IFG - Questions over Home Office role in immigration after Brexit
The Home Office may not be the right department to manage immigration policy after Brexit, argues a new report by the Institute for Government.
Published last week, Managing migration after Brexit says the Home Office is not ready or able to meet the challenge of ending free movement after we leave the EU. The report lays bare the flaws in the immigration system that have led to a series of crises and to reorganisations designed to solve the last set of problems rather than address future needs.
The report also points to other failings, including unrealistic targets, policies based on politics rather than evidence (such as the ‘hostile environment’) and poor decision making, meaning that over half of appeals against the Home Office are successful.
Major policy changes in the Home Office have also been implemented without adequate scrutiny by MPs and peers. For example, Parliament has had little say over the fact that the UK charges 20 times more to migrate here than does Canada and that some immigration fees have increased by 500% in recent years. The Home Secretary also has extensive powers over the decisions in individual cases - unlike any comparable minister.
All these concerns existed before Brexit. Leaving the EU will mean that responsibility for managing EU migration, vital to the UK economy after Brexit, comes under Home Office control. The report calls for a review into whether responsibility for immigration policy should continue to sit with the department.
The authors set out a six-point plan to improve migration policy:
- The Government must agree clear objectives for the new immigration system after Brexit.
- The Home Secretary must update Parliament each year on how far those objectives are met.
- Immigration policy should be based on an understanding of the social and economic role that migrants play in the UK, rather than net migration targets. The Home Secretary should publish a comprehensive data strategy to make this analysis possible.
- The Home Secretary should legislate to simplify immigration rules.
- The Migration Advisory Committee should be more independent of the Home Office, reflecting its increasing importance.
- The Home Secretary should immediately launch the review of the department that was promised last year, defining exactly what he means by a Home Office that is “fit for the modern world”.
Joe Owen, Associate Director at the Institute for Government and author of the report, said:
“As we end free movement from the EU, our migration policy must address the needs of the country but also the public confidence challenge. Ministers need to consider whether the Home Office is the right permanent home for a migration policy that needs to serve labour market needs, be fair and efficient in dealing with applicants, and provide the necessary degree of assurance to the wider public.”
Jill Rutter, Programme Director for Brexit, added:
“‘Taking back control’ of immigration means taking responsibility for the problems in the current system. The UK currently depends on workers from the EU to meet skills gaps and labour shortages. The task of managing immigration will completely change in both scale and importance once free movement ends.”
Stephen Hale OBE, Chief Executive of Refugee Action said:
“Institutional failures at the Home Office are literally a matter of life and death for people seeking asylum in the UK. This report lays out the scale of the problems and a clear way forward. The Home Secretary must act now, setting clear short and longer-term objectives for the department and UK immigration policy.”
Sunder Katwala, Director of British Future, said:
“Investing in a system that works competently and effectively is key to rebuilding public trust on immigration. This welcome report lays bare the failings and underperformance of the Home Office and makes constructive recommendations to fix some of the most pressing issues.”
Notes to editors
- The report is available on our website.
- The Institute for Government is an independent think tank that works to make government more effective.
- For more information, please contact email@example.com / 0785 031 3791.
Latest News from
IFS - Taking control: which taxes could be devolved to English local government?21/03/2019 10:35:00
In recent years, there has been renewed interest in the question of whether additional taxes should be devolved to English local government:
Policy Exchange - The Speaker should allow a third meaningful vote on the Brexit deal21/03/2019 09:35:00
By Sir Stephen Laws QC, Senior Fellow at Policy Exchange, and former First Parliamentary Counsel from 2006-12
NIESR Monthly Wage Tracker: Pay growth appears to be stabilising at around 3½% per annum20/03/2019 13:38:00
Pay growth appears to be stabilising at around 3½ per cent per annum.
IPPR - Calls for a ‘Just Transition Commission’ to Kick Start North’s Low Carbon Revolution19/03/2019 13:35:00
A body to ensure that energy workers in the north of England are able to make the most of a “clean energy revolution” should be established as soon as possible, according to a leading think-tank.
War on offshore financial centres undermines competition & tramples on rights to privacy, IEA report says19/03/2019 12:35:00
IEA release report on offshore financial centres
'A hidden crisis in hospitals up and down the country' - The King's Fund responds to NHS combined performance data19/03/2019 11:35:00
Deborah Ward, Senior Analyst at The King’s Fund, commented on recent monthly NHS performance figures
Patchwork safety net of food banks, fuel banks and other essential services struggling to meet needs of poorest, says IPPR19/03/2019 10:35:00
Essential service providers could be better coordinated to meet the demand created by welfare cuts and the universal credit rollout
IEA - Christopher Snowdon responds to new consultation on junk food19/03/2019 09:35:00
Christopher Snowdon responds to new consultation on junk food
Adam Smith Inst - Half marks for tariff reductions14/03/2019 11:35:00
While the government's 'modest liberalisation of tariffs' (in their words) is a step in the right direction for consumers and producers, but in bowing to the agricultural lobby the government would penalise Brits that dare to buy food from overseas.