THE UK’s immigration system is broken. It has been broken by years of Conservatives pandering to the worst excesses of the right-wing press. It’s been broken by years of populist politicians using it as a dog whistle to attract racist votes. It’s been broken by underinvestment in staffing and resources, and an equal and opposite cancerous growth in regulations, rules, and Kafkaesque paperwork.

I have a personal interest in the workings of the immigration system. Next month I am due to travel to the US to marry my American fiancé, and then next year we will commence the arduous and expensive process of getting him a spouse visa so that he can live here in Scotland. My fiancé works in IT and has skills that are much in demand in Scotland – he will be a productive and employed member of Scottish society. He is in fact precisely the kind of migrant that this country needs.

However we’ve been advised that the immigration procedures are likely to cost several thousand pounds, could take many months, and that it is more likely than not that the process will not go smoothly. Apparently it almost never does. We are anticipating it with dread. What should have been a happy time, looking forward to beginning life together as a married couple, has become a Byzantine nightmare of paperwork, expense, and the certainty of frustration and powerlessness. And all so that Theresa May could sook up to the Daily Mail.

There is a staggering hypocrisy that runs through the heart of British attitudes to migration. It’s a surprising and little commented upon fact that the UK is one of the greatest exporters of people. British citizens emigrate to other countries in large numbers. In 2015, 4.9 million British citizens were resident in other countries, meaning that the UK is the 10th largest source of migrants globally per head of population in the source country. 8% of people born in the UK now live outside the UK, compared with just 1% of US citizens who live outside their country. However when UK citizens go and live abroad they’re never immigrants in the country where they choose to live. They’re “expats”.

The colonialist mentality lives on. Britain wants to restrict the number of people who come to live here, but still expects that UK citizens should be free to go and live elsewhere, and when they do, there is little expectation that they should integrate with the local culture. Witness the hundreds of thousands of UK citizens who have made their homes along the shores the Mediterranean, living in English-speaking residential estates, spending their evenings in English-speaking bars and eating in English-speaking fish and chip shops.

I lived in Spain for 15 years, where I worked as an interpreter. I made a living out of the fact that so many British citizens made not the slightest effort to integrate into Spanish life. Those same people are often the first to complain about immigrants to the UK retaining their own language and culture. I still have many friends in Spain, both amongst the English-speaking and the native Spanish communities. Many UK citizens in Spain voted for Brexit. The sense of British exceptionalism runs deep and strong.

You can point out that migrants in the UK contribute considerably more in taxation than they receive in benefits, but it makes little impact on the UK’s toxic debate on immigration. According to a recent study carried out by the University College of London, migrants contribute 34% more in taxation than they receive in benefits. They are less likely than the native-born population to reside in social housing, and less likely to receive state benefits.

Thankfully there does seem to be a growing realisation amongst people in Scotland that the British immigration system isn’t working, and the reason it’s not working is because it has been mishandled by successive British governments. A poll released this week showed that 64% of Scots want immigration to be handled by Holyrood and not Westminster. The so-called Union

of which Scotland is supposedly

a much-loved and respected part

can only function as long as the

interests of Scotland and England are the same.

However we have an immigration policy which is driven by English political requirements and needs. Scotland needs more immigration, not less. Due to the economic decisions of the British state, Scotland has traditionally been a source of migrants, not a destination. The upshot is that we have an ageing population, and will require more migration in future in order to maintain public services and support the increasing proportion of elderly people in the population.

There is no reason why control of immigration cannot be devolved to Holyrood. Within Canada, the province of Quebec has control over immigration. Westminster continues to resist calls for the devolution of immigration within the UK, claiming that it’s too complex to implement. We are currently being told that all sorts of high-tech solutions can be devised in short order to solve the thorny question of the Irish border post-Brexit, but apparently producing a rubber stamp so that the passport of a migrant to the UK can be marked with “Residency granted in Scotland” is beyond the wit of British politicians. Of course the real reason is because Westminster simply refuses to surrender control. Devolution for Westminster was never about what Scotland wants. It’s always been about reducing concessions to the absolute minimum.

A Scottish immigration policy would be more humane, would ensure that Scottish families are not separated, and would benefit Scotland financially and economically. It’s clear that a push for the devolution of immigration policy would enjoy the support of a large majority of people in Scotland, and would allow Scotland to demonstrate that this country remains open to the world,

accepting of New Scots. However the lesson of Brexit is that the British government will never concede control over immigration to Scotland. The UK immigration system is broken, only an independent Scotland can fix it.