Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Make no mistake: Iain Duncan Smith wants the end of social security (Guardian)

Don't let the bluster, incompetence and misinformation obscure the Quiet Man's true, Tory purpose: destroying the welfare safety net, says Zoe Williams. 

2. Now Labour could become the party of marriage and the family (Daily Telegraph)

Voters want leaders who can promise good care for their children and elderly relatives, writes Mary Riddell. 

3. Don’t wallow in victimhood. Rise above it (Times)

Figures such as Sharansky and Mandela understood that saying ‘it’s tough being me’ is self-destructive, writes Daniel Finkelstein. 

4. Asset managers could blow us all up (Financial Times)

When funding conditions turn, relying on cheap dollars to finance local assets can be lethal, says Martin Wolf. 

5. The Mandela coverage and the banality of goodness (Guardian)

To discuss Mandela alongside Mother Teresa, Gandhi and Jesus is barking mad, writes Simon Jenkins. I bet he's laughing his head off right now.

6. Taxes will rise if we reject the nanny state (Times)

We may resent encouragements to stop smoking and improve our health but we all benefit in the end, says Alice Thomson. 

7. Netanyahu’s refusal to attend Mandela’s memorial service speaks of Israel’s growing isolationism (Independent)

The Israeli prime minister's apparent devotion to penny-pinching represents a startling change of heart, says Matthew Norman. 

8. Why must our governments be so incompetent at IT? (Times)

If supermarkets and airlines can do it, so should civil servants, says Ross Clark. 

9. Despite the economic misery of the last five years, Europe remains a success story (Independent)

Now the target is human capital – clever, talented and rich people, writes Hamish McRae. 

10. As society ages, care leave is the new frontline (Guardian)

About 5 million people have given up work partly or entirely to look after others, writes Jackie Ashley. They need a bit of help and legal protection.

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