Immigration isn’t attracting the same kind of attention in this election campaign that it has in the past (or at least it wasn’t until ‘bigot-gate’...)
Immigration isn’t attracting the same kind of attention in this election campaign that it has in the past (or at least it wasn’t until ‘bigot-gate’…). This is in part because, although you’d never know it from the political rhetoric, there’s a good deal of consensus between the parties. The current government has made significant progress in reforming the immigration regime, and the Conservatives and Lib Dems don’t disagree with the basic policy ‘building blocks’ that are now in place: free movement within the EU, the Points-Based System (PBS) for work/study migration, and a much improved (if still far from perfect) asylum regime.
Given the current polls, and the fact that immigration is rocketing up the agenda, it seems worth taking a look at the areas where the Liberal Democrats would introduce significant changes.
An earned amnesty for irregular migrants
In principle, this is a sensible and brave policy position. There are between 500,000 and 750,000 irregular migrants in the UK, and it is simply not credible to suggest that they all be removed. Unless we are prepared to tolerate the exploitation and costs to society which stem from irregularity, some kind of earned regularisation is the only viable option.
This said, there are still questions to be answered about how a Lib Dem amnesty would work in practice. One-off amnesties are more politically-appealing than the provision of ongoing routes to legal status, but they can be hostages to fortune. On the other hand, the problem of irregular migration in the UK is to some extent a historical one – a legacy of a period when the asylum system wasn’t working – so a one-off amnesty might make sense for the UK. The Lib Dems suggest that an amnesty would be offered to those who had been in the UK for ten years. This would leave a significant irregular population, and raises questions of how eligibility would be tested.
This isn’t an easy political sell, but neither is it an impossible one. Our research suggests that the public’s main concern about immigration is control – facing up to the problem of irregular immigration is actually a key component to demonstrating control over the system.
A change to the Points-Based System (PBS) to reflect different regional economic conditions and capacities to absorb migrants
This responds to a real problem, which is that immigration rules are national, but needs and impacts are local (e.g. Scotland is keen to attract more migrants). But a regional PBS won’t provide a real solution.
It would further complicate a system that is already difficult for employers and migrants to navigate. As Chris Huhne as clarified today, the system could only restrict where people live, not where they work, which means that this would, at best, be an indirect way of controlling local populations. The existing PBS also already allows regional flexibility. If there are regional labour shortages, the system automatically allows employers in those regions to recruit more migrant workers because it will be easier for them to demonstrate that they have not been able to recruit locally.
However, a regional approach to immigration policy does have one thing to recommend it – it’s a way of politically recognising the different local and regional contexts for the debate. That’s not to be sniffed at.
13 Responses to “Liberal Democrat immigration policy: liberal and democratic?”
Will Straw
On Sky now: @leftfootfwd contributer Sarah Mulley. Read her latest piece about the Lib Dem immigration policy http://bit.ly/aCfyjC
Tom
“As Chris Huhne as clarified today, the system could only restrict where people live, not where they work”
It’s the other way around, surely?
Andy Sutherland
RT @leftfootfwd: On Sky now: @leftfootfwd contributer Sarah Mulley. Read her latest piece about the Lib Dem immigration policy http://bit.ly/aCfyjC
cim
“a legacy of a period when the asylum system wasn’t working”
I’m not sure it’s really possible to say it’s working now. Are the abuses at Yarls Wood really part of a working system? Is the regular deportation of LGBT people back to countries where they’re likely to be killed, sometimes by the government there, part of a working system?
Robert
The big problem for New Labour is has no principles anymore, to make me vote labour it will do what ever is asked. I can remember labour leaders coming to my old factory to talk about work, voting. So the labour party asked about having a few people to talk to on TV we lined up and have a chat to the leader. They first thing I did was ask a few of the people that worked with me if they take part all mostly said yes, but hell no Labour mandarins asked are you Labour, will you be voting labour, what is the question you will ask, will you ask this question.
set up.
From that day on with Blair I began to ask the question who the hell are the labour party working for, it’s not me, it’s not my work mates.
Today I saw Brown at a factory and again the stage managed questions the stage managed answer to try and correct the mess from yesterday it’s failed mate it looks stage managed it looks false.
Labour is not a socialist government anymore god know what it is, a Thatcherite government which has made a right mess of the country.
Vote labour yes I will when the labour party makes it back