HDN Think piece – Words Matter: the Immigration White Paper

Some personal reflections from Shruti Bhargava together with how housing organisations should respond to the latest immigration proposals

Is it possible to talk about controlling immigration without attacking and scapegoating migrants, refugees and those seeking asylum from war, famine or persecution?

I think it is.  But it seems to be a sad fact that our prime minister, Keir Starmer, doesn’t.

What’s worse is his failure to consider the consequences of his words.  After his recent speech, I was even more appalled by the doubling down of that rhetoric by him and some MPs in government – denying and diminishing the feelings and lived experiences of those who have been on the receiving end of racism.

I hope that the UK housing sector will act differently.

Like many who heard him, I recognised the language.  I was born (in Britain) in the year that Enoch Powell made his infamous ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech.  I don’t remember hostility in my earliest years so much (though apparently we lived on a racist council estate in the north east for two years, an experience which included e.g. a brick thrown through the window), but I do remember from the age of 7 in my West London primary school, being called ‘p***’ and being told to ‘go back to where you came from’, pretty much every day.  I was made to feel unwelcome, like I didn’t belong, not just from words directed at me, but also the (more subtle) exclusionary behaviour of others.

Fear and Safety

My experience was daily fear and navigation of that fear, with no support, protection, knowledge or awareness of what I was going through from those around me.  Fear directly caused by the reverberation of Powell’s words, through years and years…

After Starmer’s speech, many of our housing tenants, staff, and communities may be feeling the same.  They may be uncertain about their safety, the hostilities they may face, whether they will be treated fairly, whether they belong.  There could be increasing mistrust and division between communities.  On top of last summer’s riots, rising levels of Islamophobia, anti-black racism, anti-migrant and anti ‘DEI’ sentiments, fuelled by Trump and mimicked by Farage and Reform – Starmer’s words will have done nothing to lower temperatures and make communities feel safe.

The Myths

One of the things I find hugely disappointing and disturbing about Starmer’s speech and the immigration White paper, is how it makes (convincing and boldly stated) statements based on assumptions as though they are facts, without the solid (and expert verified) neutral evidence and analysis to back it up.

I mean, just what is this ‘incalculable damage’ that refugees, migrants and their descendants have caused?  And what is behind the phrase ‘island of strangers’?  You know when you say this, Keir Starmer, that you’re talking about me?  This is personal…

If you’re going to say it, back it up with evidence.  If you can’t do that without expanding on the racism that clearly underpins those statements, then maybe think again?

Dubious Data Analysis

Another example is the far right trope, now repeated by the Prime Minister, that the state of our public services is in a large part to blame by the pressure placed on it by migrants and refugees.  Many experts have debunked this and recognise it for what it is – a deflection from the failure of successive governments to properly plan, manage and invest in services.

Let’s take the point made about pressure on housing, and the reasons for the housing crisis.  We heard the same argument used some years ago by Dominic Raab – a man who barely had any analytical skills, but felt he had the right to confidently state immigration was to blame for the lack of affordable housing.  This was based on highly dubious (and statistically nonsensical) manipulation of data from a piece of regression analysis, where much bigger key factors which contributed to the complexity of the housing crisis were removed from the calculation, leaving immigration as the only factor.  It appears that Keir Starmer (or rather his advisors) have done something similar.  This is at best statistically illiterate (A level maths +), at worst a deliberate attempt to falsely present data to back up racist dog whistle narratives.

Its telling that racism as a factor does not feature in any of the data analysis.  But equally telling is that there is no mention of the seismic impact that Brexit has had, especially in damaging our economy.  Yet the white paper chooses to make a simple direct link between immigration and a reduction in growth, despite experts reporting that immigration has actually lessened the damage of Brexit, by positively impacting the economy.  Poor statistical analysis, yet again.

The Lenses driving Policy Making

Lived Experience

What bothers me, as in much of policy making, is the lens through which all these statements are made.  Who is making them?  Where is the lived experience driving this?

Take the inflammatory false claim that Britain has been a ‘one nation experiment in open borders’.  We DO NOT have open borders, we have immigration controls, and always have had.  Further, anyone who has had dealings with the Home Office or supported others through processes to gain citizenship or asylum (I’ve done it twice in recent years with friends / family), will know just how hard the hostile environment is stacked against them.  Overly complex resource consuming bureaucracy, which takes years to navigate, with often high levels of what appears like incompetence at best, deliberate dishonesty at worst.  (Windrush anyone?)

Integration / Speaking English

A key theme through the immigration white paper is integration, with a big emphasis on tightening the English speaking requirements for individuals and their dependants.  There’s a whole section analysing the English skills of migrants (the vast majority of which is good), used to back up the assumption that this is a barrier to integration. But is it really?  This seems quite a leap as the specific evidence and analysis to directly link speaking English with integration is not there.

In the late 60s / early 70s my family lived next door to two elderly sisters, who befriended my grandmother. How did they communicate when ‘Maaji’ (as we called her), only spoke a few words of English?  Largely through smiles, gestures, kindness and compassion.  That was in sharp contrast to the neighbours on the other side of our home, who kept telling their kids not to play with us, though we were bilingual and all us kids wanted to…

Was it my grandmother‘s lack of English that was a barrier to integration, or was it something else?

I recall many years later, my housemates telling me how outraged they were to walk into a shop and hear two Asian women speaking to each other in their own language, telling me they should be speaking in English.  Why?  Did they think they should be able to eavesdrop?  Why did they think that they should be speaking in some kind of stilted English to each other rather than expressing themselves freely in a shared language.  Just why were they so bothered?

I frequently revert to Hindi to speak to my 81-year-old ‘Mausi’ (aunt), even though she speaks and understands excellent English – just because it’s easier for her to express herself fully in her mother tongue.

I’ve known other people, of my generation, who have lost much of the connection to their heritage, because their parents were advised to only speak in English.  Its been damaging to them, they feel a loss.  ‘Integrating’ into a new land is not mutually exclusive to remaining connected to your heritage.  I worry that the white paper may encourage old regressive attitudes and practices.

I speak both English and Hindi (though not as well).  I have a strong British identity, but I also have a strong sense of my roots.  It’s important to my sense of who I am, and my ability to be a well functioning person.  I proudly call myself a British Asian.  The experience of migrants – being uprooted from homelands, separating from family etc.., is challenging enough, without expecting them to abandon all sense of who they are as people.  Identity is complex and different for everyone.

Where is the understanding of these experiences in shaping policy, or, perhaps more importantly, to shape the language used to explain policy?  Where is the humanity?

‘Othering’ vs. ‘Integration’

No one would argue that it’s not good to speak English or learn how to speak English in an English speaking country, least of all migrants.  No one wants to be isolated.  Its laughable to suggest that people want to be.  But when you face open hostility, have cuts made to English classes, can’t access support, and find others with shared experiences and languages, what do you expect to happen?  We all want to be understood…  An over emphasis on ‘othering’ and attacking those who are ‘different’, those who have the least power – does nothing to build understanding, strengthen community relations, or create community cohesion.

In talking about integration, the government appears to have chosen to blame migrants and their English skills (which, again, the data shows is mostly good), over recognising the racism and prioritising any strategy to tackle racism – arguably the biggest barrier to real integration.  Indeed, what they appear to be doing is pandering to hate mongers with the biggest platforms and loudest voices, pandering to racism with subtle dog whistles, blaming those whose voices are not heard.  They are doing this over recognising lived experience; the challenges diverse communities, migrants and refugees face; and the historical roots of racism in our country.

Housing Roots of Integration / Segregation

The conversation about integration rarely faces up to the impact of decades of historical discrimination, including segregation of communities through housing policies and practices.  If we open our eyes and examine this through the lens of people on the receiving end of discrimination and inequalities, we can see this result very visibly across our towns and cities.

When people who are ‘different’ can’t access the systems for housing easily, end up in higher levels of poor quality private sector rented accommodation, or are housed by social housing providers in more deprived areas where other Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic people are more concentrated – just what does that mean for integration?  But the assumptions made in the white paper and in far right rhetoric (including that used to justify acts of racism), are that segregation of communities is the result of a reluctance to ‘integrate’.

I recall in the Sheffield Race Equality Commission (2021-2022), I asked why was it that BAME people had three times the level of overcrowding  compared to white people in Sheffield, and two times the level living in private rented housing especially in the most deprived parts of the city.  I asked why BAME people made up 60% of the population of the most deprived area in Sheffield, an area with 20 years less life expectancy than the wealthiest parts of the city.

The response?  I was told ‘they like’ living there.

The othering and institutional racism were galling.

Workforce Strategies

There’s plenty more for housing providers to pay attention to in the white paper.  Another standout are the limitations around employing overseas workers, including restrictions that will be placed on them to bring dependents into the country.  In particular housing associations that provide supported or extra care housing, and care homes will need to pay attention to the restrictions on employing new migrant workers, and indeed consider the impact on those they already employ.

The Royal College of Nursing published an article following the publication of the white paper: “Migrant nursing staff plan to leave UK due to low wages, abuse and ‘hostile environment’”.  The implications for the NHS in its current state, when it relies heavily on overseas staff, are unthinkable.  What about UK Housing?  What is the workforce profile, how are migrant workers treated, how are they feeling, and what are the implications of a large exodus?  Do you know how things are in your organisation?

The white paper suggests the legislative changes will be immediate, but that could pose huge challenges for staffing.   While ‘employing our own’ and building pipelines of future staff through apprenticeships, training schemes etc., is an admirable ambition, we all know this does not happen overnight.  Housing providers need to look closely at their workforce strategies – short, medium and long term.  But in a sector where staffing is already a challenge, and the design and culture of organisations is often a bit ‘old skool’, this can’t be done in isolation from a fundamental rethink.  Some things to consider:

• How do providers need to change to become attractive employers and organisations?
• What have organisations done to modernise themselves, be responsive to what younger generations seek from work?
• What does the regulator need to do to support providers in these changes (and modernise their own thinking)?
• Is there a better way to design the sector?


What can Housing Providers do?

There’s plenty of existing guidance, which is still relevant, and perhaps needed more than ever:

1. After last summer’s riots, Housing Diversity Network published a 14-point action plan for housing providers to support communities and community cohesion. This forms an ideal starting point for organisations to plan their actions.
2. Going further back the Better Social Housing Review (BSHR) action plan, had a strong anti-racist theme, with specific actions for housing providers to address race inequalities. This is another part of your toolkit.
3. Gathering and analysing data was a key recommendation of the BSHR. It’s basic: know your tenants, staff, communities, and their housing conditions.  Examine their experiences, who is accessing your services and who isn’t, where are the racial disparities, what is the representation etc..  Ask critical questions and interrogate the data.  Understanding through data and the voices of those most marginalised is a key starting point for addressing race inequalities, keeping communities safe, and building community cohesion.  Data is critical to challenge myths and negative narratives about migration, particularly around social housing use and pressure on services.
4. The HDN team has been working with organisations who are keen to reaffirm their commitment to Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI). This includes ensuring that boards and leadership teams reinforce inclusive values, particularly in the face of divisive rhetoric or policy changes.
5. Assess the White Paper for proposed changes that may impact tenants, applicants, or the workforce (e.g. eligibility for social housing, Right to Rent checks, or access to support services). Whilst I’m no legal expert, organisations need to understand the boundaries of the law and avoid over-compliance that could lead to discrimination.
6. Obviously, organisations need to continue providing EDI Training for Staff and Contractors. Homelessness teams for example need to be able to navigate immigration-related queries without profiling or discrimination.
7. I’ve always been an advocate of sector collaborations. And this is an ideal time to work with sector bodies (e.g. CIH, NHF, BME National) to advocate for fair and humane policies that do not criminalise or exclude migrants.

 

As well as paying attention to what will be the new legislative requirements, I would urge all in UK housing to think about the impact of the words of the prime minister, and the content of the white paper on their friends, neighbours, colleagues, tenants, residents, customers, communities.

Think about how they are feeling.

Listen to them.

Understand their experiences.

Elevate their voices.

Put this first, and at the centre of what drives your actions.

Shruti Bhargava is a HDN Associate, facilitator and consultant.  She is the former Chair of Unity Homes and Enterprise and was an active member of the sector’s steering group and race action group for the BSHR.  She has developed a workshop on ‘dismantling structural racism’: using creative methods to put decision makers in the shoes of those impacted by race inequalities.

HDN provides help and guidance on board development, staff training, and EDI strategies and action plans to help equip organisations to lead with confidence, compassion, and clarity. Contact us for more details info@housingdiversitynetwork.co.uk