Long grass helps hide government's immigration problems

There’s a crucial line in the government’s immigration white paper which admits its preferred options – a minimum salary threshold and high skill demands – would hit the economy. 

On page 111, in a rare passage that exposes the benefits of freedom of movement, the document says that by imposing a ‘salary threshold and skills threshold…. that GDP is likely to be lower than it would have been under free movement’. The government is pursuing a policy which it knows is likely to make all UK inhabitants financially worse off.

Apparently, despite this cost and the criticism coming from all sides, freedom of movement is still worth dumping.

The government sees immigration as one of its trump cards. It believes that taking a tough stance on the matter wins it votes. They have made the judgement that it is worth all the negative headlines, the repeated and very vocal concerns from business especially over the salary threshold just to appear robust.

Throughout her time in government Theresa May has stubbornly resisted any attempt to soften the policy. That it has failed year after year is of no consequence to her.

But, what actually has been promised?

The current cap on the number of skilled workers such as doctors or engineers will be scrapped. 

Low skilled workers will continue to be allowed in for a year until 2025, in an attempt to soften the blow for industries that rely on cheap labour.

The government says it wants its new system phased in from 2021. Surely this is highly improbable; I cannot remember the last time a major and complicated logistical project, which will undoubtedly require new IT and data provisions was delivered either on time or on budget.

Bizarrely, the government also cannot decide whether or not Mrs May’s never achieved target of reducing net migration annually to the tens of thousands is still in place. The Prime Minister insists it is but the Home Secretary has repeatedly refused to endorse it preferring instead to say net migration will come down to sustainable levels. It may well prove that sustainable levels are not too dissimilar from current levels.

The key aspect here is the government is clearly severely divided over a minimum salary threshold of £30,000. Several ministers, reportedly led by chancellor Philip Hammond, are opposed to the cap, thinking it far too high and they have the backing of business. The home secretary likes to frame the policy around being skill based, but an awful lot of people with skills earn under £30,000.

Rather than resolve the matter, it has been punted into the long grass, by promising a consultation. Doesn’t the long grass hide a lot of things these days?

It is this division that has delayed the White Paper so drastically; it was supposed to be published in the summer of 2017. Clearly, ministers were keen to get it published as soon as possible, partly to come before the meaningful vote takes place on Theresa May’s Brexit deal, but with the Brexit clock ticking, demands for it were deafening.

Even as late as yesterday, it was unclear if it would emerge today. It was only confirmed by an email from the Home Office at 7.33pm last night and the trail, with embargoed comments from Sajid Javid didn’t arrive until in my inbox until 7.51pm.

When I interviewed the home secretary a few months ago, Mr Javid described leaving the European Union as a ‘unique, once in a generation opportunity, to completely redesign our immigration system’. He added: ‘I’m in a privileged position to be able to do that.’

What has been produced so far, however, is little more than a wish list. With the fate of Brexit, and all its variables and implications, still unknown, this has the benefit of inbuilt pragmatism and flexibility – ‘sustainable levels’ can mean almost anything after all. The promise of stricter – and lower – immigration remains a political ploy to please Conservative voters; in reality, it may prove to be a mirage.

Details of the government's white paper on immigration can be found here

Jurassic Park's bridge

At times, as this long, tumultuous, year finally winds down, it can appear as though the Brexit debacle is engulfing everything. When one emerges briefly from behind the sofa, barely anything seems to have escaped its touch.

It is pleasing, therefore, to see a piece of news emerge that is not only entirely different but also a rare positive. After months of campaigning, the Friends of Crystal Palace Dinosaurs have secured the funds  needed to proceed with trying to install a bridge in Crystal Palace Park to enable them to maintain and celebrate the Victorian masterpieces.

Slash, with top hat

More than 600 people – many just local supporters – backed the plan, contributing to the more than £70,000 required to make the plan a reality. Mayor of London Sadiq Khan gave it a kick start with £30,000, Arup another £9,000 and the architects behind the bridge, Tonkin Liu, at least £2,500. It was assisted by an extra sprinkling of stardust from Guns N Roses guitarist Slash, who fondly remembers visiting them as a child. Taking a break from his world tour with Axl, Slash donated one of his trade mark top hats to an online auction as well as making a donation, attracting much needed wider attention to the scheme in its final few weeks. I'm sad, and a bit happy, to report that, even for a Guns N Roses nut, the hat proved to be beyond my price range.

That said, it was a close-run thing, only hitting its target in the last few hours of the appeal. And now, those behind the project have a job to do persuading some critics that its construction is for the best, amid fears it could damage wild life or attract vandalism.

The dinosaurs are of global significance. Designed by Benjamin Waterhouse Hawkins, the 30-odd statues were the first attempt in the world to create full-scale models of what dinosaurs would have looked like when they ruled the planet. While mainly sited on an island in a lake in Crystal Palace Park, proud locals are not hesitant to boast they’re also in Penge.

Despite some of the models being almost comically inaccurate – demonstrating how our knowledge of the creatures’ physical appearance was at such a formative stage 160-years-ago – the dinosaurs are Grade I listed, the highest status available. But, exposed to the elements, the dinosaurs do need constant maintenance and the last cold winter had, according to the Friends, ‘a disastrous effect upon the sculptures’.

It is understandable that some might worry the creation of a bridge might prove invasive and upset the wildlife. The lakes are well laid out, providing a lovely spot around which to walk and it is teeming with birds. But it isn’t a site of special scientific interest or a rare bird reserve. Pedaloes and rowing boats can be hired, people gather and feed the perennially aggressive Canada geese; it’s worth asking whether the wildlife would be there at all if it were not for the dinosaurs.

Those behind the project also insist the bridge will be secure from vandals and that the only visits allowed will be for works and particular tours. Overall, the local community is very supportive of the plan but hopefully those who have concerns will be assured about its benefits. It would be such a shame if it was derailed through misunderstandings, especially as I know that it has been tremendously difficult to get anything done to improve and restore Crystal Palace Park. 

This is the ambition and plan of the Friends of Crystal Palace Dinosaurs

And, apart from anything else, if the bridge opens on time next summer it will hopefully provide a delightful spot to escape from the daily nonsense that dominates the news these days.


Postscript

I would love to track down a copy of this book; Dinosaurs Don't Die, by Ann Coates. First published in 1970, the cheapest copy I have managed to find costs Aus$95. It appears to feature the Crystal Palace dinosaurs coming alive. Sadly, I doubt I'll source a copy for my two daughters this Christmas.