Migration Watch UK

“Balanced Migration... is based on a simple principle: that the number of immigrants who are given permission to settle permanently in this country should be kept to approximately the same level as the number of British citizens who are emigrating. We are not seeking to reduce the number of people who come to work here for a few years and return home.”20
“until 1982 there was a net outflow of migrants from Britain. Between 1982 and 1997 average net immigration was about 50,000 a year. It has climbed rapidly since 1997 to reach a peak of 244,000 in 2004. This has now fallen to about 190,000 a year.”21
“Net foreign immigration is officially defined as the number of foreigners arriving in the UK intending to stay for more than a year, minus the number who leave intending to be away for more than a year. In 2006 arrivals reached 510,000 (about one per minute) and 194,000 left; so the net figure was 316,000. This amounts to 0.5% of our population every year, and is 25 times higher than any previous wave of immigration”22
“The following are the main government policies which have contributed to this massive increase in immigration:
• Removal of embarkation controls for EU destinations in 1994 and for the rest of the world in 1998.
• Allowing marriage to be used as a means of immigration from 1997.
• Doubling the number of work permits issued in 2002.2
• Opening the labour market to new EU members without restriction in 2004.
• Opening new immigration routes to the UK through the highly-skilled migrants programme and the graduate work scheme.”23
2006 68% of immigration came from countries outside the EU24
3 sources of illegal immigration (1) failed asylum seekers (2) illegal entry (3) overstayers25
Arguments against amnesty for illegal immigrants (1) would be an incentive (2) expensive to administer (3) would allow them to bring in family (4) unfair to reward illegal behaviour with access to welfare state.26
regarding education, problems of schools with many students who do not have English as a first language.27
NHS: problems (1) immigration outstrips growth of NHS (2) costs with maternity, interpretation and translation (3) tendency to go to A&E where questions about entitlement are not usually asked (4) importing of diseases such as TB and Hepatitis B28
Recognises that immigrants have contributed extensively to the NHS (1/3 of doctors and nurses) but claims that this is no longer necessary, especially with the increase of domesticall trained staff.29
strain upon police, especially through the criminality of immigrants, costs with translation and the issue of traffiking.30
claims that migrants cause problems for community cohesion, and that these concerns are shared by Black and Asian minorities in the UK (quotes statistics to this effect).31
refers to research by a House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs which denied that net immigration resulted in economic benefit for the United Kingdom.32 (1) per capita impact of immigration is small, with the cost of population increase33 (2) reduces the training and apprenticeship amongst native population34 (3) increasing retirement age is the only solution for the pension time-bomb, immigration has little impact.35
points to support from business leaders for controls on migration (but are questions to wishy-washy?)36
claim that immigrants and their descendants will account for 70% of the increase in British population growth.37
claims that by 2009 England will become more crowded than Holland, losing only to Malta.38
points to research that c.40% of the demand for new housing will come from immigration.39

20F Fields & N Soames “Preface” in Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 2–3, 3.
21Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 6.
22Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 7.
23Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 9.
24Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 10.
25Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 15.
26Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 16
27Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 17.
28Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 18.
29Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 18.
30Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 19.
31Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 21.
32Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 23.
33Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 24.
34Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 24.
35Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 25.
36Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 27.
37Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 28.
38Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 30.
39Migrationwatch UK, Balanced Migration, (Deddington: Migrationwatch UK, 2008) 31–32.

Willis

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000016476 StartFragment:0000000804 EndFragment:0000016459
“migrant workers are caught in the crossfire of contemporary capitalism”1
“On the one hand, advanced capitalist economies can’t live without devouring the rich resources of
cheap labour located in, and coming from, the poorer parts of the world. On the other, (so called) advanced capitalist polities find it hard to deal with the consequences of living with strangers.”2
“immigrant workers are essential for prosperity by providing knowledge, skills, an anti-inflationary
labour supply and new job creation, but such people also have needs, they acquire rights and they can upset the sense of entitlement and belonging of those who already reside. As a result, immigration – and low waged non-European immigration in particular – can all too easily become a moral panic”3
claims that current government policy is to exclude the Non-European, non-white, (often undocumented) immigrants, and replace them with white Eastern Europeans.4
“In brief, these measures are designed to institute a hierarchy of immigrant labour, easing access for the highly skilled while closing national borders to those classed as ‘unskilled’ from outside the EU. In addition, the armoury of the state is now focused on increasing control and surveillance over those who are already in the country, and there are new measures to limit access to humanitarian assistance and prevent those without papers from accessing welfare and work.”5
claim that in London employers can exercise considerable choice over whom they seek to employ.6
point to a “hiring queue” in which decisions are made according to national and racial stereotypes.7
“Emboldened by new biometric technologies, Governments are engaging in an international ‘war for talent’ at the same time as implementing an increasingly draconian ‘war on the poor.’ States are seeking to develop semi-permeable borders that will draw in the talented and wealthy and exclude most of the poor”8
claim that the UK is becoming more “illiberal” as regards both humanitarian aid and immigration.9
table with outline of points system.10
argue that “the non-white migrants who have kept London working for the past 20 years are likely to be displaced by those from much closer to home”11
over representation of migrants from wealthier countries in the top end of the employment market, over representation of those from poorer countries in the bottom end.12
migrant workers willingness to work for low wages (i) “dual frame of reference” can earn more than they would at home (ii) are not able to fall back on the benefit system.13
claim from a respondent from the Brazilian community that they were tolerated whilst performing a useful service, but now that an alternative, E. European, supply is available, and the government wishes to seem tough on immigration, they are suffering.14
1J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 1.
2J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 1.
3J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 2.
4J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 2.
5J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 3.
6 Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 10–11.
7J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 11.
8J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 12.
9J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 12.
10J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 14.
11J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 15.
12J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 16.
13J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 29.
14J Wills, J May,K Datta, Y Evans, J Herbert & C McIlwaine, London’s changing migrant division of labour, (London: Queen Mary, University of London, 2008) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf, 31–32.

May

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000019710 StartFragment:0000000803 EndFragment:0000019693
Claims that since the 1990s a “migrant division of labour” has emerged in the UK.1
“Far from acting to protect workers from the worst excesses of low-paid work, we show how policies of labour market de-regulation, welfare ‘reform’ and of ‘managed migration’ have helped create a new ‘reserve army of labour’ in London consisting mainly of low-paid migrant workers”2
Sassen: Global city hypothesis: certain cities become key sites in the global economy, in this cities there is income and occupational polarisation with a growth of jobs at the top and the bottom and a decrease in the middle. Increase in migration to fill the gaps at the bottom so that “a significant proportion of low-wage jobs in the global city are filled by foreign-born migrant workers; with the worst jobs falling to the most recent arrivals or those whose immigration status renders them ineligible for state welfare and who, especially if working illegally, have little choice but to accept the poorest quality jobs”3
Hamnett: whilst accepting that Stassen's theory applied in a city like New York, where there was a large supply of cheap migrant labour and lack of welfare provision, claimed this did not apply in London, where such migrant labour was not in such large demand and where there was a wider welfare system in place.4
Contra Hamnett authors argue that such polarisation is now emerging in London, but contra Stassen also argue that this cannot be attributed solely to economic changes but also to the policies of the British state.5
“how cleaners, domestics and retail workers have all recently taken their place amongst management consultants, computer engineers, and lawyers as Britain’s fastest growing occupations. More importantly, when Goos and Manning’s analysis is repeated for London rather than for the UK as a whole, very similar trends emerge: with a very large increase in the number of top paying jobs alongside a smaller but still significant rise in the number of very low paying jobs, and a ‘falling out’ of the middle”6
37% of children living in poverty in London in households where at least one person works.7
1990s dramatic increase in migration of workers from poorer countries, coming to occupy low skilled jobs.8
critiques Conservative and New Labour economic and employment policy see 1) a restriction of benefits, seeking to force people into low-skilled jobs, but which has had little impact on unemployment levels 2) the stimulation of demand for low-skilled jobs, resulting in a skill shortage, which has increased the demand for foreign migrant labour.9
“an expanding army of actively recruited migrant labour … [alongside] an underground population of both rejected asylum seekers and undocumented migrants existing with minimal rights in the interstices of the … economy”10

last fifteen years a greater diversity in the countries from which migrants come to the UK.11
Significance of Latin Americans working in office cleaning.12
Women tend to concentrate in “semi-private” spaces such as hotels and clients homes, and men in “semi-public” spaces such as the Underground, or office cleaning.13
average wage of £ 10,200 a year.14
only 16% receive state benefits.15
“On the demand side, labour market de-regulation has provided the conditions in which the demand for low-paid employment has grown. On the supply side, a restructuring of state welfare has provided an impetus for workers to move off benefits and in to (low-paid) employment, whilst changes to state immigration policies have facilitated an increased flow of foreign-born migrants in to those jobs that still remain unattractive to native workers.”16
“Most obviously, given the recent direction of British immigration policy - in which migrant workers are treated less as potential citizens than units of labour, the supply of which can (in theory at least) be turned on and off as the needs of the British economy dictate - it is difficult to escape the conclusion that what we are witnessing is the most explicit attempt yet by the British state to create a new ‘reserve army of labour”17
Flynn: under managed migration migrant needs first to be useful to businesses, and then to himself and his family.18
See managed migration as a New Labour attempt to conciliate contradictory pressures, from business and the wider public.19 hence a way for the state to safeguard its own legitimacy.20
1J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 2–3.
2J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 3.
3J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 3–4, quote from page 4.
4J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 4–5.
5J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 5–6.
6J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 7.
7J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 9.
8J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 9–10.
9J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 11–14.
10Morris quoted in J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 14.
11J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 17.
12J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 18.
13J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 18.
14J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 20.
15J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 21,
16J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 25.
17J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 25.
18J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 26.
19J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 26.
20J May, J Willis, K Datta,, Y Evans, J Herbert & C Mcllwaine The British State and London's Migrant Division of Labour, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_2.pdf , 27.

Datta Work

Claims London is increasingly characterised by inequality in the labour market, especially with the expansion of lowly paid jobs occupied by migrants.1 suggest that these migrants keep London going by their presence in the “public reproductive and services sector”2
“The most recent, and perhaps most contested in terms of definition, has been a focus on
transnationalism and transmigration. This approach stresses the interconnections and networks
developed among migrant groups between source and destinations areas and how social, cultural
and economic fields often become transnational in nature”3


Britain “neo-liberal” policies: 1) decline in manufacturing 2) expansion of service industry, both in the banking, finance and creative industries, and in the low paid jobs 3) less secure employment for low paid jobs through subcontracting, agency staffing and temporary employment 4) decline in trade union power 5) creation of a “migrant division of labour”4 London: 1 in 7 workers under £5.8 an hour threshold; 1 in 5 under £6.7 an hour threshold.5
“Many of those in the lower echelons of the labour market are migrants. Indeed, London receives
around one-third of all migrants to the UK and it is estimated that between 1975 and 2000, some
450,000 migrants migrated to London (Hamnett, 2003). Furthermore, many of these migrants were
recent arrivals. Drawing on the latest Labour Survey Force (2002/2003) and the 2001 UK Census,
Spence (2005) notes that out of the 2 million Londoners born outside of the UK, 23% arrived in
this country before 1970, and 45% arrived after 1990. The ethnic profile of migrants is also diverse
with Whites constituting the largest group (40%), followed by Asians (27%) and Blacks (20%).
Also significant is that the majority of London’s migrants come from the Global South (70%), with
India, Bangladesh, Jamaica, Nigeria, Pakistan and Kenya providing the largest groups. Migrants
now account for 35% of the working age population and 29% of the total population in the capital
(ibid). Furthermore, these figures do not account for informal workers, including undocumented
migrants, so that the true size of the economically active migrant workforce is likely to be higher
than that reported officially”6


“London migrants have much lower employment rates (65%) than Londoners born in the UK (78%),
although migrants from developing countries show lower employment rates (61%) than those from
developed economies (75%); the latter are more likely to work in professional and managerial
occupations, while the former are concentrated in services and especially the hotel and restaurant
sectors. Moreover, migrants constitute 46% of all workers in typically low-paid ‘elementary’
occupations, such as labourers, postal workers, porters, catering staff and cleaners. People from
Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, Eastern Europe and South Asia often find it especially hard to
secure well-paid work, even if arriving in the UK with good skills and high level qualifications”7
Migrant acceptance of jobs which do not match their educational qualifications, with nearly half of those sampled having “tertiary level qualifications.”8 often involves a sense of loss of dignity.9
income maximisation achieved through working long hours, including overtime at normal rates of pay, with implications on leisure and family time. Students often forced to exceed the 20 hours limitations on their work.10 extra jobs taken on, especially in catering and cleaning.11 continuous changing between jobs.12 very low up take of state benefits, even in cases where migrants were eligible.13
multi-earner households, and restriction on consumption patterns.14
household sharing and reduction in utility bills.15
use of networks to share information about work, tendency of managers/supervisors to employ workers from a similar background.16 use of networks to share information about housing and cheap consumption patterns.17
ethnic identity and ethnic networks acting as a barrier to encourage a “migrant” identity/solidarity.18
hostility between different ethnic groups, increased with A8 accession.19
“The existence of such exclusion on ethnic based grounds and the existence of fractured or
‘perverse’ social capital potentially undermines the creation of community-based coping strategies
on class-based grounds.”20
“However, despite these divisions, from an organisational point of view, it appears that faith-based
organisations are potentially the most appropriate fora through which trade unions and migrant
groups can organise to address and overcome the exploitative conditions of work in global cities
like London”21
1K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 1.
2K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 1.
3K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 2.
4K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 3–4.
5K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 6.
6K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 7.
7K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 7.
8K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 10.
9K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 11.
10K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 11–12.
11K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 12–13.
12K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 13.
13K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 14–15.
14K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 15–16.
15K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 16–17.
16K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 17.
17K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 18.
18K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 19.
19K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 19–20.
20K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 20.
21K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Work And Survival Strategies among Low-Paid Care Migrants in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/working_paper_3.pdf , 22.

Datta remittances

Refers to a “remittance euphoria” in neo-liberal circles seeing remittances as a new form of funding development.1 Equally among “International Financial Institutions” e.g. World Bank, IMF,2
Official remittances increased from $31.2 billion in 1990 to $ 167 billion in 2005.3
claim that the cost of remittance upon migrants is under-researched.4
migration policy driven by security rather than development concerns.5
Points to how “managed migration” leads to a stratification of migration. In encouraging migration of highly-skilled/skilled migrants (arguably from the more affluent sectors of the Global South) and restricting low-skilled migration, especially under the points regime, the role of remittances becomes increasingly restricted.6
on average migrants send 20-30% of their income back in remittances. Refers to some Brazilians remitting up to 65%7
Most remittances are “altruistic” sent for the subsistence/health/education of family members in home country.8
Many Brazilians have migrated to the UK with the objective of saving enough money to set up a business in Brazil.9 Many Brazilians also involved in paying off debts, either previous debts, or debts incurred to migrate.10
Remittances generated by working long hours in poorly paid jobs.11 payment by hour means loss of pay if absent due to emergencies.12
process of de-skilling linked with complaints of maltreatment by employers.13 undocumented migrants unable to defend their rights before employers.14
A8 acession causes tension with workers from other countries with whom they compete. Gap between Eastern European workers and those from the Global South.15
difficulty of pressure to remit. Many migrants underestimated the cost of living in the UK when choosing to migrate.16 Coping strategies (1) sharing accomodation (2) multiple jobs (3) minimising consumption (even of essentials such as food; or taking the bus/walking instead of tube)17
loneliness (often compensated through regular phone calls) and shame of jobs carried out in UK.18 sensation of being part of an “underclass” (especially undocumented migrants)19






1K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 1.
2K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 3.
3K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 3.
4K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 8.
5K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 9.
6K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 10–12.
7K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf, 14.
8K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 14–17.
9K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 18.
10K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 18–19.
11K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 21.
12K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 22.
13K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 22.
14K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 23.
15K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 23–24.
16K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 25.
17K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 25–26.
18K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 26–27.
19K Datta, C Mcllwaine, Y Evans, J Herbert, J May & J Willis, Challenging Remittances as the New Development Mantra: Perspectives from Low-Paid Migrant Workers in London, (London: Queen Mary University of London, 2006) available online at www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/globalcities/reports/docs/remittances.pdf , 28.

Humphries

Claims that when the Tories where in power it was possible for pro-immigrant groups to access funding from Labour councils, but this has become almost impossible with the coming of New Labour to power.1

differentiates between external controls in defining those who may enter the UK and internal controls in the “policing of welfare”.2


“In defending what is 'ours' we deny the human situations of the 'other'.”3

“immigration rules, laws and practices are formed around the notion that Britain has a certain way of life.”4

1B Humphries, “The Construction and Reconstruction of Social Work” in D Hayes and B Humphries (eds) , Social Work, Immigration and Asylum, (London: Jessica Kingsley, 2004) 29–41, 38.

2B Humphries, “The Construction and Reconstruction of Social Work” in D Hayes and B Humphries (eds) , Social Work, Immigration and Asylum, (London: Jessica Kingsley, 2004) 29–41, 39.

3 J Collett “Immigration is a Social Work Issue” in D Hayes and B Humphries (eds) , Social Work, Immigration and Asylum, (London: Jessica Kingsley, 2004) 77–93, 77.

4 J Collett “Immigration is a Social Work Issue” in D Hayes and B Humphries (eds) , Social Work, Immigration and Asylum, (London: Jessica Kingsley, 2004) 77–93, 89.

Fielding

Points to neo-liberal (ie free market) arguments against migration policies and libertarian arguments which see it as a breach of human rights.1
arguments for controls (1) danger of one country being colonized by immigrants of another (2) borders need to be controlled to make liberal democracies manageable.2
“This conflict of interests and policy in industrialised societies...between maximising labour supply...and protecting a nation's cultural integrity...is a dilemma which admits few easy solutions.”3
experience with the apparatus of the nation state the most significant in the immigrant experience.4
increase in economic inequality between Europe and the rest of the world, leads to an increase in immigration controls and in illegal immigration.5
greater difficulty in the UK of reducing overstayers, whereas illegal entry less common than in other European countries.6
“It is difficult to withhold permanently the rights of citizenship from those who are required to fulfil the responsibilities of citizenship such as payment of taxes.”7
“The main problem, however, facing many immigrants and their family members is the legality of their status within the West European city.”8
London, concentration of ethnic minorities in inner suburbs, especially those north of the river.9
1A Fielding, “Migrations, Institutions and Politics: The Evolution of European Migration Policies,” in R King (ed), Mass Migration in Europe: The Legacy and the Future, (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1993) 40–62, 41.
2A Fielding, “Migrations, Institutions and Politics: The Evolution of European Migration Policies,” in R King (ed), Mass Migration in Europe: The Legacy and the Future, (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1993) 40–62, 41–42.
3A Fielding, “Migrations, Institutions and Politics: The Evolution of European Migration Policies,” in R King (ed), Mass Migration in Europe: The Legacy and the Future, (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1993) 40–62, 42.
4A Fielding, “Migrations, Institutions and Politics: The Evolution of European Migration Policies,” in R King (ed), Mass Migration in Europe: The Legacy and the Future, (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1993) 40–62, 42.
5A Fielding, “Migrations, Institutions and Politics: The Evolution of European Migration Policies,” in R King (ed), Mass Migration in Europe: The Legacy and the Future, (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1993) 40–62, 43.
6A Fielding, “Migrations, Institutions and Politics: The Evolution of European Migration Policies,” in R King (ed), Mass Migration in Europe: The Legacy and the Future, (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1993) 40–62, 49.
7A Fielding, “Migrations, Institutions and Politics: The Evolution of European Migration Policies,” in R King (ed), Mass Migration in Europe: The Legacy and the Future, (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1993) 40–62, 53.
8A Fielding, “Migrations, Institutions and Politics: The Evolution of European Migration Policies,” in R King (ed), Mass Migration in Europe: The Legacy and the Future, (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1993) 40–62, 56.
9P White, “Immigrants and the Social Geography of European Cities” in R King (ed), Mass Migration in Europe: The Legacy and the Future, (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1993) 65–82, 74–75.

Solomos

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000011354 StartFragment:0000000804 EndFragment:0000011337

points to how an intrinsic connection has developed between immigration and black immigration and how “successive governments have attempted to regulate and eventually halt the arrival of black immigrants through immigration legislation and other means.”¹

immediately after the second World War most migration to Britain was temporal from Europe encouraged by government.² “even at this early stage black migration and settlement was perceived differently from European migration. Privately the government was considering the most desirable method of discouraging or preventing the arrival of 'coloured' British citizens from the colonies.”³ points to the fact that they had the legal right to enter Britain, confirmed in the British Nationality Act of 1948.⁴

“Throughout the period [1950s] an increasingly racialised debate on immigration took place, focusing on the supposed social problems of having too many black immigrants and the question of how they could be stopped from entering.”⁵

“from 1948 to 1962 the state was involved in a complex political and ideological racialisation of immigrantion policy.”⁶ “By 1952 Labour and Conservative governments had instituted a number of convert and sometimes illegal administrative measures to discourage black immigration.”⁷ “before and after the riots [1958] the question of control was integrated into the policy agenda.”⁸ sees this as the period in which the argument for the need of state intervention to slow down black immigration and the “social problems” it caused gained force.⁹

“the debates on black immigration during the 1950s reinforced a racialised construction of Britishness that excluded or included people on the ground of race, defined by colour”¹⁰

despite 1958 riots in Nottingham and Notting Hill being attacks on blacks they nonetheless used as examples of the dangers of “unrestricted immigration”.¹¹

racialisation of immigration done through a “coded language”¹²

rather than seeing the state as responding either to pressure from public opinion or “the economic interests of the capitalist class” defends that the state had an active role in shaping the racialisation of the immigration debate.¹³

interprets the 1962 Commonwealth Immigrans act as designed to target black immigration.¹⁴ points to the fact that the Labour Party did not sustain its opposition to the act and when in power produced an even stricter “white paper on immigration” which is seen as the convergance of Conservative and Labour views on the subject.¹⁵

Significant episodes 1) victory of an anti-Immigration Conservative candidate Peter Griffiths, in Smethwick in 1964.¹⁶ 2) the arrival of East African Asians from Kenya and Uganda and the Labour 1968 Act deliberately target at them.¹⁷ Powell –significant for the defence of compulsory repatriation and construction of the image of “white Britains becoming 'strangers' in their 'own country'¹⁸

1J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 48.

2J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 49–51.

3J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 51.

4J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 51.

5J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 52.

6J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 52.

7J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 52–53.

8J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 53.

9J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 53.

10J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 54.

11J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 54.

12J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 56.

13J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 56–57.

14J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 57–59.

15J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 59.

16J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 59–60.

17J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 60–61.

18J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 61.

Solomos

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000010769 StartFragment:0000000804 EndFragment:0000010752

Significant episodes 1) victory of an anti-Immigration Conservative candidate Peter Griffiths, in Smethwick in 1964.¹ 2) the arrival of East African Asians from Kenya and Uganda and the Labour 1968 Act deliberately target at them.² Powell –significant for the defence of compulsory repatriation and construction of the image of “white Britains becoming 'strangers' in their 'own country'³

“In summary the decade 1961–1971 saw the introduction of three major pieces of legislation aimed largely at excluding black immigrants.”⁴

“Conservative Party [inc. Thatcher] chose to emphasise the supposed dangers posed to British social and cultural values by the black and ethnic minority people already settled in Britain.”⁵

Three main areas of Conservative action in government 1979–1997: 1) tightening of immigration controls 2) British nationality act 3) dealing with the issue of asylum seekers and refugees.⁶

1981 Nationality Act: created three kinds of ctizenship (British Citizen British Dependent Territories Citizen and British Overseas Citizen) effectively “enshrining racially discriminatory provisions [MacDonald and Blake]”⁷

black communities identified as the source of community problems.⁸

lack of concrete evidence in this period to substantiate claims of the nation being swamped.⁹

“In summary the Thatcher and Major eras can be seen as a time in which concerns about immigration, asylum seekers and refugees became entangled with wider preoccupations about the social and cultural impact of migrant communities, leading to the institutionalisation of an exclusionary framework that sought to restrict immigration.”¹⁰

Whilst in opposition discourse of Labour party developed to regard immigration laws as racist, and the need for firm laws which were “both non-racist and non-sexist.”¹¹

“illustrate New Labour's concern with being tough, and being seen to be tough, on immigration.”¹²

Describes the provisions of the 1999 Immigration and Asylum act as “draconion” particularly 1) the voucher scheme2) enforced dispersal 3) detention scheme 4) carrier's liability¹³

2000 Race Relations Act “exempted from its remit immigration and nationality decisions provided for in statutes or expressly required or authorised by ministers” ministers not allowed to discriminate based on race or colour but allowed based on ethnic and national origin.¹⁴

extension of detention facilities for families.¹⁵

concerning Hattersly's formula affirmed that “ the rationale behind this argument was never articulated clearly, but it was at least partly based on the idea that the fewer immigrants....there were, the easier it would be to integrate them into the English way of life and its social and cultural values.”¹⁶

1J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 59–60.

2J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 60–61.

3J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 61.

4J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 64.

5J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 64.

6J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 64.

7J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 65.

8J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 66.

9J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 66–67.

10J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 68.

11J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 69.

12J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 71.

13J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 72–73.

14J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 74.

15J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 75.

16J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 81.

Solomos

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000014976 StartFragment:0000000804 EndFragment:0000014959

refers to the difference between direct discrimination and indirect discrimination.¹

“from the very earliest stages of the migration process a number of local authorities, pressure groups and individuals raised the question of the impact of immigration on their localities.”²

at a local level issues such as “housing, employment and social problems” are linked in popular perception to immigration.³

“[Powell's] emphasis on the social and cultural changes brought about by immigration helped to create or recreate an understanding of Englishness or Britishness that was based on the notion of shared history, customs and kinship, which effectively excluded black and ethnic minorities from membership”⁴ “From this perspective the loss of Britain's national identity was due to the failure of the nation to recognise the repercussions of immigration on the national culture.”⁵

New Right move from “nativism and anti-immigration “ to seeing “the very presence of black and ethnic minority communities...as a threat to the way of life and culture of white citizens.”⁶ minorities presented as an “enemy within”⁷

“In practice the most resonant themes in racial discourses were not absolute notions of racial superiority, but the threats that black and minority communities presented to the cultural, political and religious homogeneity of white British society.”⁸

Thatcher's concern for preserving the “British nation” and “British character” linked to Conservatives taking votes from the National Front.⁹

points to the way negative social and cultural attributes are linked with terms such as “refugees” and “economic migrants”¹⁰

points to the development of anti-antiracist attitudes amongst the right.¹¹

difficulty in developing “the acid test for who is and who is not English or British?”¹²

uncertainty over the meaning of Englishness or Britishness due to the changes national identity has been subjected to.¹³

British dilemma “of what kind of multicultural society it should become.”¹⁴

Tory dilemma of being part of Europe without losing British identity.¹⁵

“One of the trends that became clear during the 1980s and 1990s was the attempt to reinvent a British national identity in line with its historical image as an 'island race'”¹⁶ points to the role of the Rushdie affair in shaping this debate.¹⁷

“is clear that the debate on immigration was as much about perceived dangers to British national identity as it was about the potential number of immigrants.¹⁸

entaglement of the labour party in the debate on British/English identity.¹⁹

New Labour's attempt to balance expressions of patriotism with an embrace of mutliculturalism. After race riots in 2001 and 9/11 “there was a noticeable shift in political language on immigration and race relations.”²⁰ refers to Blunkett's suggestion of a “British test”.²¹ increasing unease at the boundaries of multiculturalism.²²

“rather than questioning and challenging the moral panic that has broken out over the question of refugees and asylum seekers New Labour has...added to it.”²³

Emphasis on “social cohesion” and “integration”²⁴

“Labour's time in power may come to be seen as a tragic missed opportunity to “think the unthinkable” and “do the undoable”.²⁵

1J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 84.

2J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 95.

3J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 96.

4J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 172.

5J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 173.

6J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 174.

7J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 174.

8J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 174.

9J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 177.

10J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 184.

11J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 187–189.

12J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 210.

13J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 211.

14J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 211.

15J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 211–212.

16J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 212.

17J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 211–215.

18J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 218.

19J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 219.

20J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 220.

21J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 220.

22J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 220.

23J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 253.

24J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 254.

25J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 254,

Stone

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000002210 StartFragment:0000000804 EndFragment:0000002193

points to a schizophrenic policy of Labour (historically) on race (but applicable to immigration?)¹

refers to “bi-partisan political support for racial discrimination on the issue of entry into the United Kingdom.”²

1J Stone & H Lasus, “Immigration and ethnic relations in Britain and America” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 221–238, 223.

2J Stone & H Lasus, “Immigration and ethnic relations in Britain and America” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 221–238, 224.

Spencer

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000015417 StartFragment:0000000804 EndFragment:0000015400

S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95.

Quotes Roy Hattersley “Without integration, limitation is inexcusable; without limitation, integration is impossible.”¹

“The bi-partisan consensus that firm immigration control is the prerequisite of good race relations rests on the assumption that the hostility which some white people feel towards black and Asian people would be exacerbated if they believed that their entry into the country was not effectively controlled.”²

points to the way in which successive governments have failed to convince public opinion that immigration is under control, and the generally negative, and exaggerated, opinions regarding immigration in the general public.³

“Although it has become less socially acceptable to express negative views about black and Asian people within the United Kingdom, fewer inhibitions constrain expressions of such views about immigrants, foreigners, and, in recent years, refugees.”⁴

points to scholars (Jim Rose & Shamit Saggar) who suggest that politicians were responsible for fostering anti-immigration feeling with their emphasis on legislation.⁵

(writing in 1998) “Public fears that immigration is out of control are thus not justified. It has become increasingly difficult to enter the United Kingdom and numbers have fallen significantly over the last twenty years”.⁶

“the message sent to the public by immigration policy, that particular kinds of foreigners would not be welcome members of British society is in direct contradiction to the message relayed by government race relations policy- that existing members of minority communities in Britain should be accepted as equal members of society.”⁷ Quotes Roy Hattersley “if we cannot afford to let them in, those of them who are here already must be doing harm.”⁸

points to the way in which Immigration controls were targeted against Black and Asian immigrants.⁹ “In order to protect that legislation from challenge under the race discrimination legislation, immigrant law and its enforcement were and remain exempt from its provisions.”¹⁰

“It has been in the presentation of immigration policy that politicians have reinforced so forcefully the message that particular kinds of foreigners are unwelcome in the United Kingdom.”¹¹

points to the fact that after Thatcher's claim in 1978 that British people were afraid of being swamped by people from alien cultures a poll indicated that the number of people who considered immigration an urgent issue rose from 9% to 21%.¹²

“Once government decides to appease rather than assuage public concern, new measures have to be proposed to show that something is being done. Loopholes are identified, rule changes proposed, appeal rights abolished, time-limits shortened, defences removed.”¹³

“Post-war immigration to Britain has, it appears, contributed to a national identity crisis. Having lost its imperial, military, economic and sporting prowess, Britain is no longer confident of its role and cultural identity.” results in fear of the arrival of those with different customs.¹⁴ “There has been a clear resistance to updating Britain's self-image to accommodate the multicultural reality of British society and its history.”¹⁵

Against an open door policy points to 1) reality of strong fears of immigration 2) “Immigrants who settle in the United Kingdom must be entitled to the same civil, political, social and economic rights and benefits as other residents. To suggest otherwise would be to concede a future two-tier society of those who really belong and those who do not. Employment is not available to all who need it and social and economic rights...are expensive.”¹⁶

points to the Canadian declaration which is defined mainly in terms of positive goals and contrasts it with the “defensive, largely negative, tone of the United Kingdom's aims”¹⁷

“Let us reject, once and for all, the message of tolerance. Tolerance is what we feel for those whom we disapporve of, or dislike, but nevertheless feel obliged to be civil to.”¹⁸

1S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 74.

2S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 74.

3S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 75.

4S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 75.

5S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 75.

6S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 77.

7S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 77.

8S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 77.

9S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 77–80.

10S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 78.

11S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 80.

12S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 80.

13S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 80.

14S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 83.

15S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 83.

16S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 84.

17S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 85.

18S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 90.