Labour has learned nothing from Tory mistakes on migration

This election campaign has felt from early on like a mere formality, the outcome a foregone conclusion. Even back in November I was writing about Labour's assumed rise to power. By now it’s clear to all that this is Labour’s election to lose.

The most interesting question has become, how will Labour govern? And whether Keir Starmer likes it or not, the other parties still have time to influence that.

This is perhaps nowhere more true than on migration. The far right could easily set the tone and agenda in this area for the next five years. If they’re successful, this might not just be the first Labour government in 14 years. It could also be the last.

Worryingly, the Labour manifesto makes it look like the right is well on its way to victory here. The party is not promising something radically different or radically better. The frame of debate has moved so dramatically to the right that at best we can describe it as slightly less extreme than the alternative. A true bulwark against the far right it is not.

That’s not good enough. If they don’t change course on migration soon it will lead them straight into the same morass that the Conservatives currently find themselves. Always ratcheting up the performative cruelty, never succeeding to do what they’ve promised. Nigel Farage will be delighted.

Luckily, the smaller parties’ manifestos contain some very good ideas that Labour could still adopt as their own – or at least work with the other parties to get over the line. Below I’ve pulled out key points of each party’s immigration policies, scoring them out of 10 for their humanity and workability. Labour would do well to note its low score, and have enough humility to seek to improve it.

There’s still hope.

Labour (Humanity 3 / Workability 3)

Humanity: The simple promise to ‘reduce immigration’ is an arbitrary concession to anti-migrant politics. It isn’t aligned with the party’s focus on economic growth, as a reduction in numbers for its own sake in no way serves the country’s needs. It doesn’t follow any other coherent rationale either. It only plays into dangerous negative narratives about migrants, which have been shown to fuel hate crimes.

There is no mention of reversing Conservative measures that prevent British partners from living with foreign spouses, or of restoring broader family rights, for example to migrant students and care workers. Retaining what the Conservatives broke will continue to unjustly separate families and cause further harm to our university system.

On asylum, the bare minimum is to process asylum claims fairly and scrap the sadistic Rwanda plan. Labour claims it will do this much. But that’s a low bar.

Labour’s position will continue to leave the Channel as the only option for asylum seekers, which means more people seeking protection will die

The party has no plan to address the urgent need for safe routes to access the asylum system. It is instead largely parroting the Conservatives’ “stop the boats” campaign with its “smash the gangs” slogan, and has failed to rule out sending refugees to third countries other than Rwanda. This position will continue to leave the Channel as the only option for asylum seekers, which means – to put it plainly – more people seeking protection will die.

The one glimmer of improvement is Labour’s plans to address workplace exploitation. If applied fairly to migrants without discrimination, it could help address poor conditions and low pay. But given the rest of this manifesto that’s a big ‘if’.

Workability: Overall immigration numbers are already set to fall over the next 12 months, potentially gifting Labour an early win. But it would be a pyrrhic victory, given the UK’s need for immigration and desperate shortages in key sectors. Their proposal for training and skills development for locals is a laudable but long-term ambition. It won’t respond to the immediate shortages of workers and students our public services and economy rely on.

Labour has promised to reform the points-based system, but hasn’t spelled out what it would do in detail. Hopefully it means a serious overhaul of the broken system. Done right they could level the playing field and ensure fair access to dignified work and equal rights. But Labour has been so vague that ‘reform’ could really mean anything. What they will do remains to be seen.

Meanwhile, promises of yet more police operations at the border are not a credible solution for asylum seekers. Arresting some people as smugglers is arguably more doable than the Tories’ promise to stop the boats, but it won’t address any needs or shift any fundamental dynamics. The doability is cancelled out by the futility of the endeavour. Better cooperation to manage access to asylum across the continent is the only viable way forward, and the devil will be in the detail of any deal Labour strikes with the EU.

Conservatives (H1/ W2)

Humanity: The Conservative approach to immigration is to continue bringing in workers while depriving that labour force of their rights, families, and chances to settle in our communities. The party’s proposals treat low-paid migrants as disposable workers, and even extend that classist contempt to Brits if they marry a foreigner.

On asylum, it sticks to the agenda of performative cruelty. They promise flights to Rwanda, even if they breach our international legal obligations, and offer no way out of limbo for asylum seekers reaching us through irregular means. Their manifesto does, however, pay some lip-service to resettling limited numbers of selected refugees.

Workability: Absurdly, the Conservatives promise not only to reduce immigration, but to legislate a cap on numbers that will be reduced further year on year. Anti-migrant sentiment is driving their policy, rather than the interests of workforce, public services, and public finances.

The Conservatives’ unchanged approach to refugees and the UK border will be as unworkable tomorrow as it was yesterday. Their policies have wrought chaos over the past five years and all they promise is more.

There is nothing new or effective that could turn things around here. Only a dead end of increasingly desperate dog whistles.

Lib Dems (H8/ W9)

Humanity: The Liberal Democrats’ first pledge is to scrap the ‘hostile environment’, which is the Home Office’s macro-project of making life unbearable for anyone who cannot easily demonstrate a legal immigration status. The impacts of the hostile environment have been disastrous, making people vulnerable to ‘modern slavery’ and exploitation and empowering slum landlords.

Most famously, the hostile environment helped create the Windrush Scandal, which the Lib Dems pledge to learn lessons from and compensate victims for. This is the first seriously smart and humane policy to emerge from the manifestos so far.

The Lib Dems would also scrap planned increases in minimum salary thresholds for family migration and reduce fees on registering children’s British nationality. Their manifesto promises a more family-friendly immigration system.

It also commits to throwing out the Rwanda plan and repealing legislation that leaves refugees in the UK in limbo, replacing it with a focus on making the asylum system work more effectively to identify and protect people in need, and ending the ban on work for people going through the process. All this would improve wellbeing, allowing refugees to begin to rebuild their lives much sooner.

Workability: The Lib Dems make a serious commitment to safe routes for asylum seekers to reach the UK, the only viable alternative to smugglers’ boats. The party has also promised to negotiate with the EU for a deal to better manage the border. These are long-term approaches that could get tripped up in many ways, but they are certainly possible. And they have the potential to vastly improve the situation at the border.

Other proposals are not only eminently doable, but would also lead to positive outcomes. These include increasing the time for refugees to move on from asylum accommodation when they are recognised, which would have a tangible impact on decreasing homelessness. Addressing the process of immigration for work from the starting point of adjusting salaries and conditions in the UK first, rather than reverse-engineering salaries through immigration caps is sensible and could greatly improve outcomes, especially if accompanied by serious action on minimum labour standards enforcement.

SNP (H8/ W8)

Humanity: The SNP’s manifesto makes it clear that the party seeks to end the demonisation of migrants, emphasising respect for people who come to live, study, and work in Scotland. They would scrap the Rwanda plan and improve conditions for asylum seekers through a better model of safe asylum accommodation, and granting the right to work for asylum seekers.

They also oppose the cruel and counter-productive policy of barring all migrants from accessing state support – a policy called No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF). These measures, beyond practically improving the lives of migrants and refugees, also crucially would help to address the spiral of increasingly dehumanising rhetoric on migration.

Workability: The SNP’s focus is on introducing measures to ensure that Scotland can meet its skills and labour needs by bringing more migrants to key areas of the economy. This pragmatic proposal recognises Scotland’s demographic challenges and places economic realism above arbitrary anti-migrant signalling.

Pragmatism over ideology is the overall theme, although they lose a point for limited detail. Abolishing NRPF, for example, aims to spend money in the short-term to create long term savings. As it stands money is denied to people until they are in destitution, at which point much more expensive emergency support comes into play. Reversing this is sensible and overdue.

Greens (H9/ W8)

Humanity: The Greens promise to end the hostile environment and NRPF, introduce safe pathways for asylum seekers to reach the UK, end immigration detention for administrative purposes, and end extortionate minimum income requirements on family and work visas.

Ending immigration detention unless there is a public safety risk is a hugely positive moral stance. It would also save money and improve the functioning of the system by doing away with the unjustified incarceration of vulnerable individuals who represent no threat to our communities. As a whole, the manifesto represents radical changes to address the cruelty that runs through the system.

Abolishing the Home Office may be the only way to cleanse ourselves of the racism, hostility and ineptitude it has overseen for so long

Workability: The Greens go as far as to advocate dismantling and restructuring the Home Office. The Home Office is dominated by a culture of hostility, rife with incompetence, and driven by a bunker mentality that hampers effective cross-departmental working. Abolishing it may seem drastic, but it may be the only way to cleanse ourselves of the racism, hostility and ineptitude it has overseen for so long.

An overhaul of this magnitude would be a significant undertaking. It’s probably even more difficult than legislating for safe and legal routes, so it loses a point for workability. But, hand on heart, it’s a good idea.

Reform UK (H0/ W0)

Humanity: Reform presents migrants not as human beings but as “essential” or “non-essential” economic units. Neither deserve family rights or the possibility to put down roots and build stable lives with equal rights.

It echoes the failed Conservative promise that anyone entering the country without authorisation will be detained and deported, and goes further by promising to push small boats back to France. Pushbacks are both dangerous and illegal under international law.

This manifesto is built entirely on the demonisation and dehumanisation of migrants. They are Reform UK’s scapegoats for all the country’s problems, and the party uses its need to persecute them as justification for why the rest of us should give up more of our own rights by leaving the European Court of Human Rights.

Workability: Reform’s policies would be a death warrant for the many services that rely on migrant workers to function. They would likely reduce economic growth, guttering the higher education sector among other things, and drive the UK toward further isolation and malaise.

Pushbacks in the Channel would potentially lead to more deaths, as recently seen in Greece. They are also illegal and cannot be pursued without French consent, which is unlikely to be given.

Just as Brexit did not end the need for refugees to seek safety in the UK, nor would leaving the ECHR. This manifesto is nonsense that should only be taken seriously as a threat to democracy and rights in the UK.

Opposition will set the tone

Labour is very likely to form the next government on a strong majority. Their manifesto is deliberately vague, and the real opportunities will come from hashing out greater detail in the months and years to come.

The opposition context in which they do this will have huge importance. Especially in terms of whether a radicalised Tory right and Reform succeed in setting the agenda, or whether parties like the LibDems, Greens and SNP are able to gain a stronger voice to push for their pragmatic and humane alternatives.