top of page

Why Standing Up For Immigration Control Must Be Part of a Whole Nation Approach

Nov 21, 20245 min read

Co-founder of Whole Nation Conservatives Igraine Gray is a Conservative activist and former council candidate, writer, published author and rehabilitated rough sleeper. Prior to the 2024 General Election she was Policy Assistant to Sir Simon Clarke.


Immigration, and how it is discussed, might be one of the most contentious and defining issues of our time. It engenders strong feelings in many, some of who would not consider themselves political, on either side of the argument. The danger is that the debate has become polarised and a parody of itself, where nuance goes to die.


But if we are to preserve this strong, compassionate, and fair country, we must make the case to control and reduce immigration. Reducing it from its record high, a staggering figure of 745,000 for net migration into the UK for the year ending December 2022 (1), will be no mean feat. There is a multi-faceted case for such a thing.


Electoral Case


Firstly, and probably most cynically, it is in the Conservative party’s electoral interest. Most voters (76%) want to see immigration numbers lower - and a wish for lower immigration leads all groups no matter their political leanings, level of education, age, or region they live in (2). If we narrow this down to a group we know is open to voting Conservative, the 2019 Conservative voters who defected or stayed home in 2024, we can see they still want to see significant cuts to immigration (3). This even applies to those defecting to the Liberal Democrats, as counter-intuitive as that may seem to some, over half (53%) of whom are not liberal on immigration (3). Importantly, 92% of Reform defectors, 83% of those who stayed home, and 65% of those who still voted Conservative in 2024 also share this view (3).


The dial on immigration has shifted. People understand that at a too high level, any gains from it are vastly outweighed by the damage it does. No one sensible is suggesting we have zero immigration, that we don’t welcome those who have something positive to offer this country, that we don’t help those in need. After all, you only have to look at the response to our support for Ukrainians or Hong Kong Britons. But it is now almost universally recognised that we have blown through our workable limit on immigration and must take steps to lower it.

The Whole Nation wants this to happen - and it is rare to gain such consensus.


Social Case


The community tensions we have seen in increasing amounts and intensity since the beginning of six-figure net migration are a serious warning sign that we have gone too high. Post-1945 and for most of the twentieth century, net migration oscillated between five-figure net emigration and immigration. This gave immigrants to this country, and the communities they would ultimately call home, both time and space to integrate and adjust. When immigration explodes to more than ten times that (4), we cannot possibly hope to integrate those kinds of numbers. The UK population is estimated to have increased by an average of 1% per year in 2022 and 2023, which reflected higher immigration from non-EU nationals - this was the fastest pace of UK population growth in over 75 years (5). The damage this then does to both the immigrants and communities is bubbling to the surface, ripping the social fabric, and creating insecurity, prejudice, and danger.


Then there is to be considered what the role of the state should be: the security of its people. Failing to control immigration, both from an integration standpoint and also in being unable to deport foreign national offenders, is fundamentally a failing in achieving the basics.


Economic Case


Finally, but by no means trivially, long-term economic success and sustainability in all regions and generations depends on controlling immigration precisely. 


UK real GDP per head has slowed in recent years as the population has increased at a faster rate than the volume of output produced - in Quarter 2 (Apr to June) 2024, real GDP per head was 0.6% below its pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic level, while total real GDP was 2.9% above its pre-pandemic levels (5). Very simply, people are not feeling the benefit of our economic growth because our population is growing faster.


A case often made is that we require immigration to plug gaps in industries where the current workforce does not have the required amount of skilled labour to fulfil it, for instance, specific jobs in the National Health Service and social care. We have relied on cheap foreign labour so much since the 1990s that we have, in effect, created skills vacuums - and our education and labour market have dramatically altered as a result. The solution to a skills vacuum cannot be to take more of the thing that is killing you. It worsens areas of sticky unemployment and regional inequality, suppressing aspiration and opportunity. There may be a need for a transition period, but we must not perpetuate skills vacuums by failing to deal with their cause - and promote these skills again within our current and future native workforce.


Pressure upon infrastructure - whether it be transport, housing, health, education, energy, or civic - is also a factor. It is already difficult in this country, under an exceptionally broken planning system, to build new infrastructure. Whilst planning reform and political will are ultimately the answer to this particular problem, the pressure that uncontrolled immigration places on core infrastructure, making it impossible to build it fast enough or accurately anticipate its maintenance needs, is turning this problem into a perfect storm. It is jacking up demand at a time we cannot fulfil basic supply. For example, in housing, net migration accounts for around 89% of the 1.34 million increase in England’s housing deficit (the amount of homes we have underbuilt by) in the last 10 years (6).


A deeply irresponsible position that will land each generation in a worse position than the last, breaking the age-old promise of doing better for our children.


If we care about regional inequality, generational fairness, our social fabric, and frankly winning general elections in years to come, we must show our strength on this issue. For the Whole Nation.


 

References

Comments

bottom of page