In Monday’s Downing Street speech, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer pledged that his Labour government would “take back control of our borders” and “tighten up every area of the immigration system”.
The speech was met with backlash as some claimed it echoed the racially charged Rivers of Blood speech made by Enoch Powell in 1968. Powell’s speech led to him being removed as shadow defence secretary after he took a stand against immigration and the growing numbers of non-native citizens.
In his speech, Powell, quoting the Roman poet Virgil, said: “As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see ‘the River Tibet foaming with much blood’”.
Around 74 per cent of Brits in 1968 agreed with Powell and his anti-immigrant propositions, but Starmer’s speech has not been treated as favourably - even by his own party members.
Taking to X, Labour MP Zarah Sultana said that Starmer drawing on Powell’s speech was “sickening”.
The Prime Minister imitating Enoch Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech is sickening.
— Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) May 12, 2025
That speech fuelled decades of racism and division. Echoing it today is a disgrace. It adds to anti-migrant rhetoric that puts lives at risk.
Shame on you, Keir Starmer. pic.twitter.com/rQcMf6T1eo
However, the Prime Minister has told reporters that he “completely rejects that comparison”.
But why is Starmer’s speech drawing similarities with Powell’s and how similar are they?
Comparisons between Keir Starmer’s speech and Enoch Powell’s speech
The words causing the most backlash was Starmer saying that without cracking down on immigration, the UK risks becoming an “island of strangers.”
The phrase has drawn similarities to Powell’s assertion that Britons in 1968 were finding themselves as “strangers in their own country”.
When responding to comparison accusations, Starmer told The Guardian that “migrants make a massive contribution to the UK, and I would never denigrate that”.
However, some critics remain enraged at the Prime Minister’s anti-immigrant rhetoric that suggested a multicultural Britain could come at the expense of society.
Critics of Starmer’s speech have also found fault with his implication that migrants should assimilate to British culture, language, and values. He unveiled his party’s plans to ensure that new migrants “learn the [English] language and integrate”.
He said: “Britain is an inclusive and tolerant country, but the public expect that people who come here should be expected to learn the language and integrate.” Sir Keir has also said eligibility for skilled worker visas will require a higher salary threshold or graduate-level qualification, as well as an English standard equivalent to an A-level.
In a post on X, the Prime Minister restated his stance:
If you want to live in the UK, you should speak English. That’s common sense.
— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) May 12, 2025
So we’re raising English language requirements across every main immigration route.
It is this sentiment of homogenisation to the British culture that has critics drawing parallels to Powell.
In his speech, Powell said of Sikh communities who wanted to maintain religious customs: “Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment.
“To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned.”
Though different assertions, observers have said the Prime Minister is perpetuating anti-migrant sentiments and fuelling racist and xenophobic ideology.
Taking to X, many users have accused Starmer of “suddenly peddling an anti-immigration rhetoric” to harbour votes in light of Reform’s surge during local elections.
Keir Starmer has spent his entire career advocating pro immigration and now because of the surge of Reform and Labour’s disastrous local election results, he’s suddenly peddling anti-immigration rhetoric. He will literally say anything to cadge a vote. pic.twitter.com/OzGRDvFlzs
— James Melville 🚜 (@JamesMelville) May 12, 2025
Some went further to suggest that the Prime Minister is now suggesting that the pressure on housing and public services is because of migrants.
2025: Keir Starmer suggests that pressure on housing and public services is because of migrants
— Farrukh (@implausibleblog) May 12, 2025
2020: Keir Starmer, "Poor housing, poor public services are not the fault of the migrants, they're political failure" pic.twitter.com/TMr0Pp0xPY
Previously, Starmer had said: “Poor housing, poor public services, are not the fault of migrants, they’re political failure.”
In a similar vein, Powell had told anecdotes of Brits who had found themselves at a disadvantage after an influx of migrants.
“They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted,” he said.
Powell went on to suggest the danger that ethnic minorities might pose to “native born” people.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has defended Sir Keir’s speech, saying the speech was “completely different” from that of Mr Powell.
“I don’t think it’s right to make those comparisons. It’s completely different,” she told BBC Radio 4.
“And the Prime Minister said yesterday, I think almost in the same breath… talked about the diverse country that we are, and that being part of our strength.”
Asked how he felt when he heard Sir Keir’s language, Sir Sadiq Khan, the Labour Mayor of London, said: “I read the White Paper and I understand the context of the White Paper, and those aren’t words that I would use.”
He added that immigrants are “not spongers or skivers” and said he believed Sir Keir was referring to promises made on immigration by Brexiteers and was not seeking to criticise the contribution of immigrants.
He declined to criticise the Prime Minister’s policies.
