My colleagues Rajeev Syal and Pippa Crerar have some more detail in this story on the extraordinary standoff between Shabana Mahmood and Keir Starmer after Downing Street refused to immediately sack Mike Tapp.

It is being seen as a test of Starmer’s authority which has been massively drained since he announced his resignation on Monday, paving the way for the former Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham to likely replace him as Labour leader and prime minister.

The row comes as senior Labour figures tussle for leading roles in Andy Burnham’s administration, which is expected to take power in No 10 as early as 17 July.

Tapp wrote in an article for the Times 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 insisted was written “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 reforms to “indefinite leave to remain”. It is alleged Tapp took an idea proposed in those discussions and attempted to pass it off as his own in the Times article.

The ministerial code says the principle of collective responsibility requires that ministers should be able to express their views frankly in the expectation they can argue freely in private while maintaining a united front when decisions have been reached.

A source close to Mahmood said: “Mike Tapp is expected to be sacked for breaching the ministerial code. He has taken possible ideas that the home secretary and her team were working on, and briefed them as his own to try to win a job in the new administration.”

In other news, the home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, has demanded one of her ministers, Mike Tapp, be sacked after he wrote an unauthorised article in the Times calling for overseas care workers to be exempt from her hardline immigration changes.

Downing Street has resisted immediately sacking Tapp, the immigration minister, who is accused of breaching the ministerial code by his actions.

Justice minister and whip Jake Richards told Times Radio this morning that it would ultimately be up to the prime minister, Keir Starmer, whether to sack Tapp, but said it was unwise for the minister to “freestyle” in the way he did.

Richards told Times Radio:

There is a consultation that the home secretary set out last year about exactly the details of immigration rules and the asylum system that we are reforming over the coming months.

That consultation is continuing. The Home secretary will set out the plans over the next few weeks.

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 set that out publicly.

We are part of a team, he has done that and we will deal with that as a government.

The move has been condemned for costing more than placing claimants in hotels and repeating the mistakes of the last government, which faced legal challenges over the use of barracks to house asylum seekers.

Imran Hussain, director of external affairs at the Refugee Council, said:

As the government’s own spending watchdog has said, barracks actually cost more money overall than hotels. We know from experience they also isolate people from local communities and essential services, as they are often miles away from the nearest towns, so people who have fled war and persecution cannot find any security or stability while they apply for asylum.

Politicians in Bicester have questioned why the government would want to build asylum accommodation there, given that the last attempt to do so in 2001 was halted by protests, planning delays and excessive costs.

Calum Miller, the Lib Dem MP for Bicester and Woodstock, said the latest Home Office proposal “looked like a political fix” and would not work.

“Ministers say they are closing asylum hotels, but they appear to be replacing one costly and unsuitable model with another, without giving local communities the answers they deserve,” he said.

You can read more from this story by my colleagues, Rajeev Syal and Diane Taylor, here:

Good morning and welcome to our live coverage of UK politics. We are leading today’s blog on the news that the Home Office is attempting to use three more military sites to house thousands of asylum seekers.

Planning permission is being sought at Ministry of Defence sites in Bicester in Oxfordshire, Barnham in Suffolk, and Linton-on-Ouse in North Yorkshire, to accommodate 3,750 asylum seekers, the Home Office said.

The government also wants to extend the use of existing military sites in Crowborough, in East Sussex, until 2030, and Wethersfield, in Essex, beyond 2027, a statement said.

Refugee charities and local stakeholders have denounced the plans as “arrogant” and “costly”, with the move condemned for potentially costing more than placing claimants in hotels, something the Labour government has promised to phase out.

The number of asylum seekers being housed temporarily in UK hotels has fallen to its lowest level since figures were first published in 2022, according to government data.

As of March, 20,885 (21%) asylum seekers were in hotels and 72,768 (75%) were in other forms of accommodation as they awaited decisions about their claims, down from a peak of around 56,000 in September 2023.

Labour has pledged to stop using hotels to house asylum seekers by the next election after the practice was accused of being too costly and triggered protests in local communities. A number of councils, notably Epping Forest district council, either took legal action to remove asylum seekers from hotels in their areas or considered it.

When pressed this morning on whether using barracks costs the taxpayer more than hotels, justice minister, Jake Richards, said it depends on the hotel, insisting that “the real priority” is addressing the problem that hotels caused for communities. “We are determined to close (hotels),” he told Sky News. “That’s not easy and this is one way of doing it.”