In an interview with Trevor Philips, former head of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, to be broadcast by Channel 4 next week, Nigel Farage, argues that laws against racial discrimination are no longer necessary. He also insists that the United Kingdom Independence party, which he leads, is a “colour blind” political party.
I doubt it*. But here I want to query the assumptions behind his first point: that Britain has moved on, and there is no discrimination of any note in 2015.
Last year, the United Kingdom Independence party won more votes than any other party in Britain’s European elections. It bested the Liberal Democrats in the local elections that took place the same day. But Nigel Farage’s outfit performed poorly in England’s big cities. It won no council seats, for example, in inner London, Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, Liverpool, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Ukip’s urban tally was a sign of an increasingly important divide between cities and the rest of England.
That urban and rural areas have different politics isn’t of course a new observation. Tory-Whig parliamentary battles were often proxies for conflicting views between landed gentry and city dwellers. More recently, Labour has dominated northern cities and the Conservatives have won the rural south with similarly huge margins.
What is new is how big cities – especially their cores – are once again expanding and, in doing so, taking on a clearer liberal identity. Cities is where Britain’s open and cosmopolitan outlook is most apparent. But politics has so far failed to catch up. Read more
George Packer has written a fascinating profile of Angela Merkel. As well as revealing the German chancellor’s views on Vladimir Putin, and explaining her cool decision-making process, the New Yorker writer includes this quote from Stefan Reinecke of the left-wing newspaper Die Tageszeitung about Ms Merkel’s views on welfare:
“Half an hour into every speech she gives, when everyone has fallen asleep, she says three things. She says Europe has just seven per cent of the world’s people, twenty-five per cent of the economic output, but fifty per cent of the social welfare—and we have to change this.”
It often seems that there are only two types of voices in the debate on immigration. One rails against all immigrants and how they hurt the economy and the British way of life, whatever that may be. The other, in effect, mansplains, by persistently and condescendingly asserting facts about the benefits of immigration to the UK.
This leaves a large moderate majority of the country without a voice, according to an important new research report by British Future, a think tank dedicated to better understand of how immigration affects the country. Sixty-one per cent of people it polled have a mixed, moderate view of immigration; only about a third of Britons are absolutists. (The remaining share presumably say they don’t have an opinion.) Read more
If opinion polls prove accurate, on Thursday the UK Independence party will win its second-ever by-election – and its second in two months. Victory in Rochester and Strood – whose demographics are less amenable to a Ukip win than Clacton, which the party won in October – would be its latest hefty thwack to Britain’s mainstream political parties. It would lead Labour and Conservative members of parliament to call for their parties to change position on immigration, based on the assumption that Ukip’s policies are behind its success in the polls.
This is a superficial reading of why Ukip and other populist parties are gaining support across Europe. Contrary to what they or Jeremy Clarkson may say, party leaders have been talking a lot about immigration. They have changed their policies. And yet Ukip marches on. Something more profound is happening in politics in the UK. For a deep and prophetic analysis of what is going on, turn to Peter Mair, an Irish political scientist who died in 2011. Ruling The Void, his last and latest book, is a terse and cogent explanation of “the hollowing of western democracy”. Read more
The question raised by Labour’s intervention – and the various Conservative announcements, past, present and future – is ‘where does this end?’ Curbing migrants’ access to condiments, the Paddington Bear movie, Cafe Nero loyalty cards? Contrary to what politicians seem to think, there is no reluctance among Britons to talk about immigration – quite the opposite. The Labour and Conservative parties have talked a lot about migration. They’ve incrementally become tougher on EU migrants’ access to benefits. And has it curbed the rise of Ukip? It doesn’t seem so. Read more
Welfare, migration and Britain’s membership of the EU – three areas of policy that are unlikely to prompt cool thinking. Throw them together, as in the question of which benefits EU migrants should be entitled to, and you have a recipe for opacity.
On Tuesday, a European Court of Justice ruling cleared a few things up. It could – could – make for more comprehensible policy in an area that has been full of confusion, empty rhetoric, and public anger. It will also encourage the prime minister to think he can go further in restricting access to some benefits for some EU nationals, a move he is reportedly considering. This is not because the ruling changed EU law but because it clarified the law, implying that, broadly, the approach successive UK governments have taken is legal.
The Parisian arriving in London by train alights at a resplendent station. St Pancras, and the adjacent King’s Cross, make Gare du Nord look like a provincial hub. The surrounding area, once a ramshackle collection of properties, is gleaming with new hotels, offices and prime accommodation. It is a clear sign of how London’s economic geography has changed in the 21st century. The inner city has developed rapidly. Poverty is moving to the outskirts of the capital. As its core grows faster than its periphery, London is becoming more like Paris. Read more
What do the data below tell us about Britain?
The table is taken from A Portrait of Modern Britain, a report published on Tuesday by Policy Exchange, a think tank. It presents the answers of respondents from the six biggest ethnic groups in the UK to the question how would they describe their national identity given the following options: English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish, British and Other (respondents were asked to identify what they meant by Other.)
The data, taken from the 2011 census, suggest that only about 14 per cent of whites report a “British only” identity. Respondents were allowed to list more than one identity but the figure only rises to a quarter when a dual British identity is included. Sixty-four per cent, however, say that they have an English-only identity. Read more
Statistics released on Wednesday by the Higher Education Funding Council for England show that the number of overseas students studying at English universities has declined for the first time in 30 years. The data should raise concerns about the openness of the UK to the rest of the world. It is hard to win a “global race” if fewer people want to start on your track.
The chart below shows the number of overseas full-time undergraduate students entering an English university each year since 2005-6. Students from the rest of the EU are represented by the red bars and non-EU (“international”) students by the blue bars. The figures between the bars show annual percentage growth. Read more
On Thursday, the government published its needlessly controversial report that reviews the impact of migration on the UK labour market.
In a post yesterday, I argued that the alleged worry about publishing the new document derives from how Home Secretary Theresa May used a January 2012 report from the independent Migration Advisory Committee. The MAC report was replete with caveats and qualifications, a necessary feature of empirical analysis about migration.
Thursday’s report supports the MAC findings – not the use of the findings but the findings themselves. Read more
Newsnight brings more support for this telling chart about immigration:
Britons want immigration reduced, though they are not as universally or as rabidly concerned about it as conservative tabloid newspapers would have us believe. At the same time, Britons do not trust the government to meet the Tories’ target for reducing net migration. Little wonder. The whole debate is marred by exaggerations and broken commitments that engender more cynicism. This makes politicians keener to appear tough … and to jump on anything that smells like supporting evidence.
This is what can happen when a politician sets a target without thinking about whether it has the power to meet it, never mind whether it is a good idea:
What do Britons really think about immigration? The subject is rarely away from the news, including the truth-promising BBC. But I find it hard to untangle the fabric of hysteria.
In recent report, Ipsos-Mori, a polling firm, assembles a lot of data about attitudes to immigration. It provides a clear yet nuanced account of public opinion. Below, I have selected the 20 charts I found most telling about Britain and immigration. Read more
One of the assumptions politicians seem to make about migration is that promises to be tough and that they Share Your Concern will mollify public opinion. However, if anything, they can provoke public antipathy, according to pollsters. This is surely even more the case when policies are not seen to be working.
I worry about a vicious circle: public say they’re angry at immigration –> politicians say they’re doing something –> public gets worked up –> policy doesn’t or cannot work –> public gets even more angry and thinks it is being lied to. (Or something like that. There is probably a point when policy wonks point out the aggregate gains to migration.) Read more
One of the many popular myths about immigration is that politicians ignore the issue. On the contrary, they cannot talk enough about how they Share Your Concerns. In this morning’s FT, David Cameron Shares His Concern in a 1000 word op-ed. It has been met with the predictable fiery reactions from all sides of the debate. Read more
The news of three women held captive in south London for 30 years is a horrific reminder of the existence of modern slavery. That one woman reportedly spent her whole life as a slave suggests a trauma hitherto imaginable only via fiction. And that she was a UK citizen – the other two women were Irish and Malaysian – is a sign that the common perception of human trafficking as only an immigration issue needs updating. Modern slavery is a crime that can take place exclusively in one country. Read more
An independent Scotland would have to dramatically cut public spending or raise taxes, according to a report out today from the Institute for Fiscal Studies. As ever in the McPanglossian world of the Scottish referendum, the No side is saying this new evidence is further proof of the need for union, while the Yes camp is arguing that this is precisely why Scotland needs autonomy. Read more