Erica Consterdine
Immigration on the move
Immigration is a subject that sparks impassioned debate from Westminster to the local pub. It’s frequently voted one of the biggest issues facing UK society, and 70% of Britons have stated that they believe there are too many immigrants living and working in the UK(1). It’s also an area that’s seen some radical shifts in public policy in recent times.
Sussex-based research
Erica Consterdine, a third year Politics PhD student, has been examining that evolution, focusing on the way immigration policy changed from 1990 to 2010. The key question she has set out to answer is how Britain has been able to move from the days of restrictive borders through the relaxing of rules under New Labour before the return to tighter controls championed by the Coalition.
Understanding what has changed…
Erica’s research looks at how the arrival of New Labour signalled a dramatic departure from the restrictive policies that had gone before. In their place, economic immigration was radically liberalised. Work permits were made more freely available, new working migration schemes were introduced and the decision was taken to allow citizens of the A8 countries (those joining the EU in 2004) to work in the UK. In the process, Britain went from being described as having ‘an aspiration for zero immigration’(2) into a fully-fledged ‘migration state’(3).
…and why
Erica has used archival information and interviewed politicians, civil servants and interest groups in her quest to identify the triggers behind this fundamental shift. She has identified a number of contributing factors, from organised interests and new ideas to the behaviour of institutions. She argues that Labour’s foreign policy had a key part to play. So too did its view of globalisation that painted immigration as both inevitable and desirable. Other factors included changes in the policy-making process and the way that the culture of Whitehall institutions adapts to new political landscapes.
Erica’s research has established that these elements came together to create the kind of political environment that can foster such a radical re-think on a key area of public policy.
(1) Ipsos Mori, 2011
(2) Freeman, 1994, p334
(3) Hollifield, 2004
Rebecca Partos, ESRC-funded DPhil, Department of Politics
‘Campaign[ing] in poetry, govern[ing] in prose?’ The development of post-war Conservative Party immigration policy in government and in opposition
In a globalising world, the issue of immigration continues to be divisive, stirring up debate about identity, citizenship and rights. While scholars have examined immigration flows (‘push-pull’ factors, among others) and there has been some attempt to identify the forces which influence policy-making, few have explained the continuing developments in immigration policy within a critical historical context.
The policies that determine who is allowed ‘in’ and who is kept ‘out’ are designed by governments, which generally consist of mainstream political actors rather than the extremist politicians or populist media platforms that many researchers choose to focus on. In order to really understand immigration policy, and what drives it in a democracy, the focus must be on mainstream political parties.
This project examines the drivers behind the development of the UK Conservative Party’s post-war immigration policy. The Tories are of particular interest given the dynamics of immigration for a mainstream, centre-right party, in which immigration policy is their ‘territory’ and a seemingly obvious vote-gainer, and yet consistently tough rhetoric may not be the best option: a more hard-line stance will satisfy core voters, but risks alienating more moderate supporters and undermining party cohesion.
This research considers the extent to which policy is influenced by periods in government and periods in opposition. Some scholars have argued that immigration policy is tough in rhetoric when the party is in opposition, but more moderate in action when the party is in office. If this is the case, there is a need for research on these influences (for example interest groups, institutions and legislation) which constrain policy in this way.
Over time, Britain’s immigration policy has moved towards the more restrictive, not the more liberal – it continues to filter the movement of people between wanted and unwanted forms of migration – yet it has become increasingly open to the free movement of services, commodities and money. This project will use a constructivist theoretical framework to explain how this transition has occurred as well as to consider the extent to which influences within and without the Conservative Party have impacted on the development of policy.
Until now, political scientists in the comparative tradition have mostly focused on the impact of extremist parties or on the administrative side of the equation (both at the European and at the national level), possibly because of the lack of collaboration and overlap between political scientists working on immigration and those working on parties. This research project will thus make an invaluable – and possibly pioneering – intellectual contribution.