Will UK government change the narrative on immigration before it’s too late?

UK is heading for zero net migration and the consequences look seriously bad for growth

The UK immigration system needs to deliver on a number of levels, including: allowing sufficient flow of labour to supply demand in the economy and protecting UK citizens from threats, such as terrorism and crime. However, in recent years, particularly after the hysterical rhetoric of Brexit agitators, the immigration system has simultaneously become a significant key to power and the least rational area of government policy. In no way could choices such as: spending £700million on an unlikely and probably illegal Rwanda asylum processing scheme - to which only four volunteers were paid to exit UK, the creation of a Clandestine Channel Threat Commander role, performed for a few months by Dan O’Mahoney - sadly never given the sobriquet Boaty O’Mohoney, who’s role was never clearly defined, and the many £millions promised to the French government for providing beach patrols to reduce the flow of small boat crossings. Small boat crossings that only began when UK left the EU and exited the Dublin Regulation. The latest payment of £550million could have paid for well over ten million GP consultations at a time when face to face GP appointments are almost impossible to secure. But somehow these very public announcements continue under what many of us hoped would be a Labour government liberated from much of the immediate blame for inflicting Brexit on the nation, and breaking the UK immigration system. Sadly, even now, under a change of leader, the Home Office seems to be the only office of state that has not been reassessed by PM Burnham, with Shabana Mahmood retaining her post, and no amendments posited to the recently published immigration bill - in which human rights are further eroded and most importantly, from a political perspective, the far right narrative of immigration as universally bad has been encouraged to continue. An immigration bill that has attracted the open criticism of 80 Labour MPs.

There will always be tensions between the competing requirements on the immigration system. On the one hand, a significant proportion of British voters are persuaded that immigration has had negative impacts on wage levels, access to accommodation and public services, particularly GP appointments and NHS waiting lists. On the other, there is demand from farmers for seasonal workers and from the construction industry and hospitality industry, for a supply of skilled, but relatively low paid workers. And in the week that our new prime minister has placed renewed focus on “sorting out” the adult social care system, an obvious question arises: where will all these skilled/semi-skilled, low paid workers come from when immigration is cut to near zero? Firstly, low paid workers and seasonal workers, does not mean low skilled workers, nor does it mean that uk nationals can do these jobs if given the “right incentives”. For example, the seasonal workers who used to arrive in numbers from European nations each summer picking fruit and vegetables are not low skilled workers, and they are not “easily replaceable” with UK workers. This is in part a matter of training, but the UK is simply no longer set up to support a large group of “home-grown” seasonal workers. Our working culture has moved on, and so has our nation’s infrastructure. The vast majority of workers now expect to take all year round jobs and live in one place. As a result, the support infrastructure for mobile, seasonal working no longer exists in the UK. Farmers depend on fruit pickers from abroad who spend the summer in UK and then relatively quickly move on to other jobs on the European mainland, or back to their homelands. When it comes to immigration’s impact on home-grown low paid workers’ wages. In 2021 the Nobel prize for economics was won by a team that demonstrated little or no impact on wages of immigration. Based on a large-scale study of the arrival of 125,000 refugees from Cuba into Miami in the 1980s, rapidly increasing the city’s labour force by around 7%. The University of California team found that “immigrants don't reduce the wages of native-born workers”.  So it seems that the fears - often used as political levers - are substantially unfounded. But that does not mean they don’t have political traction.

Government after government has responded positively to, and built policy around, anti-immigrant narratives widely spread on social media, uncritically aired on mainstream platforms like BBC News and amplified by dedicated rightwing broadcasters, such as GBNews and TalkTV. Even the current Labour government, which arguably had an opportunity to initiate a reset on the topic of immigration, continues to run the Home Office on the assumption that any immigration is too much immigration. And all this effort is delivering actual results. In fact, recent net immigration figures have plunged so vertiginously, that forecasts of net zero migration are currently being posited. If such a net zero immigration situation is “achieved”, it would result in a potential 3.6% decrease in GDP, according to a study by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research. With immigration already plunging - down 48% year ending 2025 versus 2024 and over 80% since the 2023 peak - at some point soon UK government needs to reframe the argument and reassess its recent decisions, otherwise UK is heading for another economic crisis on the scale of Brexit. For anyone not encumbered by party allegiances and ideological obsessions, the prospect of UK plunging into a deeper economic crisis would spur immediate action, but as we have seen from consecutive UK government’s response to the absolute economic and diplomatic catastrophe of Brexit, knowing the facts doesn’t lead to quick rational action. But beyond a fear of admitting being wrong, there are political pressures pushing government into maintaining policies that almost certainly will create future problems. The continued popularity of the far right, xenophobic, Reform UK Party, under the charismatic leadership of Nigel Farage, which until recently was polling ahead of the Labour government, means that only a brave and principled leadership would present an honest narrative, placing our national interest above the short term political appetite for power. At this moment, that leadership is nowhere to be seen.

What’s in the current immigration bill?

Looking at the current immigration bill, published June 30, it seems unlikely to have a significant impact on the numbers. However, it does continue the narrative, stripping more rights from those seeking solace in the UK, through limitations on the definition of family to just spouses, and parents with children under 18, and the introduction of a non-judicial primary assessment body to consider primary appeals. This new proposed body, the Independent Immigration Appeals Authority, is said to be independent of government, but perhaps confusingly, it will sit within the Home Office. While this new Bill will probably have little effect on the overall plummeting trend of net immigration, it does nothing to start the debate over how the UK needs immigration to meet its growth targets. Growth has repeatedly been stated as the government’s primary objective, so this is significant. Even more worryingly, individuals who have been promised settled status, as citizens of EU states resident in UK before Brexit came into effect, are now being told to leave. This surely, is a step too far for our Labour government? We started with the question: who is the immigration policy working for? The answer seems to be, it’s working for the government towards its short term objective of attracting voters away from the far right Reform UK and its even more extreme competitor on the very far right, Restore Britain. In the world of immigration, the Conservative Party seems to be making very little impact, given that there is so little room between Labour and Reform on immigration policy, especially as the figures for net migration fall so precipitously. Who it’s not working for are the businesses and majority of the people of the UK. For us, the real prospect of further economic pain is clear for all those willing to look. In fact, Labour is losing more voters to the Green Party than it is to the far right, so its tough immigration strategy seems to be failing on all fronts. What would a rational immigration policy look like? In a rational world, the government would be planning to attract the kinds of people who might fit into its growth strategy. For example, given that 1.5million new homes is one of Labour’s election pledges for its first term in office, surely it would make sense to try to attract skilled labour to build these houses, as well as training our own labour force and improving conditions and rewards? Labour is already behind on this pledge. Only 208,600 new homes were completed in 2024/25, according to Full Fact. The Home Builders Federation has warned that the target will be missed. The National Federation of Builders has argued that post Brexit and post 2025 immigration rules make it harder to source required labour. Looking at the key area of healthcare, and particularly adult social care, the government is currently spending political capital on finding a cross-party solutions approach to the struggling and unfair system. Yet without a supply of skilled labour willing to take comparatively low paid work, this ambition also seems remote. Currently about 32% of adult care sector workers are migrants. Finally, in tertiary education, where international student fees make up about 20% of total income for UK higher education institutions, there has been a 42% decrease in international students due to recent immigration policies. This equates to a forecast £4billion loss in annual revenue, comparing 2024/25 with 2028/29, according to Universities UK. The government can no longer afford to sacrifice reality-based policies, simply to stave off the xenophobic attacks of far right populist political vehicles, such as Reform UK. If it really wants to deliver its election promises the narrative must change and change quickly. Sadly, by maintaining the status quo at the Home Office, it looks unlikely that PM Burnham really understands the challenge our nation is facing. I hope that he can change the narrative in time, but the jury - or in the case of asylum seekers - the independent appeals authority - is out.