Will we ever control immigration?

Too many people are coming to the UK illegally, our border controls can’t stop them and we are too lax and generous once they get here.

For modern Britain, this is the latest attempt to solve a very complex but relatively new problem. In the 1980s the world was dominated by oppressive regimes with tight borders who usually shot people if they tried to leave. The Soviet Union being the largest example.

Net migration (immigration minus emigration) to the UK averaged 4,000 people between 1980 and 1993. In 1984, 4,389 people claimed asylum. By contrast net migration was 944,000 in 2023 and in 2024 there were 108,100 asylum claims. In the 1990s as regimes collapsed into clusters of smaller states and civil wars, combined with rapid advances in technology and communications spurred mass migration.

The UK’s basic and small scale immigration and asylum system has been struggling ever since to keep up with bursts of booming asylum applications from people fleeing brutal conflicts or upheaval in new breakaway states.

As asylum applications and illegal immigration increased the Labour Government in the 2000s introduced what it called tough measures to deter arrivals with tighter controls in French ports and fines for drivers found with illegals on board.

At the same time it was under immense pressure to house and support asylum applicants and their families while they waited for the creaking system to decide their cases. The Home Office has never fully resolved the tension at the heart of its dual role of protecting our borders and policing illegal immigrants while at the same time managing a mini housing and benefits system.

The border control crackdown eventually had a long tail of unintended consequences. Illegal immigration became too hard for plucky individuals, opening a space for international organised criminals to use their networks and muscle to become the go to agents for illegal crossings extending their control as people built up huge debts and were coerced into modern slavery.

As we examine the latest Government plans it is important to recall the shocking past failures to assess the impact of changes to the immigration system.

The Home Office estimated that net migration from Eastern European countries following their 2004 entry to the EU would be 5,000 to 13,000. But it quickly reached 100,000 with the total wave estimated at up to 1.5m people. A system fixated with cracking down on bogus asylum seekers was arguably looking in the wrong place to deal with the kind of large scale immigration that would generate public unease.

The Public Accounts Committee report on the so-called Boriswave in July said the Home Office made ‘changes to the Skilled Worker Visa route without a full assessment of the risks or potential impacts.’ In four years 1.2m people arrived.

The hard truth is that the flow of people across the world and the stories that drive them to a fantasy new home are mostly beyond our control. It is true that the absence of a well run biometric identity system allows substantial illegal working and for illegal immigrants and visa overstayers to live under the radar.

But the enduring impact of British soft power, so important to our economy, is also a magnet for migrants who are willing to spend big or face danger to get here.

They come because they speak some English and know the value of them and their children speaking it fluently. They believe they can work or study in our high quality education institutions and think this is a fair country with effective public services and a police force that doesn’t arbitrarily arrest people and beat them up.

Much of this is true and most of us would never want it to change.

As the Economist reported this week, attempting to copy the Danish model, by severely limiting the support available to new arrivals both legal and illegal and delaying permanent immigration status and citizenship for many years, risks undermining something that Britain is very good at - integration and encouraging a strong devotion to Britishness.

We should beware the long tail of this unintended consequence which we could deeply regret in the years ahead.

____________________

James Sorene is a commentator and writer.

LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.

To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk