Immigrants who want to become British citizens will stand a better chance if they opt to live in Scotland, under radical reforms to be unveiled by the Home Office this summer.
It's a good headline grabber for a Scottish paper obviously, but contrary to first impression, it's a plan which won't be limited to Scotland:
The move, contained in a draft consultation to be released in the next few weeks, means prospective British citizens already settled in the UK may flock north of the Border to ensure they have enough points to be successful.It would be interesting to see how they propose to measure objectively "special artistic, scientific or literary merit"...but apart from that, I'm not at all sure about the last suggestion. It looks too much to me like Soviet era social-engineering when huge populations where moved from one part of the USSR to another purely for the sake of economic and political expediency and in a free-market economy (and in a nation with no internal border controls) I can't see it achieving its target.
The new points-based system will also reward applicants who can show they have attributes required by the country, but will penalise them for failing to disregard British values.
Under the new Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill, applicants will undertake a probationary period before being granted citizenship, meaning it could take up to eight years to complete the process.
The Home Office draft paper declares: "Attributes for which points could be awarded might include earning potential, special artistic, scientific or literary merit, qualifications, shortage occupation, English (above existing requirements); and having lived and worked in a part of the UK in need of increased population, eg Scotland."
4 comments:
This seems a bit daft to me. As you say the market is the best mechanism to allocate labour to specific areas. If Scotland's population is too low (and what evidence is there to suggest it is) then perhaps the solution is to invest in that regions economic potential so that the jobs available will attract settlers.
As you say this looks like an ill concieved social engineering project the cost and trouble of which seems unjustified
A similar system has been in use for years in Canada and Australia. Indeed the Australian states had separate "embassies" in London to attract immigrants to their specific states. The "ambassador" was styled the "Agent-General". Some states have got rid of the office but others have hung on in. Ring Western Australia House for details.
http://www.wago.co.uk/ag_message/archives/ag_message_sept05.htm
Or maybe Queensland House:
http://www.londononline.co.uk/profiles/6500/
This despite of course immigration and border control being federal matters.
The Canuks again have immigration and border control under the control of the federal government but many provincial governments have "Immigration Ministries" - even today.
(I am sure you would hit the roof if an equivalent ministry was set up by the Scottish government :)
http://www.citizenship.gov.on.ca/english/
http://www.ontarioimmigration.ca/english/index.asp
http://www.micc.gouv.qc.ca/fr/index.asp
Not to mention the grandly named Ministry of Intergovernmental and International Relations in Alberta
http://www.international.alberta.ca/572.cfm
http://www.albertacanada.com/uk/
Aberdonian
Do you know if they've achieved the target of more dispersed immigration?
No idea, but I would guess there must have been some success in Canada as the population is growing in the west compared to the old Ontario-Quebec axis - remembering that across the border from Alberta are US midwest states with populations akin to Edinburgh or Glasgow at best. Not a glamorous pop over the border to NY or New England whenever you feel like it.
Also would the provincial governments be throwing out money (which they raise from their own taxes) if it was not working?
Post a Comment