Comment

The Government's grand post-Brexit immigration plan is likely to see numbers rise

Sajid Javid has no affection for the "tens of thousands" target

The immigration white paper, published yesterday, is an unfortunate symbol of the chaos of Britain’s Brexit policy and a government that has become badly dysfunctional. What started out as a plan to reduce and control immigration has, after much ministerial wrangling, led to a policy that is likely to see immigration, including low-skilled immigration, go up not down.

While Theresa May sees Brexit as a chance to reduce immigration, her ministers openly defy her. Downing Street says its commitment to reduce annual net migration to the tens of thousands remains, but Sajid Javid, the Home Secretary, repeatedly refuses to stand by it. No 10 wants to implement the recommendations of the Migration Advisory Committee in full, but Mr Javid, along with the Chancellor and Business Secretary, have fought for a more liberal system for lower-skilled migrants.

And the rebel ministers are winning their battle. Despite the headline promise of a “skills-based” system, there are several gaping holes in the white paper that will allow low-skilled immigration to Britain to continue, and cause an unlimited volume of supposedly skilled migration.

The cap on skilled migration will be removed. Rules requiring employers to advertise jobs in Britain before recruiting migrants will disappear. The need for employers to obtain a “sponsor licence” will be dropped. Subject to a salary threshold, any worker classed as skilled – from anywhere in the world – will be entitled to compete with British workers for the same job.

What constitutes skilled work is changing. Work permits will be made available for medium-skilled as well as high-skilled workers. The qualifications required to prove skilled worker status include A-levels and NVQs. Migrants will be free to apply for 142 additional occupations, including hairdressers, newsagents, bricklayers, gardeners and fitness instructors. All in all, this is the equivalent of five million jobs, a third of Britain’s entire full-time workforce.

The white paper risks taking us back to the bad old days under Labour. Then, almost one third of supposedly “highly-skilled” migrants were working as shop assistants, security guards, supermarket cashiers and care assistants.

When it made its recommendations, the Migration Advisory Committee insisted there was no risk of British workers being undercut by migrant workers because they proposed a £30,000 salary threshold for anybody granted a work permit. This itself is optimistic – official figures show the median salary for male workers in Britain is £29,425 – but even this has been rejected by ministers.

The white paper says the Government will “allow migration at lower salary levels” for some jobs and sectors. It promises that foreign students should, upon graduation, be “subject to a lower salary threshold”, regardless of the quality of their degree. And ministers are arguing that the salary threshold should be lower than £30,000. As a result, although the Migration Advisory Committee recommendations were made following an extensive consultation with business, there will now be another consultation with employers. Their interest is obvious: many labour market studies show higher immigration can reduce wages for people in certain jobs.

So the white paper proposes lifting the cap on skilled migration, expands the definition of skilled work, and makes British workers compete for millions more jobs. It acknowledges that unskilled immigration will continue anyway through family visas, the asylum system and labour mobility schemes. And it confirms that we have more than 1.5 million low-skilled migrant workers already in Britain.

Even still, it proposes that new, short-term visas for low-skilled workers will be created. Because these visas will be for no more than 12 months, they will not appear in the immigration statistics. And although a 12-month cooling off period will prevent low-skilled migrants from working here continuously, it will be a struggle to enforce their departure if they do not comply with the terms of their visa.

The big political claim made by the white paper – that its policies could “reduce annual inflows of [European] long-term workers by around eighty per cent” – is therefore highly dubious. It is based on a salary threshold that ministers do not want to implement. It assumes there will be no exemptions, even though the white paper proposes them. It ignores the numbers of low-skilled workers coming on short-term visas. And it is separate to the very significant increase in immigration we are likely to see from outside Europe.

The white paper was an opportunity to completely rethink our approach to immigration. Aligned with industrial strategy, it could have prioritised the sectors and skills our economy needs. Aligned with an ambitious cities strategy, it could have done more to make regional cities more dynamic. Aligned with the Brexit negotiations, it could have offered preferential treatment for European workers in return for better access to the single market. And it could have brought control to our immigration system. Instead, it is a missed opportunity that risks bringing about the very opposite of what ministers promise.

License this content