Labour shouldn’t target the target - but the tools Tories have to use to “bring down net migration”. Thread. 1/ theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/n…
Javid says he “aims to reduce net migration”. But how? And what harm / good will Javid’s tools do to British society and individuals? 2/
Tool 1: rules & red-tape keeping family from joining Britain’s resident spouses, parents, children.
What’s the cost of disrupting - even destroying - those families’ lives? What’s the benefit? 3/
What’s the cost of disrupting - even destroying - those families’ lives? What’s the benefit? 3/
Tool 2: hostile environment. Supposed to discourage people from ignoring immigration rules.
But does it? Or does it mainly harm people who’ve lost their papers or made a mistake? Do deliberate rule-breakers care - or do they just increase the underground economy? 4/
But does it? Or does it mainly harm people who’ve lost their papers or made a mistake? Do deliberate rule-breakers care - or do they just increase the underground economy? 4/
Tool 3: encouraging *emigration*. Remember, Javid’s aim is cutting *net* migration. So his target is met by British citizens & residents leaving UK.
Is that a good thing? Why? 5/
Is that a good thing? Why? 5/
British Gov policy is not to talk about these issues. In 8 years of Tory immigration ministers, they’ve avoided research or discussion of the harms & costs of their policies - and whether they actually change behavior for the better. 6/
If the Tories ever publish an immigration white paper (remember how they never published their “British Bill of Rights”?) it should show the costs & benefits of their ideas - and how they say those ideas will change the UK for the better. 7/7
