By SNP MP Stuart McDonald
LAST weekend, the SNP embarked on a process of wide-ranging debate about the report of the Sustainable Growth Commission.
One of the most important features of the report is its recommendations on population and migration. In short, the commission argues that attracting new people must be a key priority of the Scottish Government’s population and economic policy.
Scotland needs inward migration to sustain population growth, and in turn economic growth to boost our public finances.
The SNP have long highlighted the positive impact of migration on our economy, and our society.
But as well as reinforcing the case for migration, where the commission moves the discussion forward is on what detailed policy proposals we should pursue in order to attract the people we need.
As well as supporting the case for restoring post-study work visas for international graduates, ideas are floated for attracting investors, entrepreneurs and the highly skilled.
As the commission points out, the financial thresholds for such visas for non-EU nationals are ludicrously high – £2 million for investors and £50,000 for entrepreneurs (and even if you meet that threshold, there is a significant refusal rate). Should we be turning away people willing to invest £100,000 or establish a business with £20,000? The commission suggests consulting on where the limits should be drawn.
More broadly, it argues for a simplified and less expensive visa system, and support with some relocation costs to help attract highly skilled individuals. I would argue that similar changes must be made to the financial thresholds for skilled workers, while the bureaucracy required for employers to become “Tier 2 sponsors” (to recruit from beyond the EU) is utterly beyond most small and medium sized businesses – the backbone of the Scottish economy – and needs radical reform.
We should also look to reform the “exceptional talent” visas – restrictively pitched by the UK Government as accepting only people who are recognised by a very limited list of institutions as “leaders in their field”. Theresa May’s brutal policies on family members – that have seen many Scottish and UK citizens split apart from spouses, children and other family abroad – also need scrapped as a priority.
Simply having decisions made in Scotland will ensure an immigration system infinitely more responsive to Scotland’s needs – the deaf ear the UK Government has turned to those calling for a seasonal agriculture workers programme and a visa for offshore fishing illustrates this.
But of course the most immediate and biggest battle is to retain free movement for EU nationals who want to come and work here and for our own people who want to work across the EU. Free movement has been a huge gain for Scotland and our people. There is no reason why it needs to end, even if the UK does regrettably leave the EU; and even if the UK Government wants it to end in other parts of the UK.
Ending free movement will be a hammer blow to employers in many sectors of our economy and nothing could illustrate more starkly that UK migration policy is operating absolutely against Scotland’s interests, rather than for them.
As the commission also points out, tone and message is almost every bit as important as detailed policy. So it’s crucial we continue to build support for migration. Scotland needs new people!
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel