What affects how Scotland thinks about immigration

First thoughts on today’s Migration Observatory report on the IPSOS Mori poll on regional support for reducing immigration to the UK

Largely the report presents responses that reflect the general intuitive reaction to immigrants by Scots. A national liberal psyche does embrace new arrivals and does appreciate the desire for everyone’s capacity to contribute to the overall good and welfare of the nation.

However, as is the limitation of any poll, the sample group may not have included the broadest spectrum of opinion, particularly that which receives the high attention of the tabloid media. Today’s Everyman concerns are having as much impact on the ground as elsewhere across the United Kingdom: the difficult conditions in employment and the economy are biting deep. There will no doubt be Scottish opinion coming to light after this Migration Observatory report that declare negative sentiment about immigration and immigrants.

What is most interesting in the Variations Enigma is the standout result that “surprisingly, Scotland has the highest levels of support of any region for reductions in immigration of high skilled workers”.

It is an enigma and there may be a host of reasons why. It really suggests that deeper or different questions need to be asked of the Scottish people.

How aware are we of the skills we need across the nation?

Of the skills we have already.

Of the skills we are being trained or should be trained to achieve?

Of how those relate to national, UK and global, economic and social drivers.

How realistic are we of what we are capable of right now, today?

How and what are we (not just the Government) prepared to do to ensure the future of the country?

As the UK (and of course Scotland) faces societal and global challenges, as we all negotiate our place in 21^st Century reality, net migration has been presented as a cure-all. It may be wise to sidestep the high tension of ping pong between the political parties and look to resolving the many and complex needs of People.

No doubt this includes migrant people in a world that has been created by migration flows over time immemorial.

Facing up to the Real Questions

It's curious that the UK Government asserts authority over people's lives, deeming this or that to be the 'right' thing for citizens, without really looking at the fundamental conditions that are behind all those 'wrong' situations (alcohol consumption, social housing, employment, welfare benefits, 'foreigners').

In her blog on Research impact: thinking outside the tick box, Bridget Anderson looks below the surface of some of the trite even convenient proposals presented in the UKBA's consultation on Employment Related Settlement, Tier 5 and Overseas Domestic Workers and wonders why the real questions are not being asked. These are political and theoretical, she states, but in fact are "the questions that affect us all". I share these musings on the two cited by Ms Anderson:

Do we want a sustainable population strategy?

Britain faces a land, demographic and economic conundrum in which it appears we resort to crisis management according to political whim. Will our nanny state leaders look beyond restrictions and curtailments to the valuing, respectful governors they purport to be? They espouse "integrated, cohesive communities" but these are just words when there is no genuine buy-in from all concerned. 

Now HOW do we achieve that and keep focused on a thriving, successful UK, at the same time! In order to deliver a sustainable populaton (if we had a stragegy), our political leaders need to realise that a comprehensive, holistic and truly inclusive approach across human society and related systems may be challenging but may well work! Sadly, personal agenda will be the price to pay and that may be too high, not just for the politicians and government workers but also for individuals, communities and political parties everywhere. It is a tough call; perhaps altruism is too idealistic, too utopian. Take the handful of leaders who may be considered to have held 'altruistic' ideals: while Gandhi, King, Suu Kyi and Mandela may fit the label, the accumulated impact of their lives' work on humanity and world citizenry is barely recognisable to my cynical eye. 

Still, our difficulty in putting aside personal self-interest is not about to bring the world to its end. It is just a shame our progress as a 'human' species does not match our technological, scientific advances. 

Why is domestic labour not considered work?

That human species that we profess we belong to continues to be at a loss about valuing each other, the assets that we are and the potential that we have to shared coexistence on a tiny blue planet. We may not have come far enough on our evolutionary road as conscious beings to maintain the rational learnings of the 'liberation' and rights movements of the last century. I can only assume we have merely taken the earliest steps on that route, with a very long way to go yet. How else can one explain the arrogant ignorance of those who demean the work of fellow human beings with supporting roles as mothers, carers, cleaners, labourers etc? How can any contribution, however 'lowly', to the fullness of our human existence be considered insignificant, inessential, unworthy or invaluable? Surely every task, every effort impacts on our human endeavour as the sentient beings we believe we are.

Yes, these musings are more philosophical, moral and idealistic, not to mention individual. Nevertheless, they ask fundamental questions of ourselves as a civil, thinking society and should not be swept under any carpet of 'evidence'-led rhetoric based on power or political designs.

Freedom of expression vs Freedom to choose

Everywhere you turn, whether print, electronic or web media, someone is reporting or commenting on underperformance; in education, public sector, business, industry, finance, politics, in fact every sphere of our existence. Such thoughts and vox pop contributions are now the norm of 21^st Century society and the 24/7 media age. They are imbued with an aura, an attitude of blame – it’s all the fault of some other person, community, system, authority, political party, government, custom, culture, even law.

Is this where democracy has taken us? Not just that we all have the right to views and to make them known (even as I’m doing here), which we do. But that in taking that right (of expression), we forego the capacity to see and acknowledge our complicity in the society we have created? Behind the blame and excuses lies an apparent belief that “I’m not able to do … whatever I’m supposed to… because you are doing something to obstruct me in doing it”.

What about my own autonomy, that other right of freedom to choose? To choose to do the best I can with my little patch of sky (or blue marble under that sky)? My own integrity to know therefore and to say that “I have a part in this and my part will help make the rest work”. As one tiny cog in the wheel, which if it sees itself as a wedge risks stalling the whole machinery.

Think of the various health, equality, education, employment, religious, responsibility (social/corporate/political) conundrums we are faced with. Then top them all with the ultimate social paradox that we have contrived – the power that we give (away) to those we believe to be of power, the politicians and leaders in our communities. What is it with humans that we think others may know us better than we know ourselves and therefore give them the right to choose for us?

It then proves stranger still when, having given away the right to choose, and politicians and leaders dictate our existence, we descend into that blame game and all collude to wallow in our ever-present human condition.

Irony of ironies, and this is why humankind is so wonderful, there exists even in that condition, the capacity to choose to be different.

Integrity hasn’t become obsolete but it has kept a low profile recently while selfish democracy, based on selfish rights, rights that have no cognition of their co-dependence with others’ rights, has had its day. A resurgence is set to happen, surely? The relentless dramas, whether natural or human-made, that are besieging us barely a decade into the new century, do threaten and paralyse us. They also hold the potential to release the humanity and integrity our race possesses by sheer dint of having a ‘superior’ intellect. So called.

Wish you knew you were Good

Looking out at a wonderful Perthshire scene bathed in warm summer sunshine, it has such beauty and stillness. Tranquility that I hope Amy Winehouse can now be part of. I think of her music and I hear Billie Holiday's Lover Man. Don't know why but guess Amy will not get to put her versions of those classics down anywhere now.

That is unless she has done a tune or two in recent recordings with Tony Bennett. How fortunate to catch that interview with him on the Radio the other day. Can't even remember which programme. But I'm glad because I'll now make sure I get hold of it - surely the last recording of the husky, raw Winehouse. Bennett said he thought she was the most natural jazz singer around today. They'd better press more copies of Duets II!

We all should have known things would end this way. Maybe we did but never dared say. Or maybe we were enthralled with the passion and talent so hot and bright, like children with a captivating sparkler that burns and is then no more.

Maybe someone told her not to mind the press, the nastiness, the uncertainty of fan-dom. Perhaps she couldn't hear.

It is such a tragedy. But it is the way of legends.

Thank you, Amy. May you now find your peace.

Exceptional talent or extremely Small Society?

It's rather curious the UK Government chooses to instigate policies that blatantly serve to undermine and work at cross purposes with each other! This 'exceptional talent' route is set to pit talents/skills and different migrants against each other, in exposing a contrivance of inequality and pre-judged (rather than equal) opportunities. More immediately, it positions its elite status even across the four ‘competent bodies’ selected to select who should or should not be granted admittance to the UK as such 'talent'. It seems other organisations were not competent enough to be considered in a fair and open process in deciding the 'brightest and best'. Not sure what that says about Scotland. Or Wales. Or Northern Ireland.

So that’s two policy areas, equality and procurement, at odds with the projected outcomes of the UKBA’s new immigration controls. A further two are integration and cohesion. High profile, contentious but well-meaning, these policy areas count for nought when it comes to ‘protecting UK borders’. The settlement proposals currently under consultation aspire to restrict or curtail the rights of individuals and families in ways that are likely to diminish their sense of belonging, of being part of our society, of being included and welcome.

How is being ‘set apart’ conducive to establishing an integrated, cohesive society? By the sheer fact of the ‘setting apart’, of placing one against the other, will disaffected communities thrive.

Besides, whatever happened to “joined up government”? Went the same way as the Small Society I guess.

BIG Society

Been meaning to put thoughts down about this for ages! Figure it won't happen unless I start somewhere, so here goes: version 1 -

To me, a Big Society is about everyone's participation in human society, feeling and playing our full part, not for personal gain but knowing there will be bountiful benefits to be shared all round.

It is not about volunteering as a chore, task or job to do any government's or authority figure's work. It is not about money, the economy or balancing fiscal budget. It so not about counting the cost!

It's about being BIG - open, expansive, broad-minded, compassionate, forgiving, welcoming, sharing, giving, contributing, mindful, respectful - with each other and ourselves.

It's about you and me, individual and separate yet together and for each other.

The Placebo of Politics

Why do politicians think they are magicians?

Promising this that or the other to win votes has long been their tactic to appeal to and to appease the electorate. They take advantage of our hopes to paint glossy pictures of how they will solve all our fears and needs. Over the years, we have believed them.

But with technology to hand, we have become more savvy. Or think we are, with the help of Twitter, facebook, blogs and 24 hour news. Increasing awareness of our 'rights', perhaps even of our 'responsibilities', also contribute to the general sensation that we are able to shape the world we live in. Still, for every 'jasmine revolution' there is a clampdown; in Bahrain, Syria, China - does it matter where? For every progressive thought, there's a fundamentalist backlash.

I don't suppose I am unique in feeling 'kettled' in by a shrinking world, a broken economy and 21st century values of our own making. No wonder the pressure is building. However, magic can't be the answer. Illusion only serves to hide things under the carpet, storing up grim realities for an even harsher day.

Politicians in the Scottish elections want us to believe their manifesto promises will bring more jobs, more policemen on the beat, better care for the sick and elderly, better education, better everything. All I get is a huge whiff of unreality. The money in the bank just will not stretch that far! There are no easy ways to get all we want or think we want. Never have been.

In fact, the law of unforeseen consequences is quick to show just how narrow authority-led pronouncements can be. A current key example is the controversial dictat from Westminster of a cap on overseas student numbers which started life as a way to contain net migration. Somehow, it didn't occur to our leaders that such policy would impact on the viability of Scotland's tertiary & education sector, on our economy, demographics, the job market, our international standing and more. The coalition government, for all its aspirations of new hope, transparency and 'listening' in a Big Society, has yet to acknowledge the full meaning of impacts for the UK overall.

There is an opportunity at this point in our collective history to connect the emerging factors in 21st century life, factors that reveal, even underline our inter-dependence and inter-relatedness as a human society. We can choose to look beyond magic mirrors and illusions towards the genuine article of a society in which each human person or group of persons is working at the potential we have with each other, for each other, for the country.

Or we can be beguiled by the magical offerings of the political parties and their election candidates. Four years may be a long time to rely on a placebo.