LONDON — Manchester United co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe is facing mounting criticism after describing immigration as a form of “colonisation”, comments that have sparked political backlash in Britain and drawn sharp reactions from commentators across Africa.
Ratcliffe, founder and chair of multinational chemicals and energy group Ineos, made the remarks during an interview with Sky News, where he argued that high levels of immigration were placing excessive strain on the UK economy.
“You can’t have an economy with nine million people on benefits and huge levels of immigrants coming in,” Ratcliffe said. “The UK is being colonised. It’s costing too much money.”
Political and Social Fallout
British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer who is an Arsenal fan condemned the statements, calling them “offensive and wrong”.
“Britain is a proud, tolerant and diverse country. Jim Ratcliffe should apologise,” Starmer said in a public response.
Community organisations also voiced concern, warning that such language risks deepening social tensions in an already polarised debate on migration.
African Voices Enter the Debate
Ratcliffe’s use of the term “colonised” has triggered particularly strong reactions among African commentators, many of whom argue that the language carries deep historical implications.
Several analysts and social commentators across the continent accused the billionaire of “re-defining colonialism”, noting the irony of applying the term to modern migration flows while Britain itself played a central role in Africa’s colonial past.
“For Africans, colonialism was not migration — it was conquest, extraction, and domination,” said one Nairobi-based political analyst. “Equating immigration with colonialism distorts history.”
Others framed the controversy within a broader global economic context, pointing to Ratcliffe’s business empire and international footprint.
Wealth, Globalisation, and Perceptions of Irony
Ratcliffe built Ineos into one of the world’s largest industrial groups, with major interests spanning petrochemicals, energy, and manufacturing. Critics argue that his fortune is closely tied to industries deeply embedded in global resource economies.
Some African commentators highlighted Ineos’ energy-related ventures and the company’s presence in regions such as the Middle East, arguing that global capital flows and geopolitical conflicts have long shaped patterns of migration.
“Western corporations have benefited enormously from globalisation and resource extraction, and Western allies are fermenting wars that are causing mass migration” said a Johannesburg-based economist. “To then frame migration as a form of ‘colonisation’ raises uncomfortable contradictions.”
Tax Residency Debate
The controversy has also revived debate about Ratcliffe’s relocation to Monaco in 2020. While entirely legal, Monaco is widely known for its favourable tax regime.
Critics in Britain and abroad have questioned the optics of a prominent businessman criticising domestic economic pressures while residing outside the UK tax system.
Ratcliffe has previously stated that his move was driven by business considerations rather than taxation.
Immigration: A Global Flashpoint
Immigration remains one of the most politically sensitive issues in Britain, reflecting wider global debates over economic opportunity, labour markets, demographic change, and national identity.
Analysts note that the intensity of the reaction underscores how migration discourse increasingly resonates beyond national borders, particularly in regions historically shaped by colonialism and global economic inequality.
Football and Public Scrutiny
Since acquiring a minority stake in Manchester United in late 2023, Ratcliffe has become one of the most visible figures in global sports business. His leadership at the club has already drawn attention to structural and pricing reforms.
The latest controversy, however, has propelled him into a debate extending far beyond football — one touching on history, identity, and the politics of globalisation.
As reactions continue, the episode highlights the powerful intersection between business influence, political language, and historical memory in an increasingly interconnected world.
