Javid starts work with promise of ‘fairness’
‘Hostile’ phrase unhelpful, says new Home Secretary as pressure continues to mount on Prime Minister
Sajid Javid has promised a “fair” immigration policy that “treats people with respect” as he distanced himself from his predecessors on his first day at the Home Office. The new Home Secretary, who was announced as Amber Rudd’s replacement following her resignation over the Windrush scandal, ruled out using the phrase “hostile environment”. He told MPS it was “unhelpful” as he vowed to put his own stamp on the department amid intense criticism of Theresa May.
SAJID JAVID has promised a “fair” immigration policy that “treats people with respect” as he distanced himself from his predecessors on his first day in the Home Office yesterday.
The new Home Secretary ruled out using the controversial phrase “hostile environment”, telling MPS it was “unhelpful”, as he vowed to put his own stamp on the department amid intense criticism of Theresa May.
Mr Javid, who replaced Amber Rudd as head of the Home Office after her shock resignation on Sunday night, faced calls to “retire” some of the policies developed by the Prime Minister when she carried out the role.
Nick Boles, the Conservative MP, said the department must change course after weeks of pressure over the treatment of the Windrush generation.
It emerged earlier this year that a number of people living in the UK legally had been threatened with deportation because they were unable to prove their right to remain in Britain. Mr Javid yesterday vowed to put their situation right.
Ms Rudd quit at the weekend after she admitted unintentionally misleading Parliament over the existence of deportation targets, which critics believe contributed to the plight of the Windrush generation.
Answering questions in the House of Commons yesterday, Mr Javid distanced himself from language used about immigration, describing the hostile environment as “unhelpful”and not representative of British values.
He revealed that he has requested more information from officials about how targets were set and used, and would make a decision about their effectiveness in the coming weeks.
Meanwhile, Mrs May, who stands accused of using Ms Rudd as a “human shield” to protect her reputation, admitted she had been aware of targets during her time in the Home Office. Ms Rudd’s inability to confirm the use of quotas for removing illegal immigrants prompted her decision to resign after she told MPS on the home affairs select committee they did not exist, before being told by officials they did.
Speaking yesterday, Mrs May said: “When I was home secretary, yes, there were targets in terms of removing people from the country who were here illegally. This is important. If you talk to members of the public, they want to be reassured that we are dealing with people who are here illegally.”
Critics have warned that the Prime Minister must be held accountable for her role in the scandal. It has been claimed she set the tone for the department, which Ms Rudd was unable to change for fear her boss would not agree. However, Mr Javid gave a clear signal that he is prepared to challenge Mrs May’s record in office as he vowed to be his own man.
Mr Boles, a former minister, asked if Mr Javid would be prepared to set a new tone. He added: “If that means retiring some legacy policies then so be it.”
Mr Javid, who has previously spoken of the need for a skills-based immigration policy, replied: “Mr Boles, having worked with me in a previous department, will know that every department I’ve worked in I’ve almost certainly been putting on my own stamp.”
He told MPS: “I don’t like the phrase ‘hostile’ so I think the terminology is incorrect. I think it is a phrase that is unhelpful and it does not represent our values as a country. So it’s about a compliant environment.
“I want to start by making a pledge, a pledge to those from the Windrush generation who have been in this country for decades and yet have struggled to navigate through the immigration system: this never should have been the case and I will do whatever it takes to put it right.”
‘My pledge to the Windrush generation: I will do whatever it takes to put it right’
The first thing I would do if I were Sajid Javid, the new Home Secretary, is make sure I have the people around me to help get an iron grip on the Home Office. It is essential in any big job in government to have special advisers, private secretaries and a permanent secretary of the whole department who spot problems and detect a crisis in the making even when their boss is busy with daily events.
Whatever Amber Rudd did, she does not appear to have been well served by such people. Her successor needs to act with cold ruthlessness in ensuring the excellence and loyalty of the people around him – nothing else will guarantee that the Home Office is doing what he wants it to do and that he knows what it is doing.
Provided he can do that, there are opportunities for this talented Midlands MP, who is the son of a Pakistani bus driver. The biggest and most crucial is to create an immigration policy that has widespread and lasting consent from most of Britain’s population, including its ethnic communities.
It is obvious that anxieties over immigration are now determining the course of politics across Europe and the US. Without the prominence of this issue, there would be no Brexit or President Trump, and elections across the EU would not be showing huge support for nationalist parties. And it’s clear, too, that this problem isn’t going to get smaller – the inability to control immigration into and within Europe is the development most likely to break the European Union fundamentally in the future.
British people want something very simple: control of who comes to their country. This is not unreasonable. It is what Australians, or Indians or Japanese people or Canadians insist on too. They are not against people coming here to work hard, or in great need, or to study, or to do work we refuse to do, provided we know who is here and that they leave at a certain time if that was the basis on which they were admitted. But being in control of our own borders is critical.
Sajid Javid could be the first Home Secretary in decades who can preside over having that control, and lead the way to fashioning a new and sensible settlement on immigration on the back of it. If he does so, he will not only escape the graveyard job of most governments with his political life intact, he will also give Britain a more cohesive society and the Tory party a stronger appeal among people of all origins.
His opportunity arises because two things are now happening that will permit the UK to control who enters and leaves it. First, we are leaving the EU – this is the most substantial advantage of doing so, amid all the many disadvantages and costs. Secondly, an attempt has been made, initiated by Theresa May when she was home secretary, to introduce comprehensive exit checks so that we actually know who has left the country and who is still here.
Both these new factors are incomplete, to put it mildly. We haven’t left the EU yet, and a recent official inspection found that the data from exit checks was not yet accurate enough, thorough enough or sufficiently co-ordinated for it to be reliable. Let us imagine, though, that by the end of 2020, we have completed the Brexit transition and managed to get the databases of all the travel companies and immigration counters working reliably together.
If that could be done, a whole new situation opens up, in which Britain can pursue and administer an immigration policy in the country’s best interests. Current ideas of what is a “tough” policy and what is a “soft” one would become out of date. We would not be a soft touch on immigration by agreeing to a labour mobility scheme with the EU – to let people come to work on farms, in restaurants or on construction sites for perhaps two years – if we could reliably know that they had left by then. Even the Prime Minister might be persuaded to take students out of the immigration figures: it is great for our universities and the country to have people from all over the world here to learn, provided we know with confidence that they cannot just stay without permission when their studies are complete.
We would not let any of these people in if they were in any way associated with terrorism or extremism. And if they committed a serious crime while here we would deport them at once. If the numbers were at any time too great for our economy or education system we would limit the total. We would have the confidence and generosity that comes from being in control.
To enforce this properly, it would be worth thinking again about bringing in universal identity cards. We Conservatives were against this a decade ago, but times have moved on. In a nation with a realistic chance of governing its borders there is a better case for them, and the growing prevalence of digital identities being required for many daily activities makes a stronger case for a core system under democratic control.
With the ability to set rules about who enters the country, the information to ensure they have left if required, and the evidence granted to each individual that they have the right to be here, many of today’s fraught controversies about illegal immigration could fall away. Illegally remaining here could be tackled more swiftly, with effective action rather than a “hostile environment”.
And finally, this would permit an enormous problem, an elephant in the room, to be addressed. Boris Johnson is reported to have upset many of the Cabinet, including the PM, by arguing again recently for an amnesty for those who came here irregularly or illegally many years ago. At the moment, it is a strong argument against his proposal that any amnesty encourages others to try their luck in the future.
A country that is able to enforce its immigration policy, however, could adopt the Boris approach, and can tell people already here for a decade or more that they can work, pay taxes and be with their loved ones. It can say we will decide who comes in from now on, but people of industry and talent are welcome to add to our prosperity. And it could also have fewer Windrush scandals, a less divided politics, and a more settled society. Go for it, Sajid.