Enough of ‘stop the boats’ – this is how to address the immigration issue

The riots, while profoundly depressing, reveal some uncomfortable things about UK society – here’s how we tackle them, write professors Anand Menon and Jonathan Portes

Any credible strategy by the government needs not just to condemn the rioters but also directly address the ‘root causes’ (Getty)

The events this month have been profoundly depressing. Who can look at the images and clips of rioters across England instigating violence outside immigration centres, burning buildings housing asylum seekers and attacking innocent bystanders while chanting “stop the boats” without feeling utterly hopeless about the state of the country?

These riots have raised many challenging questions about policing, the criminal justice system, and the impact of social media – but they have also opened the possibility of a reset of the immigration debate.

So, when the mess has been swept up, then what? One response is that to change either policy or its presentation would be to cave into violent disorder. Yet it’s not justifying violence to accept that it tells us that something is wrong with our society – as Michael Heseltine did with his report following the Toxteth disturbances of 1981.

Another view is that what’s happening now reflects “legitimate concerns” about immigration which must be addressed. Some of this rhetoric comes uncomfortably close to making excuses for xenophobia and racism. But even when it does not, the real problem with this argument is that it has been tried and has failed. The Sunak government, after all, promised both to “stop the boats” and “ban” various legal migration routes. We’ve seen how this worked out for the Conservatives.

And it would be worse still for Labour. Attempting to appease the vocal minority of the public who prioritise reducing immigration will not win their votes – nothing any Labour government could feasibly do would do that. What it would do is alienate some of Labour’s core supporters and damage the economy and public services, hurting the party with the people who actually voted for it.

Where the “legitimate concerns” crowd aren’t wrong, however, is that the riots do reveal some uncomfortable things about UK society. We rightly pride ourselves on the diversity of our political class; that explicit racism is taboo in public debate here, unlike much of continental Europe; and the UK has overall become steadily less segregated and more integrated over recent decades. The glass is half full.

But the racism and Islamophobia that we’ve seen over the last week, spread by extensive online networks – and with more than a nod and a wink from some politicians and media commentators – shows it’s also half empty. Any credible strategy needs not just to condemn the rioters but also directly address the “root causes”.

What would that look like?

First, ditch clever but undeliverable soundbites that have real world consequences. It should shame Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party that those who were trying to attack asylum seekers were chanting “stop the boats”. Starmer’s “smash the gangs” isn’t in the same category, but the underlying message of attempting to stop boat crossings without specifying how, or indeed whether, the UK will live up to its international obligations risks ending up in the same place.

Equally, politicians need to be crystal clear that those who are driven by desperation to risk their lives crossing the Channel are human and need to be treated as such. Most of those currently in hotels will be recognised as refugees and will remain permanently in the UK. Helping them to integrate – economically and socially – will be good for them, good for taxpayers and good for local communities. The government may want to start a wider debate about the Refugee Convention, and whether it is fit for purpose, but the uncomfortable coexistence of a belief in our inherent generosity of spirit and a desire to turn away those fleeing persecution is unsustainable.

So, too, is rampant dishonesty when it comes to legal immigration. A steady drumbeat of anti-immigration rhetoric – from Gordon Brown’s “British jobs for British workers” to the hostile environment with its “go home” vans, to those mugs, to repeated pledges to bring numbers down has undoubtedly shaped public attitudes. Yet all the while, policymakers implicitly recognised the link between immigration and growth and so the numbers remained high even after we had “taken back control”. Pretty much the worst of all worlds, with immigrants ultimately paying the price.

Tighter migration policy makes it harder both to staff and fund public services, while recent research has highlighted the link between declining public service delivery and support for the populist right. Blaming both immigrants and “elites” becomes much easier in the context of failed public policies, even if that has little if anything to do with immigration. That is the real immigration “doom loop”, both political and economic, that we need to escape.

Beyond immigration policy, there is ample evidence – whether you call it prejudice, Islamophobia or just plain racism – that the UK has a serious problem with anti-Muslim bigotry, with none of the main parties immune. Yes, the UK has a generally successful multiethnic and multicultural democracy. However, to accept that this is a work in progress is not an admission of defeat, still less a concession to the far right.

We don’t need more reports on “community cohesion” or “ethnic disparities”. For the most part, their recommendations have quietly gathered dust. What we need is action, both top-down and more importantly bottom-up, backed by both rhetoric and resources, to make integration work. Just as it was in the 1970s, that will be the most powerful and lasting response to the racists, on our streets and off, who want to tear us apart.

Anand Menon is the director of academic think tank UK in a Changing Europe and professor of European politics and foreign affairs at King’s College London

Jonathan Portes is a senior fellow at UK in a Changing Europe and professor of economics and public policy at King’s College London