Bridging the immigration divide (ST 19 Oct)

Number of View: 566

bangladesh worker

Oct 19, 2009
GOVT POLICIES VERSUS PUBLIC OPINION
Bridging the immigration divide

By Joseph Chamie

DESPITE the reluctance of the overwhelming majority of people in most countries to accept immigration, governments continue to promote policies that maintain or increase immigration levels. This gap between public opinion and government policies on immigration is leading to social unrest and political upheaval.

Whether in affluent countries or less wealthy nations, people are concerned about immigration. In addition to economic uncertainties, people are worried about losing their traditional culture and national identities; they feel that their way of life needs protection from the adverse effects of foreign influences.

A global study of public attitudes by the Pew Centre in 2007 found that the majority of the people in 44 of the 47 countries surveyed agreed with the statement: ‘We should restrict and control entry of people into our country more than we do now.’

This view is especially widespread in Africa and Asia, where at least 75 per cent of the public polled felt that immigration should be restricted. Majorities wishing for increased immigration restrictions were also prevalent in North and South America. Similar sentiments were shared by the greater part of Europe, even in countries facing population decline, such as Italy and Russia. Indeed, Italy led Europe with nearly 90 per cent of Italians agreeing that their country should restrict the entry of people.

In sharp contrast with public opinion, few governments view their immigration levels as too high. Among developed countries, only 6 per cent of governments viewed their immigration as too high.

But while a handful of countries had policies to lower immigration generally, not a single developed nation had policies to lower the immigration of highly skilled workers. On the contrary, most developed countries are competing globally to recruit talented workers, such as scientists, doctors, nurses, teachers and high-tech personnel.

For example, Britain now allows highly skilled immigrants to enter the country without a job offer, but simply on the basis of their skills. Some European countries, such as Germany and the Netherlands, have instituted fast-track visas and ‘Green Card’ systems, similar to the United States, to attract highly skilled migrants. In the US, even local school districts have turned to overseas recruiting to find skilled teachers.

As is the case elsewhere, few African and Asian governments have policies to lower the immigration of highly skilled workers. On the contrary, countries such as Indonesia, Singapore and South Africa are seeking highly skilled workers to advance their economies.

In addition to the gap between governments and the public on immigration, law enforcement officials are viewed by the public as lax in enforcing existing laws relating to immigration. For many, simply the presence of tens of millions of unlawful residents attests to such laxity.

By and large, the authorities tend to tolerate those who work unlawfully in the country, unless they commit a serious crime or are considered a national security risk. While this tolerance may be beneficial for the immigrants, it does not escape the attention of the general public.

The authorities frequently overlook enforcing immigration law to maintain good relations with immigrants as well as to curry favour with current and likely future voting supporters. For instance, the Marxist government in West Bengal, India, is reported to be lax with immigrants from neighbouring Bangladesh as they provide a vote bank.

In addition, powerful interest groups, such as business communities, actively promote immigration. For example, the US Chamber of Commerce strongly advocates a continuation and expansion of both temporary and permanent visa programmes for highly skilled workers and pushes for comprehensive immigration reform that includes a pathway to the legalisation of undocumented workers.

The benefits derived from these lobbying efforts are considerable. Developing countries are able to export their excess labour as well as receive large sums of valuable foreign-exchange remittances. Last year, such remittances amounted to over US$300 billion (S$418 billion).

Businesses are able to operate with a low-cost labour force, to recruit highly skilled foreign workers at discount rates, and to expand consumer demand and hence boost corporate profits.

Governments are failing to address the worrisome gap between public opinion and official policies on immigration. The consequences of this failure are likely to become more serious over time, giving rise, among other things, to increased xenophobia, vigilantism and political extremism. Some of these troubling developments – for example, rising xenophobia and the success of nationalist parties – have recently become markedly more visible in countries such as Italy, Greece and Switzerland.

Governments need to address the migration gap as a priority. Good first steps include candid dialogues between officials and citizens on the various costs and benefits of immigration.

The writer, the former director of the United Nations Population Division, is director of research at the Centre for Migration Studies in New York.

YALEGLOBAL ONLINE

Governments are failing to address the worrisome gap between public opinion and official policies on immigration. The consequences are likely to become more serious, giving rise to increased xenophobia, vigilantism and political extremism