Immigrants: UK’s abiding dilemma

Immigrants: UK’s abiding dilemma

FPJ BureauUpdated: Saturday, June 01, 2019, 03:23 AM IST
article-image

Britain is caught on the horns of a dilemma. It doesn’t want more foreigners, but it cannot ignore the evidence that foreigners are the main catalyst for economic growth. London is the country’s most dynamic spot, and that is because immigrants account for 3.2 million of the city’s 8.6 million people. The north-east, around Newcastle upon Tyne, which attracts the least number of foreigners, is also one of the country’s darkest spots with high unemployment and sagging infrastructure.

The latest immigration figures confirm that London is a truly global city. Perhaps the only one in the world. New York is American. Paris is French. But with one-third of its inhabitants born abroad, London is not English. Or even British. It’s international. Some 20 languages are spoken in London’s primary schools. Local authority notices are in Urdu, Bengali, Hindi and Gujarati, as well as English and other languages. I asked for directions at a newsagent’s shop in West London the other day and the man behind the counter replied in Hindi to my question in English. The old Cockney heartland around Petticoat Lane is Little Bangladesh, just as Southall is India transplanted. Brixton is the Afro-Caribbean stronghold. But with the European Union accounting for two-thirds of the influx since 2011, the immigration debate is no longer about colour and the Commonwealth.

But with parliamentary elections due in early May, immigration is one more headache for the beleaguered prime minister, David Cameron. His Tory Party is so much at odds with its coalition partner, the Liberal Democrats, that Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, mocks him as imagining he is giving orders in the drawing room of Downton Abbey – the stately country house that gives its name to a popular TV series on aristocratic life. The two-party system is at breaking point, with Labour edging ahead, the Scottish National Party threatening secession, the Green Party demanding an end to “hyper-capitalism” and the U.K. Independence Party pressing for an end to EU membership.

This last could be an emotive and volatile issue in a land that views foreigners with mixed feelings. Cameron must know by now that his promise to keep net migration down to 100,000 per year is just out of the question. Net immigration has not been less than 100,000 since 1997. The figures have risen steadily since then, immigration boosting the population by 565,000 in the last three years. One-third of these newcomers settled down in London. As a result, the capital’s population rose by 161,000 EU-born settlers and 28,000 from outside the EU, meaning Asia, Africa and the Caribbean.

Those “Little Englanders” who want England for only the English realise that nothing can stop the free movement of people within the EU. That’s why Nigel Farage, the UKIP leader, wants Britain out. But even he has replaced his initial demand for a maximum of 50,000 for net migration to a points system such as Australia operates to scrutinise potential settlers and match their age, qualifications and skills to local requirements. After all, while Farage may not publicly admit this, he cannot but know that migrants from the West Indies saved the public transport system in the major British cities, just as Indian doctors upheld the National Health Service that Clement Attlee’s Labour government introduced after the end of the Second World War.

In the same way, EU settlers have revitalised London’s economy. It’s become a joke to talk of Polish plumbers but they have the skill and the willingness to work inconvenient hours which spoilt British workmen just won’t do any longer. Similarly, car hire firm drivers all seem to be Afghans or Pakistanis. Lithuanians have done exceptionally well in the dotcom business ever since 2004 when their country joined the EU. True, the migration to Britain of low-skilled Europeans is believed to have kept down wages, but these people take on work that native Britons wouldn’t do in the first place.

There is talk of not issuing visas to unskilled workers. The home minister, Theresa May, has tried to impose border controls to keep out non-EU arrivals. A just published report by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development claims that the limit of 20,700 visas every year for workers sponsored by companies outside the EU has had a damaging impact on growth. Earlier figures revealed that it was a popular fallacy that Commonwealth migrants exploited the social welfare services.

Now, in fact, people from Bangladesh are one of Britain’s success stories. They appear to have outstripped Pakistanis in education and earning capacity. But since 50 per cent of the 447,201 people who called themselves Bangladeshi in the 2011 census lives in London, they, too, conform to the pattern. Their success also underlines the British dilemma. Bangladeshi restaurants complain of a shortage of native cooks, but when special immigration rules were introduced to allow curry cooks to be imported, it was found that normal economic refugees were taking advantage of the loophole.

Given the UK’s higher living standards and employment opportunities, the danger of such abuse will always remain. And there is no denying that floods of settlers affect the quality of life as well as place a strain on all existing services. This is not because they are foreigners although it might seem so: the real reason is that facilities such as housing, water supply, energy, schools and hospitals just cannot cope with suddenly increased demand. There are, in addition, internal migrants drawn by the greater opportunities that London offers. The combined effect might well mean that the present demographic rate of growth is “unsustainable”, a favourite word with commentators as well as Farage.

Boris Johnson, London’s mayor who is credited with prime ministerial ambitions, has promised infrastructural improvements by 2050. However, public opinion is shaped not by long-term promises, but immediate conditions. A week is a long time in politics, as Harold Wilson, the former Labour prime minister famously said. A crash programme to invest millions of pounds in the very short run in all the benefits that make the British Welfare State such a desirable destination seems the only remedy. It would also help the Tories’ election prospects.

If globalisation means the free movement of capital, goods and services, there is no way human beings can be excluded. Nor can Britain encourage global companies to set up offices here and yet not allow them to source the employees they want. China, which has just bought a substantial stake in Thomas Cook, could stop investing millions of pounds in Britain every year if there are manpower restrictions. Cameron regularly compliments Ratan Tata on creating employment in Britain, but couldn’t really object if he replaced Jaguar’s British workers with Indians.

Free trade implies free labour movement. Britain might feel it’s at the receiving end of the bargain but this is really the penalty of success.

RECENT STORIES

Decentralisation Can Build Better Cities

Decentralisation Can Build Better Cities

Analysis: Elections Are The True Test Of Democracy

Analysis: Elections Are The True Test Of Democracy

Analysis: Crucial Questions About Navayuga And The EBs

Analysis: Crucial Questions About Navayuga And The EBs

Editorial: Too Few LS Tickets For Women

Editorial: Too Few LS Tickets For Women

From Mandir To Mandi

From Mandir To Mandi