.

Differing Perspectives on Immigration and National Identity

The dispute highlights differing views on immigration, national identity, and the role of prominent business figures in public discourse.

Read More: Gen Z's Big Test: Can Young Voters Change Bangladesh?

  • Pro-Immigration Arguments: Supporters of immigration emphasize its historical and ongoing contributions to the UK's economy, culture, and society. Figures like Andy Burnham and groups such as Kick It Out champion diversity and inclusion, asserting that immigrants are vital to the fabric of cities like Manchester and the nation as a whole.

  • Concerns Over Immigration Levels: Ratcliffe's comments, while controversial in their framing, touch upon concerns that resonate with some segments of the public regarding the pace and scale of immigration. His meeting with Nigel Farage suggests an alignment with political viewpoints that advocate for stricter immigration controls.

  • Role of Football Figures: The involvement of a prominent football figure in such a sensitive political debate has also raised questions about the influence and responsibility of club owners. The Manchester United Supporters Trust has expressed that comments from club leadership should promote unity, not division, and that such language has no place in English football.

Evidence and Key Statements

  • Sir Jim Ratcliffe's Statement: "I mean, the UK has been colonised." (Article 7)

  • Justice Minister Jake Richards: "He has been doing a broadcast round this morning and he sounds like he feels licensed to escalate the attack on Ratcliffe." (Article 1)

  • Justice Minister Jake Richards: "There’s also something that I find quite offensive, that this man who moved to Monaco to save four billion pounds in tax is now lecturing us about immigration." (Article 2)

  • Justice Minister Jake Richards: "One might question whether he is the patriot that we need to comment on this issue.” (Article 2)

  • Andy Burnham: "These comments go against everything for which Manchester has traditionally stood: a place where people of all races, faiths and none have pulled together over centuries to build our city and our institutions, including Manchester United FC." (Article 6)

  • Andy Burnham: "Calling for curbs on levels of immigration is one thing; portraying those who come here as a hostile invading force is quite another." (Article 4)

  • Keir Starmer: His claim was “offensive and wrong”, and called on the Ineos chief executive to “apologise immediately”. (Article 3)

  • Manchester United Supporters Trust: "Comments from the club’s senior leadership should make inclusion easier, not harder.” (Article 3)

  • Kick It Out: Sir Jim’s comments were “disgraceful and deeply divisive at a time when football does so much to bring communities together”. (Article 5)

Conclusion and Next Steps

The public row initiated by Sir Jim Ratcliffe's remarks on immigration has escalated, drawing sharp criticism from government ministers and local leaders. The core of the dispute centers on accusations of hypocrisy, stemming from Ratcliffe's tax arrangements, and the divisive nature of his language. While Ratcliffe has defended his right to speak and associated himself with political figures advocating for immigration control, his comments have been widely condemned as offensive and inaccurate.

Read More: UK Economy Grew Very Little at End of 2025

  • Call for Apology: The Prime Minister and other key figures continue to call for Sir Jim Ratcliffe to apologize for his remarks.

  • Broader Debate: The incident highlights ongoing tensions and differing perspectives on immigration policy and its impact on national identity within the UK.

  • Potential Impact on Manchester United: The controversy raises questions about the leadership and messaging associated with Manchester United, a club that relies on a diverse global following.

Sources Used:

Read More: Minister Asks to Stop Firing Top Civil Servant While New Papers Come Out

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What did Sir Jim Ratcliffe say about immigrants?
He said that the UK has been 'colonised' by immigrants. He also said leaders need to be brave to talk about this topic.
Q: Who is criticizing him?
Government ministers and Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, are criticizing him. The Prime Minister also said the comments were wrong.
Q: Why are they criticizing him?
They say his words are untrue, divisive, and insulting. They also point out that he lives in Monaco to pay less tax, which they call hypocritical.
Q: Has Sir Jim Ratcliffe apologized?
No, he has defended his right to share his views.
Q: What is the main problem people have with his comments?
People are unhappy that he used the word 'colonised' and feel his comments could cause harm and division in society.