Immigration idiocy

Published on Saturday 12 September 2009 19:47

IF EVER there was a clear case for distinctively Scottish solutions to distinctively Scottish problems, then it can be found in Thomas Legendre's story. As we report in our news pages today, this celebrated writer faces having to leave Scotland – the country where he has lived for eight years and fathered a son and a daughter with his wife Allyson – because of the UK Border Agency's unnecessarily harsh interpretation of immigration rules.

His only "crime" appears to be that he receives his income – advances for books and other projects – in large sums of money every few years, and not as a regular annual salary as apparently required by the narrow rules established by the Home Office. His argument is a sound one and he has this newspaper's support in his efforts to stay in Scotland and raise his children in the land of their birth.

Cases like this are about more than the future happiness of the individuals involved. Immigration is an issue that concerns us all, for it is one of the key determinants of the future economic health of Scotland. Studies repeatedly show that an important factor in economic growth is the endeavour, entrepreneurship and birth rate of immigrants. Scotland, with far less of a racial mix and subsequently fewer minority communities than, for example, London, is seen as less attractive to immigrants. This is a significant problem, because if we fail to attract a new wave of new Scots and reap the benefits in our skills base and tax take, Scotland is likely to fall behind England when the recession eases and the recovery begins. If Scotland's momentum in this recovery is comparatively sluggish, we are likely to fall behind our southerly neighbours in the creation of wealth during a critical period.

So, if Scotland has a greater need of immigrants than England, why can't Scotland have different rules on who can be allowed into the country? For some diehard unionists such thinking is the thin end of a wedge that leads inexorably to the break-up of Britain. These powers are solely reserved to Westminster, after all. Such an implacable attitude can only aid the independence cause. Encouragingly for those – like this newspaper – who believe in greater co-operation between Westminster and Holyrood, there are signs of Whitehall flexibility on this issue. Writing in Scotland on Sunday in July, Secretary of State for Scotland Jim Murphy said that Scotland's needs should be recognised in a new points-based system for gaining UK citizenship which is being put together by the Home Office. Under the Murphy plan, extra points will be awarded to anyone who can demonstrate they have lived or worked in Scotland. Similar schemes in Australia have been shown to work well.

Of course, immigration is a contentious subject. We should not flatter ourselves with the delusion that Scots are particularly more welcoming a people than the English. When Jack McConnell, during his time as First Minister, introduced the Fresh Talent initiative to encourage more immigrants into Scotland, his staff were shocked at the overwhelmingly negative reaction this received in letters, e-mails and on the doorsteps. It was to Mr McConnell's credit that he did not let this dissuade him from a policy that is one of the most progressive of Scotland's devolution decade, and is still unfinished business. Prejudices and unfounded fears should not get in the way of doing what is best for the common good.

Some might argue that a writer such as Mr Legendre does not add as much to Scottish GDP as an Indian IT graduate or a Chinese biotech specialist, but our society derives its richness from more than just pounds, shillings and pence. This is a writer who has had a play, Half Life, staged by the National Theatre of Scotland. He is already part of our national cultural landscape. So this newspaper welcomes the fact that Mike Russell, the SNP's culture minister, has decided to take up Mr Legendre's case and those of others like him with Whitehall. If Mr Russell on the one side and Mr Murphy on the other can resist the temptation to make this a political football – a big ask, given that immigration goes to the heart of the constitutional questions Scotland faces – then perhaps some progress can be made on an issue that is plainly in need of a fresh look in the light of changing circumstances.