
Photo by Daniel Schludi on Unsplash
It’s the hot topic of the moment, of course, and for something so important the level of public debate on the topic is staggeringly low.
It might help to just set out a basic framework of points that we might like to consider, a key one being that one ought either to “support” or “object to” immigration – it isn’t that type of thing. You can neither have a free-for-all, nor can you turn it off like a tap; neither of those positions is tenable.
It’s not going to get better either. Currently, many migrants are refugees displaced by conflict, but in the future such refugees might be fleeing ever less hospitable homelands, as climate disruption worsens.
We have to be able to have sensible conversations about immigration, informed by fact and not conjecture, or political bias. As with anything, there will be pros and cons and we should, as a society, be able to understand and navigate these.
What are the good bits?
The positives of immigration are economic and cultural. Economic benefits are obvious when you have a ready-made workforce, many of whom arrive at working age, and contribute to our economy, which may not have carried the burden of educating and training them.
They fill labour shortages, consume goods and services, and records indicate that immigrants start businesses at a higher than normal rate, and those arriving with a high level of skills contribute significantly to our capabilities as innovators and global competitors.
Culturally, we get new input, from food to art and language, and customs and ideas.
And the less good bits?
Obviously there are issues, often mostly at a community level, with integration. Some immigrants are reticent to learn our language, adapt to our culture, and prefer to stick to their own.
Resources, such as housing, schooling, and healthcare can become strained by large numbers of immigrants in specific areas, and there can be resentment caused by competition for lower-paid or less skilled work.
Poor public education can lead to the assumption that immigrants are being treated advantageously, or may be here illegally, top the detriment of the local population. Of course, it may indeed be the case that people are here illegally, often trafficked in as cheap labour, and paid off the books by unscrupulous employers.

Photo by Eric Prouzet on Unsplash
How do we deal with it?
The best approach is to look at what other countries do, and how well or poorly those initiatives work.
Point systems and quotas – countries like Canada and Singapore maintan strict controls over the skills that they are looking for, and the quotas of varying skills that they will admit. Typically these differentiate by skills – the higher-skilled you are the more points, and the larger quota. Germany operates a fast-track visa system for in-demand skills.
Settlement and integration – Canada provides government-funded language classes, and cultural integration support. Sweden does a similar thing.
Opportunity – the most attractive option for many immigrants will be eventual citizenship of the country they have chosen to make their home. The possibility of this happening varies widely. Countries like Singapore control it very tightly, others less so, although in recent years many countries have begun to revisit the criteria because of the extreme pressure the immigration systems have experienced.
Tensions – one aspect that is common across most countries, to a greater of lesser extent, is tension. Resentment runs high, political; debate is divisive, and most information being circulated is wrong.
A Code of Best Practice
How about we propose a simple and sensible (I hope!) code of best practice, which will not be set in stone, but will adapt as our requirements change, mostly to attract the skills that we need at a given time.
- Clear and unambiguous criteria – whether points, quotas, earning levels etc. doesn’t matter, but the rules should be the same for all, and should be effectively implemented.
- Skill pathways – perhaps the criteria above can be set for a range of different requirements and skill levels, depending on what we need.
- Integration support – ways to access language and cultural integration, and an obligation to use the support provided.
- Clear opportunities and ‘ground-rules’ – unambiguous rules about dependents, citizenship, and the length of time immigrants can stay in the country, or earn the right to remain permanently.
- Public Information – this is critical. Trustworthy, reliable, and accurate information about the benefits, the problems, and the numbers.
If we are ever going to take the heat out of the immigration issue, we desperately need a higher standard of public information, and we need corrupt politicians to stop lying about the issue for their own gain.