An Alternative to a Points-Based Immigration System

Theresa May has expressed her reservations of introducing a points-based system to control immigration, but there are other alternatives available that the Government could use to cap the numbers of people coming to the UK to work.

Using a Points Based System (PBS) modelled on the Australian system to control immigration, “will not work,” said a spokesperson from No 10 recently.

The system had been held up by Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and other leading Brexiters as a possible solution to capping immigration during the referendum campaign, however, after failing to gain the support of the Prime Minister (PM) it will mow not see implementation.

Theresa May had already hinted a PBS would not work when questioned on her trip to China, when she said famously that it was not a “silver bullet,” cure and, “You really don’t want to ask a former Home Secretary about the intricacies of a points-based system…”

The government already has in place a PBS for immigrants from outside the EU, which was introduced under Gordon Brown in 2008.

The system has failed, however, to reduce the total number of non-EU immigrants.

Indeed, the problem with PBSs like those used in Australia and Canada, for example, is that they are based on a different premise.

Rather than wanting to reduce immigration, these systems were developed to attract more immigration into countries with low native populations, and act more as a filter than a dam.

According to the Independent, “a points-based system has also been criticised as unsuitable for the UK because it wants to cut migration – while Australia (and Canada and New Zealand) use it to expand their smaller populations.”

The UK’s Existing System

One option put forward was to simply extend the UK’s existing non-EU PBS to cover EU citizens as well.

The UK system works by categorising immigrants into one of four tiers depending on their ability to contribute to the economy.

Tier 1 immigrants are those who are either exceptionally talented or wealthy. They include entrepreneurs, known artists and high net worth individuals.
There is a 1000 per year cap on Tier 1 immigrants.

Tier 2 are skilled workers who can fill jobs not adequately filled by the host population, and include company transfers, sports people and religious ministers. They are capped at 20,700 a year.

Tier 4 are students.

Tier 5 are temporary migrants.

Tier 3 used to include unskilled workers but after the system was introduced it was decided there was no more need for unskilled immigrant labour from outside the EU so it was scrapped.

Those in Tier 1 and 2 are assessed on their English language capability, net worth, age and previous experience.

Those in Tier 2 must have a specific job offer and are also assessed on the same criteria as Tier 1. They must also get a minimum of 70 points.

By far the easiest way to get enough points is to have a job on the ‘Shortage Occupation List’ which includes doctors for example, and gives you 50 points straight away.  

The Australian System

The Australian PBS system awards people a visa based on their “personal attributes” and their ability to “contribute to Australian Society”.

Applicants who do not have a job offer fall into the skilled worker category.

“Skilled-worker visas are points-tested, and to be eligible for one a person must meet a 65-point minimum. Skilled workers include professional and manual workers, with accountants and mechanics alike earning 60 points for their occupation. Those on the lower end of the scale, at 40 points, include youth workers and interior decorators,” according to an article on the BBC news website.

Possible Alternatives: A Work Permit System

Given these systems have been rejected by the May administration, what are the alternatives?

One possibility is to award work permits piecemeal with each case assessed on its individual merits.

Whilst this might be labour intensive and costly it would have the advantage of imposing the most control.

Another possibility being considered is an ‘emergency brake’ on EU immigration for a set number of years, say 7 years for example.

Because it would only be for a temporary halt the emergency brake option would have the advantage of potentially keeping the door open to free movement at the end of the 7-year period, and this might be just about acceptable to other EU countries, helping to pave the way for more beneficial trade negotiations.

In addition, it could be argued an emergency brake might be acceptable under current EU law which allows member states to opt out of key principles in the EU charter, such as free movement of labour, in exceptional circumstances.

On the downside the plan might fall in the middle with few adherents from either camp – since it would probably fall short of the demands of many Brexiters but not help enough in negotiations to keep the UK in the common market.

According to Immigration Watch the alternatives the UK should be considering are a combination of more ‘border checks’, an immigration number cap and work permit system - but not a PBS, which it considered “thoroughly unsuitable for the UK.”

The advisory service Capital Economics sees a work permit system as the best way to cherry pick talent saying such “a system which targeted the right skills to plug holes that can’t be made up by domestic workers could raise the quality of migrant labour and actually help to boost whole economy productivity and wages.”

Capital Economics expect the eventual system will prioritise EU (EEA) over non-EU (EEA) immigrants in order to garner the favour of EU member states so that the UK can negotiate a beneficial trade pact.

“This could take the form of schemes open only to EEA migrants, work permits available for EEA migrants with lower earnings or skills thresholds, or possibly a cap on issuance of new National Insurance Numbers for EEA nationals.

“While such a policy would be less than ideal, it could still be optimal when taken in conjunction with an advantageous trade arrangement,” said the Capital Economics note.

Overall they see the opportunity to control immigration as potentially positive for the economy if the quality of immigrants was improved.