It’s now almost
March and I haven’t noticed ‘hordes’ of Romanians and Bulgarians on our
streets, swamping our economy and culture. So perhaps now is a good time to
take a more rational look at immigration in Scotland and the UK.
One of the most
positive claims in the Scottish Government’s White Paper – ‘Scotland’s Future’
is that Scotland could adopt an immigration policy more appropriate to
Scotland’s needs. It envisages an independent Scotland where
immigration grows faster than elsewhere in the UK, but remains within the
Common Travel Area (CTA). The methods include adopting post-study visas for
graduates to stay in Scotland and creating a points-based system to encourage
more skilled workers to stay.
The UK government analysis paper, ‘Borders
and Citizenship’ argues that you can’t stay within the CTA and have a widely
divergent immigration policy. That may be true, but the White Paper isn’t
really proposing a widely divergent policy. I am therefore sceptical of the
claim that border controls will spring up should we vote for independence.
The concern that UK
immigration policy fails to take account of Scotland’s needs is not new. It was
the driver behind Jack McConnell’s ‘Fresh Talent’ initiative and the methods
proposed are not that radically different. As UNISON’s ‘Fairer Scotland –
Devolution’ paper recommends, elements of immigration policy could even safely
be devolved to Scotland.
Given the
relentless diet of misinformation from much of the UK right-wing media, it’s
hardly surprising that public concern over immigration has increased. However,
as the recent Ipsos MORI review of polling data shows, there isn’t a simple
link between the number of immigrants and public attitudes. This review also
shows that people are massively wrong on many aspects of immigration. The
public’s average guess on the proportion of immigrants was 31%, compared to 13%
in the official statistics. Between 2002 and 2012 there were significant
differences between social classes in their attitude to immigration, but that
has recently narrowed again. It is still the case that older people are almost
twice as concerned than the young. Interestingly, the views of immigrants
themselves tend to come closer to the average, the longer they have been in the
country.
Scottish attitudes
to immigration have been more relaxed, although catching up with the rest of
the UK. Attitudes tend to be driven more by the type of area you live in (inner
city, rural etc.) than the nation within the UK.
What about that other myth – benefit
tourism? As non-EU citizens have to wait five years this is only an issue for
EU citizens who have the right to travel here. The statistics show that less
than 5% of EU migrants are claiming jobseeker’s allowance, while less than 10%
are claiming other working age benefits. A recent review of social security policies around the EU and their impacts on migration concluded:
“No evidence shows that access to the specific special non-contributory benefit
income-based jobseeker’s allowance could be considered a significant driver for
EU migrants in the UK.”
While Nigel Farage believes that lower economic growth is
a price worth paying for lower immigration, the rest of us are not in his
income bracket. The economic impact of a cut in immigration was addressed in
the NIESR discussion paper, ‘The Long
Term Economic Impacts of Reducing Migration: the Case of the UK Migration
Policy’. They modeled the impact of the current Tory migration target to reduce
net migration. The results show that such a significant reduction in net
migration has strong negative effects on the economy. The level of both GDP and
GDP per person fell during the simulation period by 11.0% and 2.7%
respectively. Moreover, this policy has a significant impact on public
finances. To keep the government budget balanced, the income tax rate has to be
increased by 2.2%. In essence, more cuts or higher taxes and we are all worse
off.
The case for increased immigration is
not just economic. Our culture has been greatly enhanced by
immigration through sport, music, the arts and my own joy, food. When I was a
child, most people had no idea what a curry was, and now it’s just about our national
dish. My dad’s family migrated from Scotland and I migrated back, my school
friends live and work across the world. None of us regret the experience.
I also can’t see a problem when people
come to this country seeking a better life and new opportunities – often disparaging
described as economic migrants. Some of the debate loses sight of the fact that
we are talking about fellow human beings. We are all diminished if we lose our
human compassion for others.
The case for immigration
is not complex. Scotland has an ageing population and we can rebalance the
population and generate the tax revenues to pay for demographic change through
immigration. Migrants are mostly young, they invariably work and they pay their
taxes. There may be an issue over the impact on wages at the lower end of the
pay scale, but as Ed Miliband has said, the solution is to tackle exploitation
in the workplace.
So by all means let’s
have a debate about immigration. But in doing so let’s get the facts right,
dispel the myths and understand the economic and cultural benefits. But above
all, remember we are discussing fellow human beings who have as much right as
we do to make a better life for their families.
