The crude points-based immigration system will come back to bite the government where it hurts

Boris Johnson faced no Tory backlash by giving millions of Hong Kong residents visa-free access to Britain this week. Such tolerance should now be extended across the board, writes Andrew Grice

Not for the first time, the prime minister seems to be fighting an old battle (EPA)

When the public inquiry into the government’s handling of coronavirus is held, timing will be everything. Ministers intend to order a “learning lessons” investigation in the hope it will not turn into a “blame game”. I wonder why?

Their list of mistakes is lengthening, on protective equipment, testing and care homes. Then there’s the question of timing. Was the government too slow to impose the lockdown? Did it act too fast in easing it? Should face coverings have been compulsory on public transport long before 15 June?

Should 14-day quarantine for people arriving in the UK have been introduced in March rather than next Monday?

Many Conservative MPs describe the quarantine plan as “the right policy at the wrong time” because it goes against the current desire to lift lockdown restrictions and revive the economy. Priti Patel, the home secretary, failed to win cabinet backing for the quarantine policy in March. It was brought back last month by Dominic Cummings, who knew that tough border controls are popular. According to YouGov, eight out of 10 people support the proposed £1,000 fines if people fail to self-isolate on arriving in the country, while only 11 per cent oppose the idea. Backing is higher among working-class voters (83 per cent) than the middle or upper classes (79 per cent).

So the policy appealed to Boris Johnson, keen to retain the working-class voters who gave him his huge majority last December, and to find some “good news” to announce amid growing criticism of the government’s response to the pandemic.

This is the same Johnson who declared that Global Britain would be “open for business” after Brexit. Even Tory loyalists admit privately the quarantine plan reeks of British exceptionalism: the country with the worst death rate in Europe will force arrivals from nations with lower rates to self-isolate. The government’s scientific advisers were not asked to rubber-stamp the policy; ministers knew they believe quarantine would work best when the UK’s infection rate was low, and applied to countries with higher rates. In other words, we are doing it the wrong way round.

Tory MPs, worried about the damage to the already struggling tourism and aviation sectors, are convinced quarantine will end when it is reviewed after three weeks. So it seems the new system is being set up to achieve some “good” headlines, and will then either be scrapped, riddled with exemptions, not properly enforced or superseded by “air bridges” to allow quarantine-free travel with certain countries – but only if they judge the UK’s infection rate low enough. This is not border force, but a border farce.

Theresa May, not known for being soft on immigration, told MPs the plan would “close Britain off from the rest of the world ... International air travel is necessary for trade, without it there is no global Britain.” Ouch.

Nor for the first time, Johnson is re-fighting the last war. The public as a whole has moved on since the 2016 referendum. Many believe the government has “taken back control” of borders after Brexit, so there is no need for the PM to constantly prove it. Immigration has tumbled down the public’s list of most important issues. Attitudes towards migrants are softening further as people recognise their vital role in providing health and social care, and that is nonsense to brand them as “low skilled”.

The government should amend its crude, unfair salary-based points system accordingly. The Immigration Bill should bear the date 2016 rather than 2020. Although there will be an “NHS visa”, foreign social care workers will fall foul of the £25,600 salary threshold. Ministers would be wise to perform a swift U-turn on this before it is forced on them by Tory and public opinion.

Johnson’s instincts on immigration might be liberal but old attitudes inside the government die hard. Patel has continued May’s hard line at the Home Office, with Johnson’s approval. Jonathan Portes, professor of economics at King’s College London, told a Britain in a Changing Europe webinar the Home Office culture ranges from unwelcoming to xenophobic. “Rolling that back is not going to be easy,” he said.

Yet there was a glimmer of hope this week. To his credit, Johnson surprisingly offered almost 3 million Hong Kong residents visa-free access to Britain and the chance to obtain citizenship following China’s threat to impose a national security law.

A bold, liberal policy didn’t hurt, did it? There was no public or Tory backlash against what could be a landmark change in UK immigration policy. Such flexibility and tolerance should now be extended across the board to give the country the liberal immigration system the economy and public services will need in the post-coronavirus, post-Brexit world.