London's Silicon Roundabout needs more employees with the right skills. Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Immigration policy is holding back the UK's tech boom

The government's ambitious project of putting coding on the national curriculum is exactly what UK tech needs. But in the short term, immigration policy is holding us back.

One of the biggest economic challenges facing our nation is the need for more qualified, highly-skilled professionals…Yet because our current immigration system is outdated and inefficient, many high- skilled immigrants who want to stay in America are forced to leave . . . Some do not bother to come in the first place.

Signed by executives from the likes of Google, Facebook and Yahoo these are the words of a letter sent to President Obama last year to argue for the relaxation of US immigration controls. It is striking how accurately they apply to Britain today.

Since 2003 Europe has produced $30bn technology startups; 11 of them were created here in the UK. Russia, the second best performer, produced only five.

From fast-food marketplace JustEat to financial technology giant Markit, the UK tech sector is paving the way for a new era of explosive economic growth. But just as it begins to hit full stride — in London 27 per cent of all new jobs are created by technology-focused businesses — Britain’s tech sector is in danger of being hamstrung by a shortage of skills.

My own company, Quill, has a team of 26 and is currently trying to fill 17 vacancies despite growing over 100 per cent year-on-year. The simple truth is that our education system does not cultivate the right skills to satisfy the demands of our burgeoning tech sector.

In fairness, the government has not been idle in the face of this threat; coding will now be a compulsory part of the national curriculum for UK students between the ages of five and 16.

This is a welcome reform and sees Britain leapfrog some of the world’s leading tech-hubs – including the US. But while the coalition’s long-term efforts to boost the supply of homegrown talent are to be applauded, they are not a solution to the short-term problem. The skills gap in this country is hurting British competitiveness now and, if the government fails to act, it threatens to see the UK fall behind.

It’s frustrating that the steps being made by the Department for Education are being countered by the Home Office’s increasingly regressive position on immigration. There is much talk about which political party the rise of Ukip has damaged most; the truth is that Britain’s technology industry stands to be the biggest victim of its influence on the immigration debate.

As things stand, companies looking to bring talent to the UK from outside of the EU must apply for a specialist Tier 2 visa. In 2013 just 10,179 such visas were granted, considerably below the 20,700 cap. Far from reflecting a lack of demand, such figures are testament to the mire of red-tape around the current system, red-tape that hits small businesses – who lack sophisticated compliance infrastructures – disproportionately hard.

According to research conducted by business intelligence company Duedil and the Centre for Entrepreneurs, companies founded or co-founded by migrant entrepreneurs total 14.5 per cent of all UK businesses and employ 1.16m people around the country.

Unless the government does more to recognise the enormous value that migrant talent offers our economy then those benefiting from educational reforms today may not have a world class tech sector to employ them in a decade’s time.

Britain must rethink its attitude to immigration, because as we cast aside the talented migrants seeking to live and work in the UK, our competitors, from Berlin to Bangalore, are welcoming them with open arms.

In 2012, the US reached its high-skill immigration cap of 65,000 in just five days. Our schools have begun a steal a march on their American counterparts; if our immigration system can do the same then perhaps when the next Google is born, it will be on these shores.

Ed Bussey is the founder and CEO of Quill Content

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Voters are turning against Brexit but the Lib Dems aren't benefiting

Labour's pro-Brexit stance is not preventing it from winning the support of Remainers. Will that change?

More than a year after the UK voted for Brexit, there has been little sign of buyer's remorse. The public, including around a third of Remainers, are largely of the view that the government should "get on with it".

But as real wages are squeezed (owing to the Brexit-linked inflationary spike) there are tentative signs that the mood is changing. In the event of a second referendum, an Opinium/Observer poll found, 47 per cent would vote Remain, compared to 44 per cent for Leave. Support for a repeat vote is also increasing. Forty one per cent of the public now favour a second referendum (with 48 per cent opposed), compared to 33 per cent last December. 

The Liberal Democrats have made halting Brexit their raison d'être. But as public opinion turns, there is no sign they are benefiting. Since the election, Vince Cable's party has yet to exceed single figures in the polls, scoring a lowly 6 per cent in the Opinium survey (down from 7.4 per cent at the election). 

What accounts for this disparity? After their near-extinction in 2015, the Lib Dems remain either toxic or irrelevant to many voters. Labour, by contrast, despite its pro-Brexit stance, has hoovered up Remainers (55 per cent back Jeremy Corbyn's party). 

In some cases, this reflects voters' other priorities. Remainers are prepared to support Labour on account of the party's stances on austerity, housing and education. Corbyn, meanwhile, is a eurosceptic whose internationalism and pro-migration reputation endear him to EU supporters. Other Remainers rewarded Labour MPs who voted against Article 50, rebelling against the leadership's stance. 

But the trend also partly reflects ignorance. By saying little on the subject of Brexit, Corbyn and Labour allowed Remainers to assume the best. Though there is little evidence that voters will abandon Corbyn over his EU stance, the potential exists.

For this reason, the proposal of a new party will continue to recur. By challenging Labour over Brexit, without the toxicity of Lib Dems, it would sharpen the choice before voters. Though it would not win an election, a new party could force Corbyn to soften his stance on Brexit or to offer a second referendum (mirroring Ukip's effect on the Conservatives).

The greatest problem for the project is that it lacks support where it counts: among MPs. For reasons of tribalism and strategy, there is no emergent "Gang of Four" ready to helm a new party. In the absence of a new convulsion, the UK may turn against Brexit without the anti-Brexiteers benefiting. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.