Conference season is now over, and despite a leadership election dominating the Conservatives, immigration has remained a central topic across the political spectrum. There has been a troubling consensus on anti-migrant policies and language from Labour and the Conservatives, both having moved increasingly to the right on migrants’ rights in recent years. Below are our main takeaways.
Labour: “taking back control”
Members of the Government repeated lines about “concerns” over immigration being “legitimate”, and the need to still have “a serious debate” about it, despite the major racist and anti-migrant violence that took place in August. The Home Secretary spoke of what a “serious government” would do – apparently this is continuing to go after migrants – while the Prime Minister emphasised that the Government’s policy approach is “to reduce net migration and our economic dependency upon it.”
In light of this, the Government announced plans for restrictions on businesses employing migrant workers where they have previously broken visa rules. This was mentioned alongside matching migration policies to “skills,” in order to prioritise investment in the British-born workforce, to reduce the hiring of migrant workers, which the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has been commissioned to look into.
However, a vote on the Border Security Command, the Government’s flagship immigration policy, was cancelled after pressure from migrants’ rights campaigners and fears that it would, embarrassingly for the Government, be voted down by major unions. Albeit, this will not affect the implementation of the anti-migrant Border Security Command and the introduction of its highly criticised accompanying legislation, the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill.
Tories: more of the same
The Conservative Party Conference saw less of an emphasis on proposed policy in relation to migration compared to Labour, largely due to campaigning in the midst of their ongoing leadership election taking place. Despite this, immigration was frequently at the forefront of debates, with many members of the outgoing Sunak Government running for election.
Former Home Secretary James Cleverly boasted his much-disputed claim that his policies had reduced net immigration by 300,000 people a year, while former “illegal” immigration minister and leadership election frontrunner Robert Jenrick continued his tirade against the ECHR in order to reduce immigration to his desired level. In an effective repeat of Labour’s proposed policy, Tom Tugendhat, former Minister for Security, called to cut migration by favouring recruiting UK workers, thereby reducing the number of work visas issued. Meanwhile, Kemi Badenoch has been in the news extolling “Western values” and the – often racist – claim that migrants must assimilate into this supposedly superior values system.
The smaller parties: a mixed bag
While the SNP’s First Minister John Swinney stated his Party’s mission to never denigrate migrants, he did unfortunately repeat narratives of contribution in his reference to migrants enriching the country and their right to be in the UK. This is something we have challenged, because it makes the right to belong conditional for migrants.
In contrast, Green Party co-leader Zack Polanski emphasised that “it shouldn’t require migrants or people of colour to sort of contribute a trick or deliver something for us to recognise our collective humanity.” He told the conference attendees that migrants are not a threat to our society, but instead the ultra rich, as well as water companies who are polluting the UK’s seas and rivers.
The rhetoric that came out of Reform UK’s conference, however, was, unsurprisingly, much more negative: Ann Widdecombe, Reform’s Party Spokesperson on Immigration and former member of John Major’s Conservative Government, would have people seeking asylum housed in “secure reception centres” to enable them to be deported more quickly, while there was other talk of the need to “control our borders” and “put British people first.” Rupert Lowe, MP for Great Yarmouth, also criticised democracy for making people want women to be treated like men and “foreigners wanting to be treated like natives.” This kind of language is highly concerning, where public officials can openly call for discrimination against migrants and proposed immigration policy prioritises harm to and deporting migrants.
Across the board we have seen more convergence between the two main parties on migration over recent years (see our write up of last year’s conferences here), as well as an emboldened and increasingly influential (far-)right voice. This is evident not just in policy developments, but in internal party attitudes, with Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick – the two candidates with arguably the most extreme (?) statements on migration at the conference subsequently making it through to the final round of the leadership contest. As Labour’s rhetoric on migrants and the freedom to move, it is essential that anti-migrant narratives and policies continues to be challenged across the political spectrum.
Find out more about our work on defying the narrative here and here.