Support 100 years of independent journalism.

28 June 2010

Alan Johnson’s attack on the immigration cap should be taken seriously

Shadow home secretary is no airy-fairy liberal.

By James Macintyre

Alan Johnson should be listened to when he attacks the Tory-led coalition government’s proposed cap on immigration. Partly because of what he calls “eye-watering” cuts to the Home Office budget, the former home secretary has described the decision to go ahead with a cap — first proposed by the Tories under Michael Howard in the 2005 election, and which business people have criticised — as being “at best . . . a gesture; at worst . . . a deceit”,

It has come to something in our “new politics” when plain-speaking Johnson is positioned to the left of Vince Cable, who defended the cap yesterday. Especially given that Johnson is by no means what David Blunkett might call an “airy-fairy” liberal.

After my colleague Mehdi Hasan and I interviewed him last November, this is what we wrote about Johnson and immigration:

In a speech to the Royal Society of Arts (RSA) on 2 November, he conceded that successive governments, including his own, have been “maladroit” in their handling of immigration and asylum. Is this a populist tack to the right, in the run-up to the election? From a centre-left point of view, Johnson’s position might seem depressing.

Select and enter your email address Quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics from the New Statesman's politics team. A weekly newsletter helping you fit together the pieces of the global economic slowdown. The New Statesman’s global affairs newsletter, every Monday and Friday. The New Statesman’s weekly environment email on the politics, business and culture of the climate and nature crises - in your inbox every Thursday. Our weekly culture newsletter – from books and art to pop culture and memes – sent every Friday. A weekly round-up of some of the best articles featured in the most recent issue of the New Statesman, sent each Saturday. A newsletter showcasing the finest writing from the ideas section and the NS archive, covering political ideas, philosophy, criticism and intellectual history - sent every Wednesday. Sign up to receive information regarding NS events, subscription offers & product updates.
  • Administration / Office
  • Arts and Culture
  • Board Member
  • Business / Corporate Services
  • Client / Customer Services
  • Communications
  • Construction, Works, Engineering
  • Education, Curriculum and Teaching
  • Environment, Conservation and NRM
  • Facility / Grounds Management and Maintenance
  • Finance Management
  • Health - Medical and Nursing Management
  • HR, Training and Organisational Development
  • Information and Communications Technology
  • Information Services, Statistics, Records, Archives
  • Infrastructure Management - Transport, Utilities
  • Legal Officers and Practitioners
  • Librarians and Library Management
  • Management
  • Marketing
  • OH&S, Risk Management
  • Operations Management
  • Planning, Policy, Strategy
  • Printing, Design, Publishing, Web
  • Projects, Programs and Advisors
  • Property, Assets and Fleet Management
  • Public Relations and Media
  • Purchasing and Procurement
  • Quality Management
  • Science and Technical Research and Development
  • Security and Law Enforcement
  • Service Delivery
  • Sport and Recreation
  • Travel, Accommodation, Tourism
  • Wellbeing, Community / Social Services
Visit our privacy Policy for more information about our services, how New Statesman Media Group may use, process and share your personal data, including information on your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications.

He rightly told BBC1’s Question Time that there was no “constitutional obligation” to invite the British National Party leader, Nick Griffin. But then, in his RSA speech, he unashamedly declared that he wanted to talk about immigration “today, tomorrow, next week and on any occasion I can”.

Isn’t this meeting the BNP halfway? Johnson repeatedly emphasises that immigration “has been good for this country”. Intriguingly, he also says he wouldn’t have “permission” to talk about immigration unless he first highlighted the concerns that opinion polls suggest many people share on the issue. Who must grant this “permission”? Johnson laughs, and says: “Me!” adding: “The public.”

Or does he mean the press — in particular, the Daily Mail? No, he says, but “Daily Mail readers”, among others. Johnson even chooses to defend the Tories on immigration, saying they represent a “mainstream, centre-right” party engaging in a “decent, centre-ground debate on immigration”. This, despite the Tories having stuck to the 2005 pledge, under Michael Howard, for an immigration “cap”, which — along with campaign posters asking “Are you thinking what we’re thinking?” — led to accusations of “dog-whistle” politics.