How Labour could alienate migrant voters

“It’s fair that before drawing on the welfare state, people should first make a contribution to it.” So read the Labour leaflet put out at the end of January. Above this seemingly sensible and harmless statement, bold lettering printed onto the glossy paper bellowed aggressively: ‘Labour’s tough new approach to immigration.’

This particular leaflet was met with criticism from Labour MP David Lammy but the idea it signified is far from dead. The leaderships’ belief that they need to flex their rhetorical muscles when it comes to immigration was echoed in Labour’s latest Party Election Broadcast (it is, after all, the focus of one of their five election pledges). If you were to reword the sentence, replace the word ‘tough’ with ‘control’ and substitute bold typeface with actor David Morrisey’s mellifluous tones, then the negative stereotypes of immigrants that underly Labour’s electioneering isn’t any less disconcerting.

The real message Labour are sending to the public is that immigrants are a problem to be managed. This is untrue and deeply disappointing. But it could also prove electorally damaging, and not just because it’s unlikely this approach will persuade Ukip voters to step into the Labour camp.

If we’re going to persistently talk about Labour losing votes from key electoral groups (so often the justification for their immigration policies), then let’s broaden our gaze.

Many migrants are voters too. In fact, Rob Ford has said, “migrant voters are almost as numerous as current Ukip supporters”. Research from Migrants Right Network found that migrants could hold the balance of power in some key constituencies; 12 of those listed are Labour marginals. This should cause worry among Labour MPs because although it’s dangerous to lump all migrants together, it’s no far leap to suggest talk of controlling immigration could alienate many of these potential Labour voters.

Along these same lines, Miliband and co. should pause to think about the impact their immigrant rhetoric has on groups that traditionally form part of their core vote: minority ethnic people (many of whom are working class; this social group isn’t exclusively white).

Operation Black Vote have found that people of colour could decide the way the vote goes in 168 marginal constituencies. It’s not a given that these people will be pro-immigration. And as with migrants, there’s a clear danger in treating the very different people who make up these groups as the same. There are also many other policy issues that are, of course, concern to migrants and people of colour. However, immigration could be one of these. There is evidence to suggest that people who identify as minority ethnic are less likely to be concerned about immigration than their white counterparts. They are also more likely to feel alienated from political parties that negatively typecast immigrants. Research group, Mapping Immigration Controversy have come to very similar conclusions. Although Labour’s announcement that they’re launching a Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic manifesto could help to speak to such people, it won’t undo their immigration message.

The the unhelpful baggage Labour help to heap upon immigrants (because the party’s positive platitudes are lost in a haze of ‘toughness, ‘control’ and ‘earned entitlements’), could do them damage in May.

But this isn’t just about votes and the election – I never feel comfortable just talking about abstract voter groups as if they aren’t people. It should concern everyone that the anti-immigrant sentiments Labour and other parties buy into are part of a contradictory quagmire that could legitimate discriminatory attitudes towards immigrants and minority ethnic people (all too often people see these two groups as overlapping).

So, while I understand Labour’s decision to quietly push their immigration line, I don’t accept it. Many others might not either. And if none of the other rational arguments are going to persuade Labour to stop pushing their subtle anti-immigration message, they should be concerned that it could affect how some of these people cast their ballot in May.