Tough public attitudes on immigration mean that on the doorsteps it is often the very last thing that any activist wants to talk about. But when a voter says they are concerned about immigration, often what they are really saying is they are worried about their life and some of the social pressure they are encountering.
Closing down the conversation just carries on the myth that in Britain we are never allowed to talk about immigration. That?s one of the reasons that British Future, a new thinktank, is holding fringe debates at all three party conferences on the challenges that politicians of all parties have about talking about immigration.
There is strong evidence that migration brings net benefits to Britain, but there is plenty of evidence that talking about the economic numbers doesn?t speak to anyone but economists, and as Mark Rusling has detailed in a previous article for Progress this is just one of the challenges you meet on the doorstep. Most people hear a number and just switch off. A personal story makes far more sense, as does bringing the issue back to the local community. Yes, there are stories about housing shortages, but are there also stories about local and national businesses set up by migrants bringing jobs to the area? Talk about both. What do they think of Mr Khan who is now running the garage at the bottom of the road, who escaped from persecution in Afghanistan and set up his company from scratch? Make it personal and then it matters more.
The public also wants to hear more about integration. People are proud of modern Britain, 75 per cent think the Olympics showed Britain to be a confident, multi-ethnic society. This is a country where we turned out in thousands to cheer Mo Farah, Jessica Ennis and Chris Hoy. A politics of solidarity demands a shared society, not a segregated one, a concern that might link concerns about social mobility or the super-rich playing by different rules to how those of different ethnic backgrounds and faith groups live together.
The British public wants to see migrants contribute positively to the UK, and they are proud of the ones that do. When it comes down to attitudes to new migrants, the public sees skill and education levels as more important than cultural background, according to the latest British Social Attitudes study.
Most people believe that professional migrants are good for Britain, whether they come from Eastern European countries like Poland, or Muslim countries like Pakistan, while strong majorities also believe that the settlement of unskilled labourers is bad for Britain. The study also finds strong support for student migration, from all parts of the world and cultural backgrounds, as long as students coming to Britain have good grades.
There is good evidence that migration brings net benefits to Britain ? but social democrats will worry about the distribution of gains too, and pay attention to who wins and who loses out. A politics of ?nobody left behind? would not take an entirely open approach to migration, but look for ways to spread both benefits and burdens fairly.? Labour should find more to say about integration too.
Labour can be deeply anxious about how to talk about immigration, but each of the major parties struggles with how to articulate an immigration approach which is both workable and can secure public consent. The Liberal Democrats got into trouble at the last election with their policy of an earned amnesty for those without legal status. The Conservatives may have been better at chiming with public sentiment, but are struggling to find policies which could meet their net migration pledge.
It is easy for oppositions to blame governments ? but Labour simply turning up the volume once out of office would not be credible. Between the polarised positions of open borders or slamming them tight shut is a hidden middle ground, on which many people could converge.
There are limits to migration. Britain can?t admit everybody who would like to come to this country, so the question becomes how to make workable choices that reflect our interests and values. Securing public consent for sensible limits depends first on securing trust in an orderly system, where the rules are managed fairly with borders controls that work. Only then might an argument about which forms of immigration, and at what pace, reflect Britain?s interests.
Many people think Labour has been running away from this issue. So the first thing any doorstep advocate needs to establish is that, however difficult it might sometimes be, a frank, fair and open conversation about immigration is very much on.
Sunder Katwala is director of British Future
British Future is holding a joint fringe with Progress in Manchester on October 1 at 12.45pm at Peter House, The Doorstep Challenge: How Labour Can Talk About Immigration.
Photo: Victoria Peckham
British Future, immigration, international students, Labour, skills
Source: http://www.progressonline.org.uk/2012/09/28/a-frank-fair-and-open-conversation-on-immigration/
what is sopa marianne gingrich ibooks author gabrielle union merle haggard ladainian tomlinson mark wahlberg
Display Full Page
