Britain was rocked this week by a wave of outrage and debate after Sir Jim Ratcliffe, the billionaire founder of INEOS and co-owner of Manchester United, declared in a televised interview that the United Kingdom had been "colonised by immigrants." The comments, made on February 11 during a Sky News interview with Ed Conway, immediately drew sharp rebukes from political leaders, football fans, and anti-racism advocates, igniting a national conversation about immigration, economic policy, and the responsibilities of public figures.
Sir Jim, who moved his tax residency to Monaco in 2020 after being a vocal supporter of Brexit, has never shied away from controversy. But his latest remarks struck a particularly raw nerve. "You can't have an economy with nine million people on benefits and huge levels of immigrants coming in," Ratcliffe said. "I mean, the UK has been colonised. It's costing too much money. The UK has been colonised by immigrants, really, hasn't it? I mean, the population of the UK was 58 million in 2020, now it's 70 million. That's 12 million people."
Official data, however, tells a different story. According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), the UK population was 67.1 million in 2020 and reached 69.5 million by November 2025. The last time the population was near 58 million was in 2000, more than a quarter-century ago. The ONS also reported long-term net migration of 204,000 from 2024 to 2025, and a House of Commons briefing found that 1.68 million people were claiming unemployment-related benefits as of December 2025—far fewer than Ratcliffe's cited nine million.
Ratcliffe's assertions did not go unanswered. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer was quick to respond on X (formerly Twitter), calling the comments "offensive and wrong." Starmer stated, "Britain is a proud, tolerant and diverse country. Jim Ratcliffe should apologise." Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy echoed this sentiment in an interview with Sky News, acknowledging that migration—both legal and illegal—was too high under the Conservatives, but underscoring, "I want your viewers to know that I am really proud that Britain is a diverse and tolerant country that is strengthened by waves of immigration." She added, "I'd be more than happy to speak to him about what we're doing."
The reaction from the football community was equally fierce. The anti-racism charity Kick It Out described Ratcliffe's comments as "disgraceful and deeply divisive at a time when football does so much to bring communities together." In a statement to Sky Sports News, the group added, "In addition to the inaccurate figures mentioned, it's worth reminding him that Manchester United has a diverse fanbase and plays in a city whose cultural history has been enriched by immigrants. This type of language and leadership has no place in English football, and we believe most fans will feel the same."
The Manchester United Muslim Supporters Club also voiced their deep concern, warning that such rhetoric "echoes language frequently used in far-right narratives that frame migrants as invaders and demographic threats" and "could have real-world consequences…legitimising prejudice and deepening division." Labour MP Stella Creasy pointedly noted on social media that Ratcliffe "doesn't seem to understand the contribution they (immigrants) make to his own team, let alone this country" and reminded the public that Ratcliffe himself is "an immigrant"—a reference to his move to Monaco.
Ratcliffe, for his part, doubled down on his views, arguing that addressing what he sees as the "major issues of immigration" and benefit dependency would require "unpopular" actions and "courage." He drew a parallel between the leadership needed for the country and his own experience at Manchester United, where he has faced significant criticism for sweeping changes since INEOS took a minority stake in February 2024. "I've seen quite a bit of this at the football club. If you do difficult things, which we felt that we had to do at Manchester United…we felt like they were the right things to do. But you do become very unpopular for a while," he said. "I've been very unpopular at Manchester United because we've made lots of changes. But for the better, in my view. And I think we're beginning to see some evidence in the football club that that's beginning to pay off."
Indeed, his tenure at Manchester United has been anything but smooth. Since INEOS assumed control of football operations, the club has seen five men's head coaches, 450 redundancies from an average workforce of 1,112 employees, and a raft of cost-cutting measures Ratcliffe claims were necessary to avoid the club "going bust by Christmas." These moves, along with rises in ticket prices, have spurred protests from United fans—some directed at Ratcliffe personally for the first time.
Ratcliffe also commented on the state of UK politics, suggesting that Prime Minister Starmer might not be the right person for the job. "I don't know whether it's just the apparatus that hasn't allowed Keir to do it or he's maybe too nice. I mean, Keir is a nice man. I like him, but it's a tough job and I think you have to do some difficult things with the UK to get it back on track, because at the moment I don't think the economy is in a good state." He went on to praise Nigel Farage, leader of the right-wing Reform UK party, calling him "an intelligent man" with "good intentions," but argued that the country needs someone "who's prepared to be unpopular for a period of time to get the big issues sorted out."
The timing of Ratcliffe's remarks was notable. He spoke on the fringes of the European Industry Summit in Antwerp, where leaders from across Europe—including France's Emmanuel Macron and Germany's Friedrich Merz—were meeting to discuss the continent's economic future. Ratcliffe warned of "unsurvivable conditions" in the European chemicals sector, a nod to his own industry background as founder of INEOS, which employs more than 26,000 people across 194 sites in 29 countries. Despite his criticisms of the UK economy and government spending, it is worth noting that INEOS itself received £120 million in UK state aid last year to protect jobs.
The controversy has reignited broader debates about immigration, economic policy, and the role of high-profile business leaders in public discourse. While some commentators have defended Ratcliffe's right to raise difficult questions, many others see his language as inflammatory and divisive, particularly given Manchester United's global fanbase and the multicultural fabric of British society.
As the dust settles, the episode serves as a stark reminder of the enduring tensions in British public life—and the power of words spoken from positions of influence. Whether Ratcliffe will heed calls for an apology remains to be seen, but the impact of his remarks is likely to reverberate through both football and politics for some time to come.