Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read comment pieces from this morning's papers.

1. Labour must face this fact – it may be better in coalition (Guardian)

Spitting expletives at the Lib Dems has to stop, writes Polly Toynbee. If they'd governed together we'd have had no Iraq or civil liberties abuses.

2. When the Queen gave me a story, I didn't blab (Independent)

If you go around printing people's informal remarks, pretty soon you'll find your social circle confined to the newsroom, writes Andreas Whittam Smith.

3. US must not hide from the Middle East (Financial Times)

The American president would benefit by setting out a decisive regional strategy, says Philip Stephens.

4. Labour needs real cuts as well as real ideas (Times) (£)

What happens to the benefits bill under a Miliband government, asks Philip Collins. Voters need details as well as philosophy.

5. The Hugo Chávez cult is over (Guardian)

Oil can no longer blind Venezuelans to their leader's failure, says Francisco Toro. The flaws in Chávez's 21st-century socialism are all too clear.

6. Won’t Osborne learn the lesson? Wealth taxes don’t work (Daily Telegraph)

When even Tories talk about squeezing the rich, it’s clear Britain is heading for trouble, argues Fraser Nelson.

7. South Africa drifts under Jacob Zuma (Financial Times)

A country that should be leading finds itself at a dangerous impasse, says an FT editorial.

8. To govern alone, Tories must reach out to all voters, not pander to their own (Guardian)

David Cameron needs to show a determination to make life better for people whether they voted Conservative or not, says Michael Ashcroft.

9. Chicago’s got the second city blues (Daily Mail)

Chicago isn’t inhabited by savages, writes Martin Samuel. For some reason, though, its government is happy to let you think that way.

10. America’s best weapons are law and justice (Daily Telegraph)

Open and fair trials are playing an important role in fighting the al-Qaeda terror threat, writes Mark Martins.

Getty
Show Hide image

How Theresa May laid a trap for herself on the immigration target

When Home Secretary, she insisted on keeping foreign students in the figures – causing a headache for herself today.

When Home Secretary, Theresa May insisted that foreign students should continue to be counted in the overall immigration figures. Some cabinet colleagues, including then Business Secretary Vince Cable and Chancellor George Osborne wanted to reverse this. It was economically illiterate. Current ministers, like the Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Chancellor Philip Hammond and Home Secretary Amber Rudd, also want foreign students exempted from the total.

David Cameron’s government aimed to cut immigration figures – including overseas students in that aim meant trying to limit one of the UK’s crucial financial resources. They are worth £25bn to the UK economy, and their fees make up 14 per cent of total university income. And the impact is not just financial – welcoming foreign students is diplomatically and culturally key to Britain’s reputation and its relationship with the rest of the world too. Even more important now Brexit is on its way.

But they stayed in the figures – a situation that, along with counterproductive visa restrictions also introduced by May’s old department, put a lot of foreign students off studying here. For example, there has been a 44 per cent decrease in the number of Indian students coming to Britain to study in the last five years.

Now May’s stubbornness on the migration figures appears to have caught up with her. The Times has revealed that the Prime Minister is ready to “soften her longstanding opposition to taking foreign students out of immigration totals”. It reports that she will offer to change the way the numbers are calculated.

Why the u-turn? No 10 says the concession is to ensure the Higher and Research Bill, key university legislation, can pass due to a Lords amendment urging the government not to count students as “long-term migrants” for “public policy purposes”.

But it will also be a factor in May’s manifesto pledge (and continuation of Cameron’s promise) to cut immigration to the “tens of thousands”. Until today, ministers had been unclear about whether this would be in the manifesto.

Now her u-turn on student figures is being seized upon by opposition parties as “massaging” the migration figures to meet her target. An accusation for which May only has herself, and her steadfast politicising of immigration, to blame.

Anoosh Chakelian is senior writer at the New Statesman.

0800 7318496