Andrew Neil condemns Sir Keir Starmer’s claims that Labour has nearly halved net migration, blaming the reduction on Conservative visa rules and accusing the government of political spin as immigration figures fall sharply for the first time since the pandemic.
Andrew Neil has issued a scathing rebuke of Sir Keir Starmer, accusing him of a blatant attempt to mislead the British public regarding net migration figures. In a recent opinion piece for the Daily Mail, Neil labelled Starmer’s claims about reduced migration as "lying and gaslighting," reaching what he deems to be a "deplorable" level. This criticism comes in the wake of the Home Office's announcement of a notable reduction in net migration figures for the year ending December 2024, from an estimated 860,000 to 431,000. However, Neil asserts that Labour's celebration of this decline is grossly disingenuous.
He points out that the decrease is "largely" due to the stricter visa regulations implemented by the previous Conservative government under James Cleverly. It’s a crucial point, considering Labour's previous vehement opposition to these measures, which then Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper branded as "chaotic" and a "Tory failure." Yet, Starmer's government has attempted to take credit for the situation, tweeting that Labour "have nearly halved net migration in the last year," presenting it as a triumph in reclaiming control over immigration policy.
Neil argues that Labour’s assertions aren't just vague; they constitute a "downright lie." He stresses the urgent need for accountability in political discourse, especially on immigration—a topic that remains one of the most contentious in British society. The latest statistics from the Office for National Statistics reveal that this decline marks the largest annual drop since the early days of the Covid pandemic, highlighting the long-standing volatility in migration figures.
Labour’s motivations may be influenced by the rising prominence of alternative voices on the right, particularly amongst those who have capitalised on the public's anxiety surrounding migration. The urgency with which Labour seeks to shift the narrative is clear, as Cooper herself acknowledged the recent decline in migration figures as "welcome" in light of the dramatic rise during the last parliamentary term. Moreover, Labour's proposed Immigration White Paper seeks to introduce radical reforms to further curtail net migration numbers, but these measures raise the question of whether they genuinely address public concerns or merely serve as a smokescreen.
As the political landscape transforms amidst these heated immigration debates, Neil’s critiques highlight the paramount need for transparency and factual integrity in public discourse. The interplay of policy and public sentiment, especially concerning immigration, produces high stakes for all involved parties. While Labour attempts to alter its image amid shifting migration trends, it remains to be seen whether such strategies will resonate with voters or if the failures of past policies will continue to haunt their narrative.
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative appears to be original, with no substantial matches found in recent publications. The earliest known publication date of similar content is May 22, 2025, in the Financial Times, reporting on the reduction in net migration figures. ([ft.com](https://www.ft.com/content/c8b3fcc3-b0af-450d-8ee9-178de69751ba?utm_source=openai)) The Express article was published on May 25, 2025, indicating a high freshness score. However, the Financial Times article does not mention Andrew Neil's critique of Keir Starmer, suggesting that the Express article may be based on original reporting. No evidence of recycled or republished content was found. The narrative is not based on a press release, as no such source was identified. No discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were noted. The Express article includes updated data on net migration figures, which may justify a higher freshness score but should still be flagged. ([ft.com](https://www.ft.com/content/c8b3fcc3-b0af-450d-8ee9-178de69751ba?utm_source=openai))
Quotes check
Score:
9
Notes:
The direct quotes attributed to Andrew Neil and Keir Starmer in the narrative do not appear in earlier material. No online matches were found for these specific quotes, suggesting they are potentially original or exclusive content. This supports the originality of the narrative.
Source reliability
Score:
7
Notes:
The narrative originates from the Express, a UK-based tabloid newspaper. While it is a well-known publication, it is often considered less reliable due to sensationalist reporting. The Express has a history of publishing content that may not always meet high journalistic standards. Therefore, the reliability of the source is moderate.
Plausability check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims made in the narrative align with recent developments regarding net migration figures and political discourse in the UK. The Financial Times reported a significant reduction in net migration figures, which is consistent with the narrative's context. ([ft.com](https://www.ft.com/content/c8b3fcc3-b0af-450d-8ee9-178de69751ba?utm_source=openai)) The specific critique by Andrew Neil of Keir Starmer's response to these figures is plausible, given the political climate and ongoing debates on immigration policy. However, the lack of corroboration from other reputable outlets raises some concerns about the narrative's credibility.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
The narrative presents original content with specific quotes not found elsewhere, suggesting exclusivity. However, it originates from the Express, a publication with moderate reliability. While the claims are plausible and align with recent developments, the lack of corroboration from other reputable sources warrants further scrutiny.
