Category Archives: Britain

Britain, Government, Politics, Society

The UK Government needs a clearer policy on migration

IMMIGRATION

Theresa May follows her predecessor by setting a specifically vague target on net migration levels. But how will the targets on immigration be met?

As Theresa May seeks a mandate from the electorate on June 8 to proceed with Brexit negotiations under her own terms, there are certain and specific issues that should be central to her case. Immigration policy is clearly one of them.

But in keeping and in line with much of the Prime Minister’s campaigning so far, the political debate on such issues fall short on substance. Certainly, it’s apt to ask whether Conservatives can agree on what the detail of their immigration policy should be. Yet, when pressed on the matter, Home Secretary Amber Rudd, could only say that the party’s manifesto “will not be identical” to the last two election campaigns. Hardly enlightening given that one of the central tenets prior to the Brexit vote was people’s concerns over migration. Mrs May insists there will be no back-tracking, and the target will be to reduce net immigration to the “tens of thousands”, a policy enshrined previously by David Cameron. If that’s suitably vague to speak in such terms, we must question whether it is credible? In 2016, net migration stood at 273,000, and it is some 20 years since that figure was below 100,000. What interpretation are we to apply when the Prime Minister repeats the mantra of old by insisting that net migration be reduced to the “tens of thousands”? An issue of confidence might yet arise.

In all of this, however, we should be careful of assuming that the EU is to blame for the UK’s high net migration. That would be a mistake. Migration from the EU accounts for less than half of the total figure, at 44 per cent. The other 56 per cent, from the rest of the world, is already within the control of the British government.

A difficult dilemma arises. The suggestion being made is that immigrants who shore up our workforce will be permitted entry if they are important to the economy, such as filling the skills-gap in industries such as health and IT. But those who come here to work account for half of the annual influx. Reducing the immigration figure by enough to get anywhere near the target (whether notional or not) will be tough if an exception is to be made for the majority of migrants.

The government could halt the flow of students into the UK, but by doing so could harm our universities and cut off a supply of skilled workers who could help to drive economic growth if they stay on. Or, the number of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants could also be tackled. The most recent figures, however, show that just over 12,000 people were granted asylum over a 12-month period. Even if all of them were to be removed at a stroke that would make minimal difference to the headline figures.

When published, the Conservative manifesto could yet contain a coherent strategy on immigration. But, on the evidence of recent years, when net migration targets have been repeatedly missed, we are entitled to doubt whatever the document says will be done or if the targets will ever be achieved.

Standard
Britain, Economic, Government, Politics, Society

Tax policy and the hidden truths

BRITAIN

Tax Return

For various reasons it has suited both the Labour and Conservative parties not to have tax policy turned into a central issue in the election campaign.

Under a Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn a significant rise in public spending would be envisaged. The party leadership, too, has made no secret of its intention to raise taxes on the better-off – on those, as the saying goes, ‘who have the broader shoulders’. But, the definition of broad shoulder has, for some time now, been left conveniently undefined, while the resort to higher borrowing, the mantra of any socialist party, is unlikely to assuage voters after the calamitous borrowing and debt of recent years that has necessitated such a lengthy period of austerity and spending constraint.

The Conservative Party have also been markedly reluctant to be drawn into the discussion on tax, having long symbolised itself as the party of low tax. While it may claim to have lower spending commitments than Labour this does not necessarily mean that taxes will not rise. Chancellor Philip Hammond, for one, has made known his desire for greater financial flexibility and for the party to drop the ‘tax lock’ pledge. Ultimately, this begs the question of what Conservative tax policy is now.

Policies of taxation are especially sensitive at this point in time given the background of a slowing economy and forecasts of a deepening downturn. There have been signs over the last few days that the election battle – largely focused till now on the personalities of the respective leaders – is swinging back towards more practical and tangible issues.

Both parties have pledged not to increase the 20 per cent rate of VAT until 2022. As matters stand, though, the total tax burden is set to rise to its highest level in 30 years – even were the tax lock to stay in place. The March Budget stipulated that the tax burden will rise to 37.2 per cent of national income by 2019-20. And with overall government debt approaching 90 per cent of national income, voters deserve more informative answers on future tax policy than the rhetoric currently on offer.

The likelihood is that continuing low growth for the foreseeable future and a worryingly high level of government debt will act as a powerful restraint for whoever wins the election: any increase in government spending will have to be found from improved productivity and efficiency gains. That is not a particularly comfortable message to portray for any party aspiring to be the next government. It is, however, an unavoidable truth whatever the political rhetoric may claim.

Standard
Britain, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

Britain will be entitled to walk away without a deal with the EU

BREXIT

brexit

When the 27 EU leaders met to review their Brexit talks guidelines last Friday, it took them less than a minute to approve the draft. They then burst into open applause – the grandstanding almost akin to a Soviet-era meeting of Warsaw Pact comrades. The guidelines are provocative and blatantly breach the UK’s own red lines. Britain, in turn, must spell out that it is prepared to walk away if it is unsatisfied with the deal that the talks produce.

The EU’s mask of collegiality and high ideals is slipping. As it does, so the decision of the British voters to walk away last year looks even wiser. Britons should be aware that walking away is a valid and legal option that the UK is entitled to exercise if talks with the EU irretrievably break down.

Extracts from Yanis Varoufakis’s memoir of the 2015 Greek crisis depict an EU where the Germans dominate and the Union, they insist, must be preserved at all costs. He claims that Emmanuel Macron, probably France’s next president, described the EU’s deal for Greece as a latter-day “Versailles Treaty”. Angela Merkel apparently overheard and barred Mr Macron from talks.

But Greece is not Britain: a great deal more for the Union is at stake this time around given the UK’s historic position of generating handsome contributions to EU coffers in Brussels.

Theresa May attracted shrill criticism for pointing out that continental security might be affected by the course of negotiations, yet the EU has shamelessly put absolutely everything on the table: the cost of the so-called divorce, from which they are determined to wring every penny, Gibraltar, UK bases in Cyprus and, in a concession to the French, an effort to stop any financial deregulatory drive by Britain.

The UK cannot accept a settlement that would, say, tie its hands on tax and regulation after it leaves the EU: the country voted to get out in part to liberate its economy. And there are matters on the table that have nothing to do with the EU – such as the future of Ireland. Britain therefore has to make it absolutely clear that it will not be drawn into diplomatic traps or be landed with bills and commitments that reduce its status and undermine the raison d’être behind Brexit.

The EU needs to be reminded that it relies so much on the UK’s markets, intelligence and military that it would be foolish to act so bullishly over the terms of settlement. It is in everyone’s interests to separate amicably and agree as soon as possible on a new trade arrangement. That is what Britain should aim for. If the Europeans will not play ball, however, they must be in no doubt that Britain has the strength and will to go it alone.

Brexit | Some of The European Union’s draft negotiation principles

 . The EU wishes to have the United Kingdom as a close partner in the future

. Preserving the integrity of the Single Market means that the UK will not be able to participate on a sector by sector basis

. The EU “four freedoms” are indivisible and there can be no cherry-picking

. A non-member of the Union cannot have the same rights and benefits as a member

. The EU will negotiate as a bloc, rather than 27 individual countries, so as not to undercut the position of the Union

. Brexit negotiations will take place as a single package. They will only be considered settled when all individual items are agreed

. The United Kingdom and European Union must agree on their future relationship, but these discussions can only take place when there is sufficient clarity on the process of the UK’s withdrawal from the Union

. The Union is open to a transitional membership agreement, but this must be very clearly defined, time-limited and dependent on the UK maintaining EU membership obligations

. Negotiations must be completed by 29 March 2019

. No part of these negotiations can affect Gibraltar without an agreement between the United Kingdom and Spain

Standard