UK Migration Minister Mike Tapp Denied Access to Sensitive Documents Amid Row

The migration minister, Mike Tapp, is to be denied access to sensitive documents and meetings without approval from the home secretary, as she called for the prime minister to sack him.

Shabana Mahmood has demanded that Tapp be fired for writing an unauthorised article in the Times calling for overseas care workers to be exempt from changes to the immigration rules.

Downing Street said Tapp – who has been a loyal supporter of Keir Starmer – remained a minister but that the prime minister was taking advice on whether he broke the ministerial code on collective responsibility.

The extraordinary public row between Mahmood, who was one of the first cabinet ministers to urge Starmer to stand down, and Tapp escalated on Friday, with the junior minister insisting he would not “be intimidated”.

In a sign of the breakdown of ministerial discipline in the last days of Starmer’s time as prime minister, Tapp, the MP for Dover, delivered a defiant response on his X account to Mahmood’s call on Thursday for him to be sacked.

In a tweet that he appears to have deleted, Tapp responded to a supporter: “The attempted intimidation is quite a sight. I’ve seen off the Taliban and taken out terrorists. Country First, always.”

In an initial tweet that remained online, he said on Friday: “Ok, morning all. It’s gone from ‘he broke the ministerial code’ to ‘he stole my idea’. I have put my views across on a policy I’ve been working on for months (I have the receipts) in an Op Ed in the times. Give it a read, and let’s continue to discuss.”

Above a picture of himself, he added: “I won’t be intimidated to drop my views. Stay classy! Oh and I’m at a wedding in San Francisco, but happy to talk more when I’m back (I promise that’s the Golden Gate Bridge hidden by the fog).”

His remarks appear to have been interpreted by some in government as a threat to share sensitive information. One Home Office source said: “Mike Tapp wrote a piece in a national newspaper freelancing on policy without the knowledge or agreement of the home secretary or her team.

“He took proposals that the home secretary was working on, and briefed them as his own.

“In doing so, he has broken collective responsibility and has breached the ministerial code. Now he is threatening to leak sensitive documents. The home secretary has asked the prime minister to sack him.”

Pressure is building for the prime minister to act after another member of the government said it was “unwise” for junior ministers to set out views in the way Tapp had done.

Pressed on Friday about whether Starmer continued to have confidence in Tapp, a former soldier, the prime minister’s official spokesperson told reporters that Starmer was “taking advice in the usual way”.

He said it was ultimately up to the prime minister whether Tapp’s actions would be considered a breach of the code. The Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team (PET) is understood to be one source who could be providing that advice, aside from Sir Laurie Magnus, the prime minister’s independent adviser on ministerial standards.

The row comes as senior Labour figures tussle for leading roles in Andy Burnham’s prospective administration, which is expected to take over as early as 17 July.

Tapp wrote in the Times that it was his “strong belief” that migrant care workers should not have to wait longer to apply for permanent settlement in the UK. Mahmood was unaware he had written the article, which a source close to her claimed had been done “to try to win a job in the new administration”.

It is understood Tapp was involved in ministerial discussions about exempting care workers from the proposed changes to indefinite leave to remain. It is alleged he took an idea proposed in those discussions and attempted to pass it off as his own in the Times article.

The justice minister, Jake Richards, told Times Radio that the Home Office needed to “take a deep breath”.

He said: “Mike’s article in the Times sets out what his views are and some of the issues that he in the Home Office is exploring. It’s not particularly wise in my mind for junior ministers to kind of set that out publicly. We are part of a team, but he has done that and we will deal with that as a government.”