Will the post-Brexit immigration rules ease public anxiety?
By: Steve O'Neil
Tags: UK Politics, Public Opinion, Immigration, Priti Patel, Brexit

Today we got our first look at what the post Brexit immigration rules will look like with the release of a ‘policy statement’ on the new points based immigration system. The merits of this plan will be debated in detail over the coming weeks, in particular the possible impact on sectors of the economy as diverse as social care and retail. However on this issue the scrutiny of policy wonks and business people is less important than that of the public at large, so driven is the immigration debate by public opinion. So the key question is if this plan can sate the public’s anxiety on migration from within the EU and beyond.

The tone of the announcement was that the new system will “move away” from relying on “cheap labour”. In practice a combination of say, a job offer, a relevant qualification, speaking English and a £25k salary would be enough to earn the required ‘70 points’. The plan itself is the compromise it was always going to be. It falls short of providing an absolute cap on numbers. Home Secretary Priti Patel today refused to give a firm commitment on that; steering away from a repeat of the Cameron era pledge of bringing net migration down to the ‘tens of thousands’. Yet the plan does decisively End Freedom of Movement and promise a reduction, as we knew it would.

Where does the public stand?

To make an assessment on how the public might react it is important to understand a bit better how the country thinks about immigration; and to avoid the tendency too common in ‘elite’ circles to categorise these concerns on-mass as ‘‘xenophobic”, as Libdem spokesperson Christine Jardine seems to have done today.

The first thing to say about public attitudes to migration is that concerns are widespread. Less than one in five want migration levels to go up. Over 40% want it reduced. It is also true to say concern is already falling, less than two years ago it polled as the third biggest ‘issue facing Britain’, now it is ninth. Although there is a clear slit bettween Remain and Leave voters about why that is.

Second, to judge how the public might view immigration post Brexit we need to understand the nature of their concerns. The think tank British Future specialises in such questions. To simplify they split the public into three groups. Around a quarter are positive about migration, often they are young and educated. Another quarter, termed ‘rejectionists’, are strongly opposed to migration. Generally older white men, as per our stereotypes. But the most striking thing is that the remaining half are not against or for migration in any firm ideological way, but have practical concerns about it. They are the ‘balancers’, seeing both good and bad in immigration. Their concerns are about whether the NHS can cope, whether there are enough social houses and so on. Perhaps more than anything else they have very little confidence that government can or wants to do anything about migration.

How might they react?

Understanding these groups has some implications for how the new system will be received. The quarter who are hard line rejectionists won’t be sated by Patel’s or any other realistic plan. They may even be angered by the lack of a cast iron guarantee on numbers. Given these people are quite likely to be Conservative voters who might consider the Brexit Party, that could be a worry for Tories in future should Nigel Farage resurface. More positive news for the plan likely comes from the ‘balancers’. The idea that Freedom of Movement will end and that government will require European migrants to meet the points based criteria should speak to their more practical concerns. These may be the people the plan is looking to convince. It seems reasonably well placed to do so.

Whether any of this becomes important come the next local or general elections we will see. However in the long term a note of caution should be heeded by politicians looking to appease public fears. While migration does have an impact on the things the majority of people care about — housing, public services and so on — most experts will tell you it is only a very small factor with much bigger more systemic forces at play.

So unless the larger underlying causes of these concerns are dealt with, don’t be surprised if public anxiety on immigration is not sated for long. The key to allaying concerns may end up being less about migration policy, and more about the success of the new government’s stated commitment to “leveling up” the economy.