TThe events of this month have been deeply depressing. Who can look at the images and clips of rioters across England calling for violence outside immigration centres, burning down asylum seeker buildings and attacking innocent bystanders whilst chanting ‘Stop the boats’ without feeling utter hopelessness about the state of the country?
These riots have raised many difficult questions about policing, the criminal justice system and the influence of social media – but they have also opened up the possibility of a new debate on immigration.
So what happens when the chaos is cleared up? One possible answer is that changing policy or its narrative would be tantamount to giving in to violent unrest. But accepting that violence shows us that there is something wrong with our society does not justify violence – as Michael Heseltine did with his report after the Toxteth riots in 1981.
Another view is that what is happening now reflects “legitimate concerns” about immigration that need to be addressed. Some of this rhetoric comes uncomfortably close to making excuses for xenophobia and racism. But even if that is not the case, the real problem with this argument is that it has been tried and failed. After all, the Sunak government promised to both “stop the boats” and “ban” various legal immigration routes. We have seen how this has worked for the Conservatives.
And it would be worse for Labour. Trying to appease the vocal minority of the population who see reducing immigration as a top priority will not win their votes – nothing a Labour government could do would come close to doing that. What it would do is alienate some of Labour’s core supporters and damage the economy and public services, which would hurt the party with the people who actually voted for it.
What the supporters of “legitimate concerns” are not wrong about, however, is that the riots reveal some unpleasant things about British society. We are rightly proud of the diversity of our political class; that open racism is taboo in public debate here, unlike in much of continental Europe; and that Britain as a whole has become less segregated and more integrated over the past few decades. The glass is half full.
But the racism and Islamophobia we have witnessed over the last week, spread widely online – and met with more than a wink by some politicians and media commentators – shows that this strategy is also half empty. Any credible strategy must not only condemn the rioters, but also tackle the “root causes” directly.
What would that look like?
First, stop using clever but unworkable slogans that have real consequences. Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party should be ashamed that those attempting to attack asylum seekers chanted “Stop the boats”. Starmer’s “Smash the gangs” does not fall into the same category, but the underlying message of stopping boat crossings without specifying how or whether the UK will meet its international obligations risks aiming in the same direction.
Equally, politicians must make it crystal clear that those who risk their lives crossing the Channel out of desperation are human beings and must be treated as such. Most of those currently living in hotels will be recognised as refugees and will stay in the UK permanently. Helping them integrate – economically and socially – will benefit them, taxpayers and local communities. The Government may want to encourage a wider debate about the Refugee Convention and its advisability, but the uncomfortable coexistence of belief in our innate generosity and the desire to turn away those fleeing persecution is untenable.
The same goes for rampant dishonesty when it comes to legal immigration. A steady drumbeat of anti-immigration rhetoric – from Gordon Brown’s “British jobs for British workers” to the hostile environment with its “Go Home” vans, those grimaces, to repeated promises to reduce immigration numbers – has undoubtedly shaped public opinion. Yet politicians implicitly recognised the link between immigration and growth all along, and so the numbers have remained high even after we “took back control”. Pretty much the worst of all, with immigrants ultimately paying the price.
Tighter immigration policies make it harder to staff and fund public services, and recent research has shown the link between declining public service performance and support for the populist right. In the context of failed public policies, it becomes much easier to blame both immigrants and “elites,” even when it has little or nothing to do with immigration. This is the real political and economic “vicious spiral” of immigration that we must get out of.
Beyond immigration policy, there is ample evidence – whether you call it prejudice, Islamophobia or simply racism – that Britain has a serious problem with anti-Muslim bigotry, and none of the major parties are immune. Yes, Britain has, by and large, a successful multi-ethnic and multicultural democracy. But accepting that this is a work in progress is not an admission of defeat, and certainly not a concession to the far right.
We don’t need more reports on “community cohesion” or “ethnic inequalities”. Their recommendations have largely fallen flat. What we need is top-down and, more importantly, bottom-up action, backed by both rhetoric and resources, to make integration work. Just as in the 1970s, this will be the strongest and most lasting response to the racists who want to tear us apart on and off our streets.
Anand Menon is director of the academic think tank “UK in a Changing Europe” and professor of European politics and foreign policy at King’s College London.
Jonathan Portes is a Senior Fellow at UK in a Changing Europe and Professor of Economics and Public Policy at King’s College London.
