It’s time we talked about immigration

Labour doesn’t have an ‘open door’ immigration policy. We never have had that approach.

It is therefore surprising how many supporters and potential supporters think that we do. To be fair we gave them a lot of evidence during our period of office and especially with a ‘not fit for purpose’ Home Office.

For the record I am in favour of immigration. As the son of Irish immigrants I know that my life was transformed by living in England compared to the very limited opportunities offered in the 1960s by the Irish State. However the world has been transformed in the last thirty years in terms of the willingness and ability of millions to move around the world. While it is great to live in a country that many people want to move to (after no-one is queuing to settle in Russia) there are major concerns.

As a responsible political party we have to challenge prejudice but also we have to accept that for many of our fellow citizens there are clear negatives to immigration.

It is not a conspiracy but a fact that the Treasury during our last period of office regarded immigration from the accession states in the European Union as an acceptable form of wage control. Whilst certainly not the only reason, the large flows of workers willing to work for the minimum wage or less has been a major factor in the flat-lining of wages over the last decade for a large number of manual workers. My brother-in-law who is a self employed driver in London is now working for the same level of commission that he gained in the late 1990’s. For all the warm words about the living wage and its (limited) implementation in the public sector there is absolutely no way that companies like Amazon will sign up when they have a limitless supply of willing workers happy to work for less.

As a party we have to listen to our colleagues in the Trades Unions and provide greater opportunities for union recognition (and the prevention of victimisation of union activists). As a government we also have to be ruthless on those firms and agencies willing to exploit workers from other parts of the EU. Ultimately we have to put more pressure on the EU Commission and Parliament to deal more effectively with rank prejudice against minority communities in some of the EU states (and the Roma community are a clear example) that currently drives a lot of inward migration.

As well as pressure on wages we also have to accept that the current levels of immigration will generate considerable pressures on our welfare state. Milton Friedman once said that you can have large scale immigration or a generous welfare state but you can’t have both. He was wrong on a lot of things but he was right about that. It may be a co-incidence but the Labour front-bench – initially by Liam Bryne and now Rachel Reeves – have been speaking a lot recently about the need to introduce a contributory principle into our welfare system. It is hardly a novel idea. The contributory principle was the cornerstone of the Beveridge Report and the creation of the welfare state in the 1940s (it’s called National Insurance for a reason). Whilst services such as the NHS will always be on the basis of need and free at the point of delivery we do need a mature conversation about how such services (and especially unemployment payments) are paid for. Unlike other EU countries we have moved so far from the contributory principle that a lot of our welfare payments are effectively charitable donations (one of the reasons why our welfare system is rapidly losing popular support).

Do we as party have a view about the levels and reasons for immigration? What is the appropriate split between those coming to study, work and for family re-union from outside the EU? How seriously should we police our borders and how do we treat the large number of ‘visa over-stayers’ and illegal immigrants.

We don’t seem to hear a lot of Blue Labour these days. But we do know that millions of working class voters have simply disappeared from the political process. It is precisely those communities who need to hear a clear message from Labour. Part of that message has to be about immigration and a willingness to listen to their concerns.