Should city-specific immigration come to London?
Imagine handing control of immigration to Boris. OK, not the best way to sell it, but still...
By Alex Hern Published 20 August 2012 16:53
Brandon Fuller, a researcher for the NYU Stern Urbanization Project, suggests that American cities could benefit from the ability to issue their own visas (post one, post two):
Not all cities welcome additional immigration, but perhaps those that do could sponsor visa holders. The visa could be temporary and renewable, with a path to permanent residency and eventually citizenship. Visa holders would be free to bring their immediate family members with them...
A policy that allows a greater number of law-abiding immigrants into the American cities that want them most could do more for global welfare than other policies related to trade and aid. An effective policy of this sort would be a win-win—a way for struggling American cities to stabilize their populations and a way for immigrant families to live, work, and study in the United States.
The point is easily transferable to the UK, as well; though the reasoning is more political than economic.
London is far, far more pro-immigration than the rest of the UK. In a 2011 Ipsos MORI poll (pdf), 61 per cent of Londoners thought immigration is "a very big or fairly big problem", compared to a UK average of 75 per cent and a peak of 88 per cent in the West Midlands. Similarly, although 15 per cent of Britons opposed a cap on the number of non-EU workers, 23 per cent of Londoners did.
Obviously those figures still don't reveal a populace willing to welcome all-comers with open arms. But they do hint that a national anti-immigrant agenda could be tempered if London were given the power to control its own borders.
Of course, such a move wouldn't do wonders for relations between the capital and the rest of the country. Given the fact that the success which has already accrued to the capital from having an elected mayor has lead to calls to scrap the position to aid a "levelling down", it's hard to imagine the bad blood that could result from an immigration-driven economic boost.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists





















6 comments
Yup, back in the good oldays, I remember everyone saying how hideously white it was in London, and how we reeelly reeeely wanted to be culturally enriched by all these Afro-Carribean muggers rapists drug dealers and dolefraudsters, and all these inbred offspring of the followers of a certain 5th century Arab child molester....
City immigration now? City???
Immigrants already get visas to do the jobs Americans won't do and marry the bachelors Americans won't marry, now they are gonna live in the cities Americans won't live? How pathetic...
How about those cities that consider participating start making themselves livable for a change? How about paying livable wages to make those jobs attractive to Americans again? In general, how about making America liveable again?
It's easy: Australian immigration rules.
Could it be that London is much more pro immigration because a large proportion of the population are immigrants.
ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY!
Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.
The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.
Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.
What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?
How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?
And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?
But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.
So could all other cities decide not to welcome immigrants and refuse visas? Could a city overrule a national decision on granting a visa? Policy that seems interesting in principle but far too many holes in it