It comes following an interview with Sky's political editor Beth Rigby earlier today in which the PM repeatedly failed to commit to reducing net migration to below 226,00 per year - a Conservative manifesto pledge at the 2019 election - saying only said he was "committed to bringing down the levels of net migration that I've inherited."īut speaking to reporters moments ago, a Downing Street spokesperson pushed back, saying: " said specifically 'I won't put a number on it'. You may think we don't need to talk about migration.Ī Downing Street spokesperson has said the prime minister will not "put a number" on his ambition to bring down net migration figures, saying that he is working "incredibly closely" with the home secretary to reduce numbers. The broader government take is more muddled though, with other cabinet ministers talking up the economic and educational benefits of more migration.Īs others have noted, the long tail of border decisions made by Tony Blair arguably set the stage for the Brexit vote. Home Secretary Suella Braverman seems to have a clear-eyed answer to these questions, even if her position appears - in part anyway - distinctly unrealistic. One on level - can sustained migration at a higher than previously expected rate be politically justified when you have an overloaded NHS, stretched public services and a shortage of housing?Īnd on another - is the government saying that increasing migration - even in the short term - is part of their solution to NHS staffing shortages, broader job vacancies and sluggish growth? Quite aside from the straight forward risk of electoral damage that may be done by a party breaking manifesto pledges and letting numbers rise, there is perhaps a more deep-seated danger here that speaks to how migration is being handled as a modern policy issue. The OBR clearly doesn't set policy, but the forecast shows that even baseline assumptions are higher than the 2019 level that the Tories at the time promised to cut and in a different ballpark to the David Cameron-era pledge of getting numbers down to the tens of thousands. In March, the government's own forecaster - the Office for Budget Responsibility - estimated that net migration will stabilise at around 245,000 from 2026-2027. On this, it's likely the peaks we are currently seeing will eventually drop as the numbers of people coming from Ukraine and Hong Kong tail off and some of the larger-than-normal groups of students who moved here after COVID leave the country.īut there's also political peril in the longer-term outlook.
The first risk for the prime minister is next week's migration data being so high it forces the issue up the public and political agenda again and leads to a perception that the government has either lost control or doesn't care about having control. This doesn't mean Rishi Sunak is on safe political territory though. So for now anyway, the government can just about maintain that it has control of what's going on. That's because the rise is largely being driven by events in Ukraine and Hong Kong as well as students (who potentially delayed travel because of COVID restrictions) and skilled workers (especially NHS staff). The prime minister's explanation for recent increases is global factors. The data is clear that most people think migration is too high and want ministers to bring it down.īut it's also noticeable that while small boat crossings have cut through with voters, the current record level of legal migration has not been met with anywhere near the amount of outrage that you might have expected just a decade ago.Īmong Tory MPs too, there has been a degree of agitation from the right of the party - but the concern is not nearly as widespread as it has been for illegal migration. That's not to say presiding over a massive increase in migration - as appears to be taking place now - is a popular move for the government. Then - somewhere around 2016 - polling seemed to show attitudes shifting and softening. For many years, it seemed like we spoke about little else.
0 kommentar(er)
