The efficient management of immigration, including residence permits and public service provision, helps to avoid social problems
Immigration is unavoidable, but public hostility can be aroused if large numbers of people are involved (4.4.5.3) and there are practical issues to address. Three categories of immigration are considered here:
· Employers need to fill skills shortages.
· A country which is one of the 142 signatories to the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 has committed to providing asylum for refugees whose lives are in danger (5.4.7.6).
· Economic migration is driven by people seeking better lives.
Checks for all immigrants are necessary at a country’s borders, or at the borders of the EU’s Schengen Area, so that people who are a threat to national security can be turned back and to check whether they meet other criteria for admission in accordance with national policies. People who evade the border checks have broken the law and are referred to as ‘illegal immigrants’.
Arbitrary national targets for immigration are impractical. Employers should be allowed to fill their vacancies – but local politicians should take account of the availability of public services and accommodation before granting permits for economic expansion, to prevent job-seeking immigrants from overwhelming an area such as Shirebrook in Derbyshire for example, as described in the BBC article Immigration: threat or opportunity. Clear policies and procedures are needed.
Many people risk their lives to reach wealthy countries. It is an emotive subject. British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's promise to stop the boats was one of his five promises as he tried to turn round the fortunes of the Conservative Party. He failed to keep that promise, and the subject remained a high profile political issue in British politics: in the competition to replace him as the party leader, and as a problem for the incoming Labour government. Desperate people resorted to making dangerous boat crossings in the absence of an offshore processing system. The government's failure to process asylum claims efficiently was very costly, with large numbers having to be housed in hotels while their claims are processed.
Economic migration is the most contentious category of immigration because it can be seen as competition for employment, although it can have broadly positive effects on an economy in the medium term (3.4.3.3). It is possible to try to prevent economic migrants from entering the country, as reported by Reuters for example: Trump says Mexico 'eventually' will pay for border wall, or they might be deported if they fail to find work soon enough, to prevent them from becoming “an unreasonable burden” on the social assistance system – within 3 months, for example, as catered for in EU directive 2004/38/EC.
A system of residence permits, such as that described in the “Guide to French visas and permits”, can enable local government to ensure that incoming economic migrants can support themselves and it allows a check to be made that there is adequate housing, infrastructure and public services for them. It has been suggested that Britain could manage immigration more efficiently if it had an equivalent system, as described in the article Tony Blair and William Hague call for digital ID cards for all:
“digital ID cards would make it easier and more secure for people to access services and for the government to understand their needs and better target support.
…such a scheme could allow people to prove their identity, age, driving licence, right to live and work in the UK and even their educational qualifications.”
Opposition to digital ID cards is misguided. The above article noted that “Silkie Carlo, director of campaign group Big Brother Watch, said the "sprawling digital identity system" proposed by the pair "would be one of the biggest assaults on privacy ever seen in the UK".” UK citizens already have their details on government computers for access to benefits, driving licences and taxes – so a degree of rationalisation of identity details would not be unduly intrusive. The only group in society whose privacy would be affected would be undocumented illegal immigrants. They could no longer hide so easily if landlords, employers and police were able to swiftly check their right to be in the country.
Asylum-seekers need an induction into society. They may find that it is easiest for them if they settle near to people from the same ethnic group, so that they can receive moral and practical support and can speak the same language. They need different lengths of time to adjust, but it is preferable that they don’t remain separate from the rest of society for any longer than necessary because that undermines social cohesion (6.6.3.4). If they are allowed to find work wherever it is available, they will gradually disperse and can be absorbed.
All immigrants create an immediate pressure on public services. They need housing, they may need access to medical care, and their children need schools. If the authorities have made insufficient provision for receiving people, it is they who deserve criticism – not the immigrants. Policies need to be localised for efficient management of immigration. Local politicians need to visibly manage it: ensuring that there are adequate public services and infrastructure, and consulting with local community leaders and the immigrants themselves about cultural adaptation. The problems are radically different in Dover (where refugees might arrive), London (which has a rich history of successfully absorbing immigration) and East Anglia (where immigration is necessary to pick fruit but there is now Fear and anger in once-wealthy town divided by insecurity and immigration).
(This is an archive of a page intended to form part of Edition 4 of the Patterns of Power series of books. The latest versions are at book contents).