The United Kingdom’s reckless immigration policies, which we now know were intentionally designed to bring “diversity” to that country for ideological purposes, have brought both the Labour Party and the Conservative Party to their knees, and opened the door to what looks like a Reform victory in the next election. Perhaps too late, Labour is now reversing course, as Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announces a drastic change in refugee policy:
Refugees arriving in the UK will now be granted only temporary status as Shabana Mahmood begins to implement radical immigration reforms despite a mounting backlash from Labour MPs.
The home secretary announced that plans to end Britain’s decades-old approach to permanent protection for refugees would come into effect immediately. …
Anyone who enters the UK from Monday will have their refugee status reviewed every 30 months and will be required to return home once their country is deemed safe. It marks the most significant change to Britain’s refugee laws since the Second World War.
So refugee status will be temporary, with a strong presumption that at some point refugees will return home. The new rules will be applied retroactively:
In an interview with The Times, Mahmood made clear that she would press ahead with the plans on indefinite leave to remain and confirmed that the changes would apply retrospectively to those already in the UK.
Immigration is one of many policy areas where faux scientific claims have shored up bad ideas. Mahmood is addressing this problem, too:
Mahmood also used her interview to say official economic forecasts must reflect the costs of immigration, as well as the benefits.
At present, the methodology used by the Office for Budget Responsibility, Britain’s fiscal watchdog, to estimate the impact of immigration to the UK assumes each migrant is a net contributor to the national finances. It calculates that each 100,000 additional migrants lowers government borrowing by £10 billion.
That is sheer fantasy. If it were true, Britain or any other country could make itself rich by opening the doors to millions of third-world immigrants. I don’t suppose anyone imagines that would work.
Mahmood said: “Depending on how you forecast and what you’re measuring, of course it could look like it’s always positive. We know from the MAC’s work on fiscal contribution of workers in this country, the picture is much more mixed.
“So they’ve been able to show that over a lifetime, skilled workers are making a positive contribution to the country in fiscal terms. But those who are lower skilled and those who come as dependants over the course of their lifetime make a negative fiscal contribution rather than positive.”
That seems blindingly obvious, yet Mahmood’s reforms are unpopular with many Labour MPs. Happily, they won’t be given a vote:
Mahmood had announced her intention to replace permanent refugee status with 30-month reviews in November. It had been expected that the change would require lengthy legislation but Mahmood will instead implement the policy through a change in immigration rules on Thursday.
