Re-assessing the immigration debate

The Oxford Dictionary defines immigration as “the action of coming to live permanently in a foreign country”.  This carries neither positive nor negative  connotations; it is simply a dispassionate description of the action of relocating. However, in a political sense immigration has become associated with the alleged negative impact of people relocating. We would do well to start any debate by respecting the real meaning of the word.

Far too much of the immigration debate is rhetoric aimed at stoking fears.  There is not enough focus on properly assessing the motivations behind immigration or the benefits which come from it. Following recent strong UKIP polling, the three main UK parties have sought to harden their lines. Some of the policies are good, but they are often wrapped up in hostile words which play to concerns rather than the reality.

It is reasonable that we should deem those who come to the country purely to claim benefits to be unfairly using the system. This behaviour should be prevented. However, I think the arguments on this aspect can overstate the problem and there are some hard numbers to back this up. A study by the National Institute for Economic and Social Research found that migrants living in the UK are proportionately less likely to claim benefits than the population as a whole. Any abuse of the benefits system should of course be tackled, but that is a separate matter from immigration, as we also need to prevent wrongful claims from British-born residents.

At this point it is worth thinking about the basic macro-economic model of state funding. Tax raised from productive economic activity is received by the Exchequer and redistributed through public services, including welfare. Interestingly, when considering migration from other European Union countries,  it appears from the Department  for Work and Pensions’ own estimated figures that only 6.6% of working-age migrants  claimed Job Seekers Allowance or similar work-related benefits in 2012. In fact, a study by University College London found that EU migration had resulted in a net benefit to the Exchequer in every year since 2004. Not only are EU migrants paying for their own use of state-run services, they are paying towards services for the rest of us too.

Perhaps the welfare state does enhance the attractiveness of Britain to some extent. But this is not because it offers a lazy option; rather it exists as a safety net so that if the career-building move to the UK goes wrong, then there is a chance to keep food on the table while the next opportunity is pursued. It is part of an overall package, along with a relatively strong and free economy, which makes Britain a good place for people to follow their aspirations. We should remember the greatest story of immigrant success saw people attracted to the United States not by benefits but by free market opportunity.

There seems to be broad acceptance that if highly-skilled people come to the UK to fill much needed roles, they should be welcomed. So the real debate centres on our approach to those who enter the UK without skills, but with a desire to integrate and a strong work ethic. They might, for example, feel that they can access the training they need to pursue a career, and have more job opportunities in the free market society than they may have had in their former country. These people are coming to the UK with a drive to work hard and the benefits if they succeed will not just be personal to them but will be good for all of us, either through the provision of new services or through increased tax-take which then funds public services.

Any increase in the population, whether domestic or from abroad, has its challenges. But if carefully managed, there is scope to extend the reach of services and community infrastructure just as we have done while the UK grew to its current population of 70 million.

There was a time when talking about immigration carried the fear of being viewed as xenophobic.  That was unhelpful. So too is the politicised language which features in the current debate.

As a nation we need the following aspects to the fore in any real discussion of immigration:

• Valid statistics and not newspaper headlines
• Considering what we mean when, not unreasonably, asking incomers to integrate into UK society, and ensuring those requests are achievable for migrants
• Appreciation that the next immigrant may be a doctor; but even if they are not, they may be the IT expert who sets up the hospital record system or the builder who helps build the new wing of the hospital.

We should be proud to live in a country that offers the kind of opportunities which attract migrants. Those who come in should respect the UK through seeking to mix beyond communities dominated by other migrants.  That requires a good level of spoken English or, at least, a commitment to learn the language. In exchange, we Brits should re-assess the words we currently choose when discussing immigration and to take a balanced view of the overall situation.

Could Big Data be the new Localism?

Big Data definition from Gartner:

“Big data is high-volume, high-velocity and high-variety information assets that demand cost-effective, innovative forms of information processing for enhanced insight and decision-making.”

Localism was a cross-cutting theme of the Conservative manifesto in 2010 and many of the components were factored into the coalition agreement. A Localism Act defined some of the new rights, but the theory of localism was not limited to just the one piece of legislation. Among the aspects of localism  included in current policy are:

• Free Schools
• Police and Crime Commissioners
• Directly-Elected Mayor referenda
• Community Right to Challenge (to run public services)
• Community Right to Bid (to protect community assets)
• Neighbourhood Planning

The principle in each case is about moving decision-making closer to the people. Where it has been a matter of the community taking the lead, there have been encouraging signs:

• Oxford United fans used Community Right to Bid to help protect their stadium
• Upper Eden voters backed the first Neighbourhood Plan in the country with a respectable turnout of over 33%

The turnout at the latter would have been very welcome at the Police and Crime Commissioner elections, where a far smaller proportion of people headed to the ballot box. Similarly, the referenda in the ten largest cities in England, without an existing elected Mayor, resulted in only Bristol opting for the leadership model as the remaining nine rejected the opportunity.

If the principle of devolving power from Westminster to people is popular it seems the creation of elected roles is not. Personally, I think this is a shame as I do see directly-elected mayors as a great way to reinvigorate local government and give people a more direct say on how cities and shires are run. It may seem fanciful after the poor turnout in November but if the Police and Crime Commissioners are seen to be a success then it may be that we will see further commissioner roles created. Perhaps an elected Health Commissioner or a Waste Commissioner to run refuse and recycling services. The theory could be used in many circumstances to increase public participation in decision-making. However, and this is a big “however”, right now, there is no public interest in creating more directly elected roles.

I don’t believe that the low turnout for the Police Commissioner elections was due to people not taking an interest in how policing was run in their area, but rather that they were not convinced that an elected official was the best way to move forward.

If people are to be empowered they need information. Modern technology has enabled people to scrutinise decisions like never before, but not all organisations have yet opened up to this opportunity to “show the taxpayer the books”. They should. There is no hiding place and when it comes to spending taxpayers money that is just the way it should be.

During my Police Commissioner campaign I cited the difference between my approach and that of my opponents as the level of raw data I would make public, rather than relying on press releases. The same principle should run through democratic society. A recent article in The Economist raised concerns at the lack of statistics in policy making. Those statistics can, however, do more than just inform Government policy making they can enhance public scrutiny and drive debate in the country. Government at all tiers should embrace big data, publish as much as practicable and allow people  to debate and discuss their own priorities based on the raw statistics. This will lead to a more informed electorate and a more pragmatic political debate which avoids scaremongering and focuses on the facts. It is a form of empowering the people, in just the way that the principle of localism has set out to do. If people are not prepared to vote for more politicians, they might be more keen to see the data for themselves and take a direct role in decision-making.

NB. Some of the policies referenced above relate to England only

Gwent Chief Constable steps down

Last night the South Wales Argus broke the news that Carmel Napier, Chief Constable of Gwent Police, had decided to step down. As part of their coverage the Argus has been running a rolling blog of reaction to the news.

Labour politicians appear to be of one mind, or more likely one central press briefing. They cite disagreements between the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Chief Constable over crime statistics. In addition, they take a swipe at the Commissioner role itself – presumably, they’d have been quieter had their candidate won. This week the Labour Party announced plans to abolish the publicly accountable, directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners. The reaction from Labour appears more focused on attacking the role of Commissioner rather than focusing on the long service of a senior officer.

I cannot comment on the relationship between the Commissioner and the Chief Constable. However, it is the job of the Commissioner to challenge the force and to hold them to account. While the Commissioner and Chief Constable should have a constructive professional relationship, it should not be an unnecessarily cosy one. The Commissioner is there to represent the public and not as an extension of the police.

Carmel Napier retires after a hugely impressive career. She took specific roles at a national level in counter-terrorism and tackling domestic violence. As Chief in Gwent she oversaw very impressive improvements in crime detection and prevention.

A final comment, I would hope that the current Deputy Chief Constable, Jeff Farrar, applies for the role. I was very impressed when I met with him.

Update: BBC Wales covered the story including a comment from William Graham AM, Conservative,  in which he rightly paid tribute to the Chief Constable.

Charity Clarity

Charitable organisations do an enormous amount of good work in often terrible conditions. It is great that so many people take the opportunity to donate money to them.

With so many important causes being highlighted how can one identify which charity to give to? Perhaps, the answer lies in legislating for greater clarity as to exactly where the donation money goes and how it will be used.

Is a donation to an anti-poverty charity putting food on the table, or providing support services, or putting press releases into newspapers or something else related to the topic?

There is no reason why charitable giving should not be used for all of the above reasons, but with a crowded field of charitable organisations more transparency about how money is being spent would be helpful to donors.

At the same time charities should be upfront about their funding. Recently one charity spokesperson was interviewed on Radio Wales and they set about attacking the UK Government while stating the Welsh Government were “on their side”. A look at the Charity Commission records demonstrated that the Welsh Government had provided over £600,000 in funding in the past two years – something which surely should be acknowledged if such public support of a Government is to be declared. Interestingly, the issue they were raising was one in which the statistics clearly demonstrate a vastly stronger performance from the UK Government (albeit limited to England) than their Welsh counterparts.

People should be free to choose to support which ever charities they see fit, but they should have plenty of information about how their donation will be spent. Charities must be clear about where their funding comes from and avoid making political statements without declaring any reasonable potential conflict of interest.

In recent years, larger charities have become far more effective at marketing their issue and the now act in a corporate manner. In the same way that customers will rebel against a business that does not live up to their expectations, charities need to realise that providing good information to donors is vital not just as good practice but also for building a long term relationship with that supporter.

Could people power save Chartist mural?

Yesterday evening a long running campaign to preserve the Chartist mural adjacent to John Frost Square took a particularly heated twist as the @SaveNewportArt twitter feed challenged Paul Flynn MP (Newport West, Labour) about the proposed removal of the mural. A snapshot of the debate is below:

It would be a huge shame to see the mural disappear, but let’s be rational about this situation too. There are a number of problems with retaining it or moving it:

• The redevelopment of the city centre to include the Friars Walk development is hugely important we can not afford further delay. Retention of the mural in the current site would threaten the redevelopment.
• When constructed in 1979 the mural was not designed with future relocation in mind, it is a huge task to relocate the artwork and the estimated cost is £200,000. If it is moved, this should be a future-proofed display
• I’m not shy when it comes to criticising Labour-run Newport City Council. They have spent money they didn’t need to on the council itself while reducing funding to cultural projects in the city. However, it is still the case that £200,000 is a large sum of money at a time when budgets are stretched.
• SaveNewportArt have reported that the earlier redevelopment proposal for John Frost Square had an artwork allowance of £250,000. The newer proposals are not on quite the same scale, nor is the economy in the same shape and while one would expect Queensbury Real Estate to set aside a sum for art, it would be unlikely to match the earlier figure.
• The Welsh Government could theoretically offer to help, after all they found £52 million of taxpayers money down the back of a Cardiff Bay sofa to nationalise an airport without providing a business plan, but there is no indication that help is forthcoming.

I don’t believe that the council want to see the mural lost, nor do I imagine that is the outcome that Queensbury would like to see, but it comes down to simple mathematics.

The good news is there might just be another way which also uses simple mathematics.

The debate thus far has focussed on whether public money should be spent and how much it is reasonable to expect a developer to spend. Chartism was a great movement, one which set us on the path to the democracy we enjoy Today. It was about power of individual people to change things for the better. It might be a tough sell for me to completely compare the social civic development platform Spacehive as being quite as influential as the Chartists, but there might just be one or two parallels and it could offer a new way forward for the mural. Certainly, it is also all about people power.

Spacehive brings together individuals and organisations who each make donations to fund civic projects in the UK. It is a private enterprise and does take a cut, but the structure it offers may appeal to those seeking to relocate the mural. It could be that the people of Newport could save a part of their city’s heritage. With a population of 145,700 currently in Newport and many more ex-pats who retain an interest in the city, raising £200,000 would be tough going but possible. One would also hope that the retailers planning to move to Friar’s Walk would see the benefit in making larger corporate donations to the cause. A recent development of a new community centre in Glyncoch mixed public sector and private donations to achieve their aim. Support from local media would almost certainly be required to boost the profile of the fundraising.

Perhaps were this route to be followed all those who donate could have their names displayed next to the relocated mural. People power may once again be the answer.

I think the campaigners who have sought to save the mural have made an excellent case thus far and it would be wrong for me to tread on their toes, but I’ll share this idea with them and see whether it does offer an alternative way forward.

Welsh football success (in English leagues)

Across the Welsh media you will hear how great a year it has been for Welsh football. The evidence for this claim is strong:

• Swansea City enjoyed a comfortable second season in the Premier League and won the League Cup;
• Cardiff City will join them in the Premier League next season after dominating the Championship;
• Newport County return to the football league for the first time since the late 80s;
• Wrexham won the FA Trophy.

All four clubs are Welsh sides succeeding in the English league and cup system. The reason for Newport’s exile by the Football Association of Wales in the 90s was a refusal to join the League of Wales (now Welsh Premier). At the time eight clubs refused to leave the English pyramid, most eventually gave way until only Newport County and Colwyn Bay remained as rebels.

Twenty one years after the League of Wales launched it is clear that Newport County made the right decision to stay in the English leagues. Barry Town, at the time a fellow rebel, have been in free fall in the Welsh structure after a short lived spell dominating the League of Wales. This season they failed to complete their fixtures. Llanelli FC’s attempt to go professional fell apart this season. The Welsh Premier clubs continue to make a minor impact at best in the European competitions, often knocked out before the domestic season even kicks off and it is hard to see that those clubs who joined the League of Wales have gained a great deal from doing so. Surely, all would happily swap places with Newport.

My aim in writing this article is not to condemn the Welsh Premier clubs, but to suggest that we should take a long hard look at whether the structure has been good for Welsh football. The evidence that it has been is far less convincing than that for the glorious season for Welsh clubs in the English leagues.