Labour needs pragmatism on immigration

A crucial part of rebuilding public trust in Labour will be ensuring that promises made to the electorate are credible, viable, and realistic. Not only does our immigration policy do this, setting us apart from the position taken by the Tories and UKIP – but more importantly as a party we have a social responsibility to offer an alternative to the toxic debate around immigration.

This week, the pound dropped to a two-month low after Theresa May suggested that the UK may leave the single market in order to ensure an end to freedom of movement, prompting Keir Starmer to question the economic competence of a Government “prepared to put so much priority on immigration they’re prepared to damage the economy.”

But even if the prime minister’s proposals on freedom of movement were economically competent, what trust can the public put into a party that whilst mindlessly repeating a commitment to bring immigration levels down to ‘tens of thousands’ has overseen record high levels of immigration, relaxation of border checks and cuts to border security. Labour has more respect for the British public than to patronise them in this way.

The ‘border control or bust’ approach to Brexit negotiations that the Tories are adopting does little to address the uncertainty for businesses operating in the UK and the potential impacts on jobs and wages if GDP predictions are correct. Despite estimates by the IFS suggesting that single market access is worth up to 4% on GDP in the medium to long term, May has made it clear that she is ready to sacrifice our access in order to ensure Britain heads for a hard-Brexit with greater limitations on immigration.

I don’t disagree that for too long the public have been lied to – told that the struggles they face are due to members of their own communities who have relocated from Europe and not due to Government incompetence. But as many have rightly noted we can only address these concerns and start to change the discourse by engaging in a dialogue with the public – producing statistical evidence and data on the benefits of immigration is not enough.

In opposition to the extreme position taken the Tories, Labour need to offer a pragmatic alternative, not driven by ideology but by economics – being neither ideologically bound to free movement, nor ideologically bound to cutting migration to arbitrary targets, regardless of the economic impact.

In contrast to the Tories, Labour has said that we will prioritise tariff-free single market access in Brexit negotiations, whilst adopting localised mitigation strategies for immigration through investment in housing, health and education, a new migrant impact fund, rigorous enforcement of the minimum wage and preventative action on the undercutting of wages.

This is not a new position and shadow cabinet have been expressing the need for fair rules and reasonably managed migration, in contrast to the article in last weeks Observer by Kinnock and Reeves that suggested that “some in the Labour party claim the proponents of managed migration are UKIP-lite”. Indeed, those who have raised concerns about rhetoric on immigration have done so in response to comments such as Kinnock’s assertion that we need to “move away from multiculturalism and towards assimilation”. He has since appeared to distance himself from the tone of this comment in a blog post where he described a more multicultural view of British identity.

Addressing public concerns about immigration does not mean repeating the mistruths that lead to the demonisation of members of our communities who have lived abroad. A credible solution by definition must be a viable product of Brexit negotiations and based on evidence. The increasing rates of global migration will bring with it new challenges in recruiting the best talent, managing safety at our borders, monitoring immigration and supporting increasing numbers of refugees – both new opportunities and new challenges, and talking about and developing policies around these issues are in no way anti-socialist. In fact, it’s what a good government should be doing, but instead resort to glossing over their failures with jingoism and ‘go home’ billboards.

Labour has the potential to be a safe pair of hands in negotiations and in managing migration – but only if we are ready to present a coherent and united front. Addressing these challenges with competence and without debasing ourselves or the British public is what will set us apart from the ideological driven approach of a government that right now is letting the country down.

Greg Dash is an executive committee member of Greater Manchester Fabians. He tweets @GregLabour