Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

General Election 2015: Let's take a more positive, balanced view on immigration

We wish the debate could be conducted in a different frame; with a more generous cast of mind

Editorial
Saturday 25 April 2015 14:12 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Once upon a time, the opponents of immigration complained that the subject was discussed too little. That seems like another age. Two elections ago, the Conservatives fought a campaign in which immigration was a big theme, with the questionable slogan “Are you thinking what we’re thinking?”. Since the last election, the rise of the UK Independence Party and David Cameron’s promise of a referendum on our membership of the European Union have ensured that immigration and the free movement of EU workers have been prominent subjects in public debate.

Now the balance has tilted too far the other way. Last week, YouGov published an opinion poll that asked people which issues had been discussed too much or too little in the election campaign. Top of the list of questions being discussed too much was “Scottish devolution or independence”, named by 44 per cent of respondents. But the second most over-discussed question, named by 28 per cent, was immigration.

Partly, we suspect that this finding reflects the dismay of those who feel the debate has been too dominated by those who take a fearful, mean-minded and backward-looking view. So we welcome the energy and clarity with which Chuka Umunna, Labour’s business spokesman, rejects that approach in his interview with The Independent on Sunday. He is right to say that Ukip and its leader, Nigel Farage, have “a problem with race”. And he makes the interesting point that it is not particularly complimentary to describe this country as “tolerant” because it implies “there’s something negative that we’re having to put up with”.

We recognise, as does Mr Umunna, that immigration is an important subject, and that large movements of people do cause problems. But we do wish that the debate could be conducted in a different frame. First, with a more generous cast of mind towards those who seek a better life, and, second, with a more realistic appreciation of how hard it is to restrict the movement of people.


Are you undecided about who to vote for on 7 May? Are you confused about what the parties stand for and what they are offering? Take this interactive quiz to help you decide who to vote for...

Click here to launch


On the one hand, Ukip suggests that simply by leaving the EU Britain would be able to close the country to the outside world. On the other, much of the discussion about the drowning of would-be immigrants in the Mediterranean seems to assume that there is an unstoppable tide of people approaching the shores of our neighbours from the teeming continent of Africa.

The truth is, as ever, more complicated. If we left the EU, it would still be hard to restrict people coming here, not least because we would realise that it was in our interest that many of them did so. It is notable, for example, that the Australian-style points system that Ukip admires so much lets more people into Australia per head of population than we do into Britain now.

And, as Joan Smith writes today, dealing with the failure of the Libyan state, which is one of the main factors leading to the increase in attempted sea crossings, is a big problem to which politicians have tended to bring simplistic and short-lived solutions. We do not know what all the answers are, but we are sure that they involve the countries of the EU working more closely together rather than splitting apart.

In the end, there are many important subjects in this election. That YouGov survey found that 40 per cent thought that immigration is not being discussed enough. But even higher numbers said that other subjects are being discussed too little. Europe, pensions and education all scored higher than immigration, and the environment scored highest of all. This newspaper is proud of its record in trying to redress that balance.

Let us take a more positive, balanced view of immigration by all means, but let us not forget that other important subjects risk going unheard over the noisy and negative immigration debate.


The Independent has got together with May2015.com to produce a poll of polls that produces the most up-to-date data in as close to real time as is possible.

Click the buttons below to explore how the main parties' fortunes have changed:

All data, polls and graphics are courtesy of May2015.com. Click through for daily analysis, in-depth features and all the data you need. (All historical data used is provided by UK Polling Report)

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in