George Osborne's Conservative fringe appearance: 10 things we learned

Including, his parents were non-Tory voters and Gordon Brown is the only politician "he found it impossible to have a civil relationship with".

It's been a while since anyone called George Osborne "the submarine" - and with good reason. The man previously known for surfacing only for set-piece events and retreating under water at the first sign of trouble, has become one of the government’s most visible faces. In the last year, he has made a series of high-profile speeches on the economy, taken the fight to Alex Salmond in Scotland, and braved the world of Twitter. The morning after the government’s defeat over Syria, it was the Chancellor who led the counter-offensive on the Today programme.

After his strikingly personal speech to the Conservative conference yesterday, in which he referenced his children and his parents (seen by many as preparing the ground for a future leadership bid), Osborne made a rare appearance on the fringe at lunchtime, speaking to Channel 4 News's Gary Gibbon. Here are ten things we learned.

1. His mum has voted Labour and his dad used to vote Liberal but both now vote Conservative.

2. Gordon Brown is the only politician "he found it impossible to have a civil relationship with".

3. He believes the Tories "never really" worked out how to deal with Tony Blair, "the master of the political landscape", and "need to understand why he was appealing".

4. He conceded of the 2012 "omnishambles" Budget: "in my job you're not supposed to make those political miscalculations."

5. After pledging in his speech to achieve a budget surplus by the end of the next parliament, he has not decided whether to continue to ring-fence health and international development spending.

6. Nigel Lawson's children helped persuade him to move his family to No. 11 Downing Street.

7. He sees himself as "a social liberal, small 'l'" and cited his strong support for equal marriage and gay rights.

8. He "does not want to run the election campaign" (Osborne is still officially the Tories' chief election strategist), "which is why we've got Lynton Crosby in. I was the one who approached him."

9. While refusing to comment on his reported leadership ambitions ("I'm not going to fall for that"), he believes that as Chancellor he has "an obligation to get out and about".

10. Michael Gove joked (brilliantly) of his new hairstyle: "you've applied your economic policy to your hair. You've turned it around to stop the recession."

George Osborne delivers his speech to the Conservative conference in Manchester. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Scotland needs its own immigration policy – here's how it would work

Sub-state immigration policies and autonomy work perfectly well in countries such as Canada and Australia.

Theresa May’s relentless obsession with the net migration target – prioritised over economic, educational, or even human rights concerns – is all the more surprising given the fact that it is such nonsense. For a number picked out of thin air prior to 2010, it is both remarkable and worrying that it became almost a sacred cow of British politics.

The net migration target (NMT) can be unpicked in many, many ways but it has been welcome to see a growing focus on the fact that a “one-size-fits-all” target for all nations and regions is just not appropriate. Clearly if the only migratory movements in the UK next year were that 900,001 people left Wales to head abroad and 1,000,000 migrants arrived looking to live in Maidenhead, this would not be good for Wales or the Prime Minister’s constituency – yet it would be the first time in eight years of trying that she had met her pet ambition.

We need to be much more sophisticated. Different parts of the UK have very different demographic and economic needs in terms of migration.

Since 2007, the Scottish National Party government at Holyrood has pursued a different population target – aiming for Scotland to match average population growth of other EU15 nations over the decade to 2017. The fact it is on course to succeed has been considerably aided by May regularly and spectacularly missing her own.

But what if May finally reduced net migration to the tens of thousands?

In 2014 the Office for National Statistics produced population projections for Scotland and the UK based on different migration scenarios. One “low net migration” scenario was 105,000 – so just outside the NMT. Even that narrow miss would see Scotland’s population almost stagnate over 25 years, barely mustering a overall population increase of 3,500 – 0.07 per cent – per year. So there is a real danger that May actually hitting or "exceeding" her target means population stagnation or even decline for Scotland. This is potentially disastrous when the population is ageing.

More generally, having migration policies in place so different geographical areas are able to attract human capital and the right labour to match skills shortages is surely in the interests of all. The UK system isn’t working well for too many parts of the UK. A very bureaucratic Tier 2 system is navigable for large companies with armies of immigration lawyers – and international firms can always rely on intra-company transfer rules. But for many small and medium-sized enterprises – a more significant part of Scotland’s economy – these are often expensive and unrealistic options, and it is no surprise that Scotland is home to fewer Tier 2 sponsors than its population size would suggest. 

There is strong support for a new system, including both the Scottish Chamber of Commerce and Scottish Trade Unions Council. In the House of Commons the Scottish affairs committee, as well as the All Party Group on Social Inclusion, chaired by Chuka Umunna, have advocated bespoke immigration policies. And this week even in the House of Lords, two committees concluded there should be “maximum flexibility” for nations and regions and that there was “merit” in a specific system for Scotland (and London). Academics like Professor Jonathan Portes and think tanks such as the IPPR are supportive of the idea. But how could it be done? 

With a little imagination, there are a bucket load of ways – many very helpfully set out in a recent paper by Professor Christina Boswell of the University of Edinburgh. Whether it’s applying different points thresholds for jobs in Scotland, a bespoke post-study work scheme, allowing Scotland a separate quota under the Tier 2 scheme, or a more flexible shortage occupation list, options are there which need not complicate administration or enforcement. Indeed, if there was political will at the UK level, there is no reason Scotland could not continue to allow free movement of EU nationals, which is what my party and I will continue to advocate for.

It’s worth remembering that sub-state immigration policies and autonomy work perfectly well in countries such as Canada and Australia. And the UK itself previously experimented with a post-study work visa applicable to graduates from Scottish universities (but curiously, not limited to Scottish employers) and currently there is a (very slightly) different list of shortage occupations for Scotland.

An immigration policy for Scotland is an idea whose time has come – and failure to listen could have serious consequences for Scotland’s population.

Stuart McDonald is the MP for Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East and the SNP's immigration spokesman