Labour must distinguish between immigration and the immigrant

The Labour party no longer speaks for a segment of the electorate that were once its most dependable supporters. This is partly a result of Labour’s pursuit of swing voters in the 90’s and 2000’s. But it’s equally a consequence of Labour politicians ignoring voters’ concerns, most significantly on the subject of immigration.

By shifting the party away from the centrism of New Labour, Miliband has implicitly accepted that he will lose some electoral advantage attached to the middle ground. This might be fine were he not also failing to cement the party’s base support by sidestepping its key concern – immigration.

Labour’s natural constituency has narrowed. This is made worse by the fact that former Conservatives are more receptive to Nigel Farage than Ed Miliband. So while Labour won Newark in 1997 (although under different boundaries) in the by-election today they will most likely come in at a distant third. While appealing to Conservatives, UKIP have also united disaffected Labour voters with their willingness to talk about immigration. This is the biggest single challenge facing Labour today.

The issue is divisive for the party. Generally the more middle class elements, from which the Labour hierarchy is drawn, fail to truly appreciate traditional Labour voters’ immigration concerns. All too often for them immigration is a positive because it makes society more cosmopolitan and interesting. In these circles the migrant is rightly accorded admirable character status for possessing the courage to move from their country of birth – never an easy decision – to pursue a better life for themselves and their family. And, to underpin their case are the cold statistics illustrating that immigrants contribute more to the exchequer than they take.

Labour rightly takes pride in arguing that compassion should have no boundaries. But it is wrong to belittle or ignore the concerns of the working classes and others, many of who have had to live with some of the less attractive consequences of an open immigration policy. The party needs to recognise that many natural, and indeed former, Labour supporters are turning towards UKIP because the party offers not just solace but answers, albeit misguided ones, to genuine economic and cultural problems.

To counter this, Labour must move to monopolise the debate. A distinction should be made between ‘immigration’ and the immigrant, recognising the negatives of the former while insisting upon respect and compassion for the latter. Only by owning the argument can Labour best counter racism, bigotry and ignorance. Speaking clearly and outlining transparently the economic and social factors influencing future immigration policy will allow Labour to include immigration in their wider discourse on living wages, employment and opportunities. By doing so, the party will reconnect with those who feel marginalised by mainstream politics and let down by changes over which they believe they were not consulted.

Miliband’s relentless focus on the cost of living crisis and the patently uneven state of the economic recovery may lead to success in 2015. But he and his cabinet must acknowledge that immigration policies is integral to these issues. Only then can Labour counter Farage without disavowing our moral commitment to solidarity.