The Gig Economy Political Ties Migration And The Delivery Apps Dilemma

It was well past midnight in late 2015 when David and Samantha Cameron, escorted by George Osborne, emerged from the Coral Room at Sexy Fish, a Mayfair restaurant favoured by Britain’s elite. With well-connected hosts Steve Hilton and Rachel Whetstone, the gathering initially appeared a regular soiree among high-flying friends. Yet, these were not ordinary times in Westminster. Cameron and Osborne, fresh from an unexpected majority election victory, stood atop their powers. Meanwhile, the gig economy was quietly taking root, its impact only beginning to stir debate in both political and economic circles.

The intersection between the UK’s leading politicians and the digital disruptors of the time could not have been closer. Whetstone, once political secretary to Conservative leader Michael Howard and more recently Uber’s head of policy, was on the frontlines defending the app against rumoured regulatory crackdowns from Boris Johnson, then Mayor of London. Documents later revealed lobbying efforts aimed at protecting Uber’s business model under threat from London’s established taxi lobby. Just as pressing was Deliveroo’s rapid expansion, with the start-up’s network of self-employed bicycle couriers transforming food delivery while bypassing traditional labour protections and union representation.

For Cameron and Osborne, Uber and Deliveroo represented progress—a new era of low-regulation, high-tech entrepreneurship, signalling Britain’s emergence as a global digital hub. Advocates lauded smartphone-enabled flexibility and entrepreneurial opportunity, while critics warned of eroding workers’ rights and the unchecked growth of a low-paid, migrant-heavy workforce. As the debate deepened, the number of couriers on London’s streets soared and gig economy practices started attracting parliamentary scrutiny.

The coalition government’s positive stance on the gig economy was reinforced both by its appointments and attitudes. Matt Hancock, then Business Secretary, commissioned a review of the “sharing economy” with the ambition of positioning Britain as a global leader. Relationships between technology lobbyists and government ran deep. Figures like Adam Atashzai and Naomi Gummer crossed seamlessly from Downing Street to policy roles at Uber. Deliveroo pursued similar connections, notably bringing on Thea Rogers, formerly at the BBC and ex-aide to Osborne, and engaging Westminster’s top lobbying consultancies.

As the gig economy flourished, legal challenges erupted over employment status. Uber lost a pivotal Supreme Court case brought by drivers seeking worker rights, forcing the company to change its business model and pay historic claims. Deliveroo, by contrast, prevailed by maintaining a contractual substitution clause, allowing riders to appoint substitutes—a procedural detail with profound legal and economic consequences. While boosting flexibility, this model has made it easier for undocumented migrants to work via the apps. Reports emerged of rampant account renting and illegal work, with investigations revealing that a significant proportion of food delivery riders stopped at random were operating unlawfully.

The substitution system, coupled with minimal right-to-work checks and lack of guaranteed minimum pay, has created fertile ground for migration-driven wage competition. Academic studies identified food delivery as a crucial survival route for migrants facing barriers to formal employment. Corporations have promised to step up enforcement and invest in facial recognition and ID checks, but critics maintain that system loopholes are readily exploited. Government action continues to lag—while Labour and Conservatives have expressed intentions to rein in the gig economy, concrete legislative progress remains slow. Amidst growing pressure, platforms vow reform, yet online forums remain awash with offers to rent delivery accounts, signalling ongoing regulatory challenges at the nexus of politics, technology and migration.