Immigration has long been a defining and divisive issue in UK politics. With every election cycle, the debate resurfaces-often with heightened rhetoric, bold pledges, and policy overhauls. In recent months, both the Labour and Conservative parties have unveiled sweeping reforms aimed at tightening the UK’s immigration system, promising to “take back control” and reduce net migration. Yet, the persistent use of immigration as a political tool-the so-called “immigration card”-raises profound concerns for the nation’s social cohesion, economic health, and democratic discourse. Here’s why UK politicians and parties should stop playing the immigration card.
The Political Weaponization of Immigration
Immigration has become a convenient lever for political parties seeking to mobilize support or distract from other pressing issues. Both Labour and the Conservatives have, in recent years, competed over who can cut net migration levels most drastically, often framing migrants as either burdens or threats to national identity and public services
Electoral Calculations: The rise of the Reform UK party and its success in recent local elections is a direct result of public frustration over immigration, prompting mainstream parties to respond with ever-tougher rhetoric and policies.
Short-term Gains, Long-term Harms: While hardline stances may yield short-term political gains, they often fail to deliver on promises, as seen with the Conservatives’ “stop the boats” campaign and previous pledges to reduce net migration to “tens of thousands”-targets that proved unachievable and eroded public trust.
Distorting the Realities of Migration
The political narrative around immigration often distorts the facts and nuances of migration flows and their impacts.
Misleading Use of Net Migration Figures: Net migration is a blunt instrument that tells us little about who is arriving, their skills, or their contributions. It also fluctuates with global events, policy changes, and economic needs, making it a poor measure for setting rigid targets.
Economic Realities: Despite claims that high immigration suppresses wages or overwhelms public services, evidence shows that migrants fill critical shortages-especially in health and care sectors-and contribute significantly to the economy. The UK’s recent record-high net migration was driven by demand for workers in these essential sectors, not by uncontrolled or “open borders” policies.
Integration and Language: While new policies emphasize English proficiency and integration, research indicates that most migrants already value and achieve language skills, and that those with limited English are a small minority. Overstating integration challenges fuels unnecessary suspicion and exclusion.
Social Cohesion and the Risks of Othering
The persistent framing of immigration as a threat undermines social cohesion and fosters division.
Demonization and Stigma: Political rhetoric that casts migrants as burdens or outsiders leads to their “otherisation,” reducing recognition and fostering intergroup tensions6. This stigmatisation does not protect social cohesion; rather, it breeds mistrust and polarisation.
Multiculturalism Under Attack: The UK’s approach has increasingly shifted from celebrating diversity to emphasizing sameness and assimilation, with multiculturalism becoming a taboo in political discourse6. Social psychology research shows that solidarity and positive identities develop through recognition of diversity, not its denial.
The “Island of Strangers” Paradox: Ironically, policies justified as necessary to prevent the UK from becoming “an island of strangers” may actually accelerate that outcome by making newcomers feel unwelcome and by deepening divides between communities.
The Electoral Backlash and Policy Failures
History shows that playing the immigration card is not just ethically questionable-it is also politically risky and often counterproductive.
Failed Promises Breed Disillusionment: The Conservatives’ repeated failure to deliver on tough immigration pledges has not reassured sceptical voters; instead, it has fuelled the rise of more radical parties and eroded trust in mainstream politics.
Changing Voter Coalitions: Post-Brexit, Labour’s support base has become more pro-immigration, while the most anti-immigration voters are concentrated in the Conservative base7. Attempts to outflank rivals on immigration now risk alienating the broader electorate, including swing voters for whom immigration is not a top concern.
Policy Gridlock and Unintended Consequences: Draconian measures, such as closing care worker visas or raising skill thresholds, risk harming sectors that depend on migrant labour and creating legislative gridlock, as seen with the “stop the boats” campaign
The Need for Honest, Evidence-Based Debate
The UK needs a migration system that is fair, effective, and responsive to real needs-not one shaped by political gamesmanship.
Recognizing Contributions: Migrants are not just numbers; they are workers, students, family members, and future citizens. They contribute to the UK’s economic growth, cultural richness, and global competitiveness.
Addressing Skills and Demographics: An aging population and chronic skills shortages mean that controlled, well-managed migration is not just desirable but necessary for the UK’s prosperity
Learning from Past Mistakes: Overpromising and underdelivering on immigration control has repeatedly backfired, undermining public confidence and empowering more extreme voices.
Recommendations for a New Approach
To move beyond the politics of fear and division, UK politicians and parties should:
Stop Using Immigration as a Wedge Issue: Focus on policies that address real challenges-such as skills training, housing, and public service investment-without scapegoating migrants.
Promote Honest Communication: Acknowledge both the benefits and challenges of migration, and avoid simplistic or inflammatory language that distorts public understanding
Foster Integration and Inclusion: Support programs that help newcomers settle and thrive, while also investing in community cohesion and mutual recognition
Set Realistic, Evidence-Based Policies: Base migration targets and rules on robust data, labour market needs, and the UK’s international obligations-not on arbitrary numbers or populist demands
Conclusion
The UK’s future as a cohesive, prosperous, and open society depends on ending the cycle of political point-scoring on immigration. Playing the immigration card may offer short-term political rewards, but it carries long-term costs: eroding trust, deepening divisions, and undermining the very cohesion politicians claim to defend. It is time for a more honest, humane, and pragmatic approach-one that recognizes migration as a vital part of Britain’s story and future, not a perpetual crisis to be exploited at the ballot box.
Barrister Magazine
