This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/19/white-paper-migrants-windrush-dehumanising-rights
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| This white paper doesn’t ‘change the debate’ It treats migrants as things | This white paper doesn’t ‘change the debate’ It treats migrants as things |
| (30 days later) | |
| They claimed it would change. As the news of the so-called Windrush generation dominated the headlines in April this year, the same politicians who had helped create the architecture that plunged people into such uncertainty – along with those who had made Britain a hostile environment in all but name in previous decades – promised to change the “debate” on migration. They lamented how people were being treated and the kind of country the UK had “become” (a quick glance at the history books would show them just how misguided it is to think that this wasn’t the country the UK had always been, for some people). Eight months on, as the government releases its white paper on immigration, that change is difficult to find. | They claimed it would change. As the news of the so-called Windrush generation dominated the headlines in April this year, the same politicians who had helped create the architecture that plunged people into such uncertainty – along with those who had made Britain a hostile environment in all but name in previous decades – promised to change the “debate” on migration. They lamented how people were being treated and the kind of country the UK had “become” (a quick glance at the history books would show them just how misguided it is to think that this wasn’t the country the UK had always been, for some people). Eight months on, as the government releases its white paper on immigration, that change is difficult to find. |
| Talking about people as little more than things and advocating punitive bordering practices is a constant in UK history | Talking about people as little more than things and advocating punitive bordering practices is a constant in UK history |
| One of Theresa May’s Brexit indelible red lines – you know, one of the ones still left standing – is on immigration. No matter how beleaguered she is, or how unconvincing the Brexit speech, you can rest assured she’ll find time to repeatedly stress that freedom of movement will end. As the country hurtles towards a potentially disastrous no-deal Brexit, one of the prime minister’s top priorities still seems be reducing immigration. | One of Theresa May’s Brexit indelible red lines – you know, one of the ones still left standing – is on immigration. No matter how beleaguered she is, or how unconvincing the Brexit speech, you can rest assured she’ll find time to repeatedly stress that freedom of movement will end. As the country hurtles towards a potentially disastrous no-deal Brexit, one of the prime minister’s top priorities still seems be reducing immigration. |
| Now we have an idea of what the UK’s post-Brexit immigration system might look like. After months of delay the white paper outlines a plan where, at least as a temporary measure, so-called low-skilled workers from the EU will have to apply for 12-month visas and with no access to state support or right to extend their stay. | Now we have an idea of what the UK’s post-Brexit immigration system might look like. After months of delay the white paper outlines a plan where, at least as a temporary measure, so-called low-skilled workers from the EU will have to apply for 12-month visas and with no access to state support or right to extend their stay. |
| There’s also the possibility that a minimum salary requirement might be extended to EU migrants (still subject to consultation), which at the moment is £30,000 for everyone else. Whether the government is clinging to its net migration target or not, these plans spell fewer rights, more exploitation and more dehumanisation – and some of the most pernicious parts of the hostile environment remaining in place. This is the extension of a system that’s based on how much money you earn and how your “skills” are classified: continuing to treat people like nothing more than pound signs. | There’s also the possibility that a minimum salary requirement might be extended to EU migrants (still subject to consultation), which at the moment is £30,000 for everyone else. Whether the government is clinging to its net migration target or not, these plans spell fewer rights, more exploitation and more dehumanisation – and some of the most pernicious parts of the hostile environment remaining in place. This is the extension of a system that’s based on how much money you earn and how your “skills” are classified: continuing to treat people like nothing more than pound signs. |
| The government likes to dress up its approach as if it’s about fairness – that vague, positive-sounding word politicians love to use when they’re talking about migration, and which seems to cover up all manner of sins. “Instead of an immigration systems based on where a person comes from,” May wrote in her ‘letter to the nation’, “we will build one based on the skills and talents a person has to offer.” | The government likes to dress up its approach as if it’s about fairness – that vague, positive-sounding word politicians love to use when they’re talking about migration, and which seems to cover up all manner of sins. “Instead of an immigration systems based on where a person comes from,” May wrote in her ‘letter to the nation’, “we will build one based on the skills and talents a person has to offer.” |
| It’s not fair to have a system based on where someone comes from, but we already have that for non-EU migrants, who aren’t treated the same as one another. To remedy that, the UK could give everyone the same terms as EU citizens. Instead what we’re seeing is a levelling down of rights: giving more people short-term visas, deciding how long they can stay in the country depending on their job or only letting people into a country if they’ve the “right” skills and the “right” amount of money in their pocket. | It’s not fair to have a system based on where someone comes from, but we already have that for non-EU migrants, who aren’t treated the same as one another. To remedy that, the UK could give everyone the same terms as EU citizens. Instead what we’re seeing is a levelling down of rights: giving more people short-term visas, deciding how long they can stay in the country depending on their job or only letting people into a country if they’ve the “right” skills and the “right” amount of money in their pocket. |
| Post-Brexit immigration policy exposes May's weakened position | Post-Brexit immigration policy exposes May's weakened position |
| Talking about human beings as little more than things – simply because of where they were born – and advocating punitive border practices is a constant you find across recent UK history, and it’s something that crosses the Brexit divide. | Talking about human beings as little more than things – simply because of where they were born – and advocating punitive border practices is a constant you find across recent UK history, and it’s something that crosses the Brexit divide. |
| Former Labour home secretaries Alan Johnson and Charles Clarke comforted people in the Guardian that the UK could stay in the EU and “control” immigration more “effectively”. It didn’t matter that people’s views on immigration are ill-informed or based on misinformation, they said: what mattered was that they had them, and they should be acted upon. Tony Blair, who once stood in front of the white cliffs of Dover as prime minister to promise he would implement a system of “strict” immigration controls, has touted a similar line. | Former Labour home secretaries Alan Johnson and Charles Clarke comforted people in the Guardian that the UK could stay in the EU and “control” immigration more “effectively”. It didn’t matter that people’s views on immigration are ill-informed or based on misinformation, they said: what mattered was that they had them, and they should be acted upon. Tony Blair, who once stood in front of the white cliffs of Dover as prime minister to promise he would implement a system of “strict” immigration controls, has touted a similar line. |
| Migrants, a label largely reserved for people racialised as “other”, are marked out as unwanted or constructed as threats to the nation, jobs or public service. Politicians believe that if they claim these lies as truths and then take the “right” action (which usually amounts to fewer rights for people coming into the country), they will deliver what people want – as if they haven’t said that a million times over, and as if for decades there haven’t been successive, often racist, immigration acts to address peoples’ “legitimate concerns”. They do the same thing over and over again and they expect different results. In the meantime peoples’ lives are ruined. | Migrants, a label largely reserved for people racialised as “other”, are marked out as unwanted or constructed as threats to the nation, jobs or public service. Politicians believe that if they claim these lies as truths and then take the “right” action (which usually amounts to fewer rights for people coming into the country), they will deliver what people want – as if they haven’t said that a million times over, and as if for decades there haven’t been successive, often racist, immigration acts to address peoples’ “legitimate concerns”. They do the same thing over and over again and they expect different results. In the meantime peoples’ lives are ruined. |
| The long-term political fallout from Windrush was never going to be a fitting response to the size of the issue politicians have helped create with their consistent demonisation and scapegoating of migrants. Amber Rudd, who resigned as home secretary over her mishandling of the fallout from Windrush, has floated back into the cabinet – that should serve as a reminder that beyond bad headlines, there was no real accountability for what happened. | The long-term political fallout from Windrush was never going to be a fitting response to the size of the issue politicians have helped create with their consistent demonisation and scapegoating of migrants. Amber Rudd, who resigned as home secretary over her mishandling of the fallout from Windrush, has floated back into the cabinet – that should serve as a reminder that beyond bad headlines, there was no real accountability for what happened. |
| It’s not that “nothing has changed” since Windrush; it’s that not enough has. Immigration is not, and has never been, a problem; the real issue is that people were told it was, and that there’s very little sign of that changing any time soon. | It’s not that “nothing has changed” since Windrush; it’s that not enough has. Immigration is not, and has never been, a problem; the real issue is that people were told it was, and that there’s very little sign of that changing any time soon. |
| • Maya Goodfellow is a writer, and researcher, and a columnist for Media Diversified and LabourList | • Maya Goodfellow is a writer, and researcher, and a columnist for Media Diversified and LabourList |
| Immigration and asylum | Immigration and asylum |
| Opinion | Opinion |
| Windrush scandal | Windrush scandal |
| Commonwealth immigration | Commonwealth immigration |
| Conservatives | Conservatives |
| comment | comment |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |
Previous version
1
Next version