Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Cameron's 'historic' speech proves he's the latest leader to lose control of his party over Europe (Independent)

The Prime Minister's chaotic approach will leave him even more at the mercy of events and his party’s willful insurrectionaries, writes Steve Richards.

2. Blair has failed in the Middle East and should quit (Daily Telegraph)

It’s easy to see what the former Labour prime minister gets out of his role as Middle East envoy, but harder to see what he gives back, says Peter Oborne.

3. Banks and bonuses: gaming the public (Guardian)

George Osborne suggested he could withhold government work from miscreant banks - now it is time for action, says a Guardian editorial.

4. Even if everything’s free, there can be a price (Times) (£)

The death of hacker Aaron Swartz reveals a young generation unaware of its own great power – or responsibilities, writes David Aaronovitch.

5. Are ministers too scared to say what they know about the next wave of migrants? (Daily Mail)

In refusing to disclose the number of migrants expected to arrive from Romania and Bulgaria, the government is treating us like children, says Stephen Glover.

6. Hong Kong sees the light through a haze (Financial Times)

The city is finally addressing its pollution problem but is not going far enough, says David Pilling.

7. Referring Syria to the international criminal court is a justified gamble (Guardian)

An international criminal court investigation may split the United Nations – but it would change the civil war's political dynamics, writes Philippe Sands.

8. Battle lines drawn in Whitehall’s phoney war (Daily Telegraph)

There’s always tension between ministers and mandarins, but strong leaders see it through, says Sue Cameron.

9. The west must plan for an arc of uncertainty (Independent)

The collapse of the state in a nuclear Pakistan is a prospect that must be addressed, says an Independent editorial.

10. Ending the culture of US gun violence (Financial Times)

Obama must try to break the NRA’s grip on national politics, says an FT editorial.

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