Jim Ratcliffe apologises for claiming Britain has been ‘colonised’ by migrants as FA looks into comments

Sir Jim Ratcliffe has offered a lukewarm apology for his claim Britain has been “colonised” by migrants, as the FA confirmed it would look into whether the comments have brought the game into disrepute.

The Manchester United co-owner said he was sorry if he “offended some people” with his remarks, but insisted that is important to “raise the issue of controlled and well-managed immigration that supports economic growth”.

Sir Jim, one of Britain’s richest men, faced growing backlash for the comments and was under pressure from a string of high-profile politicians, including Sir Keir Starmer, to apologise.

The prime minister dubbed the comments "offensive and wrong”, while Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham said they were “inaccurate, insulting and inflammatory”.

If the FA finds Sir Jim’s remarks brought the game into disrepute, he is likely to be hit with a financial penalty.

open image in gallery

It came after Sir Jim – who founded chemical giant Ineos in 1998 – told Sky News: “You can’t have an economy with nine million people on benefits and huge levels of immigrants coming in.

“I mean, the UK is being colonised. It’s costing too much money. The UK has been colonised by immigrants.”

In a statement released on Thursday, the billionaire said: “I am sorry that my choice of language has offended some people in the UK and Europe and caused concern, but it is important to raise the issue of controlled and well-managed immigration that supports economic growth.

“My comments were made while answering questions about UK policy at the European Industry Summit in Antwerp, where I was discussing the importance of economic growth, jobs, skills and manufacturing in the UK.”

He added: “My intention was to stress that governments must manage migration alongside investment in skills, industry and jobs so that long-term prosperity is shared by everyone. It is critical that we maintain an open debate on the challenges facing the UK.”

The apology was welcomed by the prime minister’s official spokesperson, who told reporters: “The prime minister asked for an apology, and one’s been issued, and it’s absolutely right that Jim Ratcliffe has apologised for that language.”

Pressed on whether it went far enough, the official said: “It’s right that he’s apologised. It’s for Mr Ratcliffe to speak to his apology… It’s not for me.”

open image in gallery

Confirming that there has been no contact between Downing Street and the Manchester United co-owner about his comments, the spokesperson added: “We are of course of the view that there should be a serious debate about immigration, but the prime minister believes in a Britain built for all, and that those comments were inflammatory and divisive.”

Others have said the apology does not go far enough, with Minnie Rahman, CEO of refugee charity Praxis, dubbing it “half-hearted”.

Writing for LBC, she said: “Blaming migrants for today’s economic problems is a convenient way to dodge responsibility for that failure.

“His half-hearted apology only underlines the point: powerful men are quick to inflame division, but slow to accept accountability for the consequences.”

Meanwhile, Conservative peer and former transport secretary Mark Harper said his apology could have been "a little more generous", describing it as “one of those terrible 'I'm sorry if I've offended anyone' apologies".

Mr Burnham, who previously backed plans driven by Sir Jim to regenerate Old Trafford and build a new stadium for Manchester United, had said the remarks “go against everything for which Manchester has traditionally stood”.

The Manchester mayor also said “footballers who have arrived from all over the world to play in Greater Manchester have enhanced the life of our city region”.

He then appeared to hit out at United’s ownership, adding: “If any criticism is needed, it should be directed towards those who have offered little contribution to our life here and have instead spent years siphoning wealth out of one of our proudest institutions.”

Meanwhile, Kick It Out, the anti-discrimination football campaign group, said Sir Jim’s comments were “disgraceful and deeply divisive” and also criticised his claim that the UK population has swelled by 12 million since 2020, which has proved to be inaccurate.

It came as Manchester United said it “prides itself on being an inclusive and welcoming club” that has “embedded equality, diversity and inclusion into everything we do”.

“Our diverse group of players, staff and global community of supporters, reflect the history and heritage of Manchester; a city that anyone can call home”, the club said in a statement posted to social media.

“We will continue to represent our people, our city and our fans with purpose and pride”, the club added.

Sir Jim bought a minority share in Manchester United in late 2023 and his Ineos group has since taken control of football operations.

The Football Association is understood to be examining whether the Manchester United co-owner’s comments have brought the game into disrepute, as well as looking to ascertain whether they breached its regulations.

Should the FA choose to formally investigate, the probe may be focused on FA Rule E3.1, which covers general behaviour.

The rule states: “A participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.”

The FA’s guidance says there are “no set sanctions for media comments or social networking comments cases. However, financial penalties are the most usual form of sanction for these kind of cases.” Sir Jim, as a club co-owner, is subject to FA rules as a participant.