Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Will Mitt Romney's defeat force a Tory party rethink? No chance (Guardian)
Many Conservative MPs can see what's going wrong for the party, but their prescriptions are all for more of the same, writes Polly Toynbee.

2. A good day for David Cameron, but a rout for the Tory Right’s vision (Telegraph)
David Cameron and George Osborne must learn from Mitt Romney’s defeat and rethink Conservative election strategy for 2015, writes Peter Oborne.

3. Our dangerous illusion of tech progress (Financial Times) (£)
The actual landscape around us is almost identical to the 1960s. Our ability to do basic things such as protect ourselves from earthquakes and hurricanes, to travel and to extend our lifespans is barely increasing, write Garry Kasparov and Peter Thiel.

4. The venerable FT is too valuable to sell off (Times) (£)
The market isn’t infallible. The sale of certain businesses is against the national interest, writes William Rees-Mogg.

5. There's a chance of a deal with Iran. Is a re-elected President Obama brave enough to seize it? (Independent)
Ahmadinejad's regime is worried, and not just about the currency crisis, writes Adrian Hamilton.

6. World crowds in on Obama’s second term (Financial Times) (£)
Mr Obama’s re-election has changed the dynamics of American politics, writes Philip Stephens.

7. The Greek books are still being cooked (Telegraph)
This week saw yet more austerity measures voted by the Greek parliament for yet another bail-out that won’t be repaid, writes Jeremy Warner

8. Jordan: threatened by the drama next door (Guardian)
As long as King Abdullah's regime continues to block genuine reform its ability to resist contagion from Syria's turmoil will weaken, writes David Hirst

9. Not long a bishop? Perfectly qualified then (Times) (£)
Justin Welby has had success in non-churchy experience, so the real world is not alien to him, writes Diarmaid MacCulloch.

10. Drop this Great British fetish with childhood (Independent)
For all the outcry over deviant stars, most abuse is committed by someone known to the child, writes Mary Dejevsky.

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

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