Campaign 7
Immigration: Facts First
Judge immigration policy by outcomes, not slogans.
Few areas of British politics generate more heat or less clarity than immigration.
Immigration is confused with net migration. Visas with arrivals. Asylum with legal migration. Illegal entry routes with total immigration.
These are different things. Britain on Purpose wants to make them easier to understand.
The campaign in 30 seconds
- —Government policy: The Government's immigration White Paper aims to grow the domestic workforce, reduce reliance on overseas recruitment and maintain an immigration system that supports economic growth.
- —Latest evidence: ONS provisionally estimates UK long-term net migration at 171,000 in the year ending December 2025, down from an updated 331,000 the year before.
- —Our approach: Track the different components of immigration separately and compare outcomes with government's stated objectives.
- —Success looks like: A controlled and understandable system whose benefits, costs and trade-offs can be openly assessed.
Falling net migration is a fact
The latest estimate represents a substantial reduction. That should be acknowledged. Good news should survive politics too.
But net migration is not the whole immigration system. It is simply immigration minus emigration.
The Immigration Scorecard
Track separately:
We will not choose the answer before looking at the evidence
Britain on Purpose does not begin with a predetermined migration number and work backwards.
Migration can bring economic, fiscal, cultural and demographic benefits. It can also create genuine pressures on housing, infrastructure, services and particular labour markets.
Being honest about immigration's benefits should not require denying its costs. Being honest about its costs should never require demonising migrants.
What we are asking government to do
Adopt an Immigration Facts Standard whenever major policy changes are announced. Government should clearly state:
- 01What is changing?
- 02What is the baseline?
- 03What result is expected?
- 04What are the expected economic and public-service effects?
- 05When will the policy be evaluated?
- 06What evidence would cause it to change?
What would change our mind
- —The answer is deliberately simple: the facts.
- —If evidence shows a policy is delivering its objectives with manageable trade-offs, acknowledge it.
- —If not, change it.
Policy in Practice
Immigration policy affects more than the headline migration number.
Track:
If government changes visa rules, also ask:
- —What happened to the sectors that previously recruited those workers?
- —Did domestic recruitment increase?
- —Did wages change?
- —Did businesses automate?
- —Did vacancies remain unfilled?
- —Did universities or public services experience financial effects?
None of those outcomes automatically determines whether the policy was right or wrong. They tell citizens what the policy actually did.
Compare the alternatives
We apply the same test to every party: is the proposal costed, independently verified, and does it define how success will be measured?
Current Government
The Government's Restoring Control over the Immigration System white paper seeks to reduce reliance on overseas recruitment, strengthen domestic skills and retain migration routes it considers supportive of economic growth.
Expected benefit
Tighter work routes could encourage employers and government to invest more in domestic recruitment and training.
Potential trade-off
Sectors that remain reliant on international workers could face shortages, higher labour costs or reduced capacity. Effects will vary between sectors and regions.
Conservatives
The Conservative BORDERS Plan proposes barring asylum claims from new illegal entrants, creating a removals force and leaving the ECHR and other legal frameworks.
Expected benefit
If legally and operationally effective, the plan could increase removals and strengthen deterrence.
Potential trade-off
Leaving legal frameworks and attempting rapid removals would create major constitutional, diplomatic, administrative and financial challenges.
Liberal Democrats
The Liberal Democrats propose seeking UK participation in the EU's Migration and Asylum Pact, including access to shared biometric information and mechanisms for returning some asylum seekers to European countries.
Expected benefit
Greater European cooperation could improve identification, information-sharing and returns arrangements.
Potential trade-off
Participation would require agreement with the EU and acceptance of negotiated responsibilities within a shared framework; the UK could not impose the terms unilaterally.
Reform UK
Reform proposes net-negative migration, replacing Indefinite Leave to Remain with renewable visas, raising requirements and restricting access to benefits for foreign nationals.
Expected benefit
Lower migration could reduce dependence on overseas labour and give government tighter control over settlement and eligibility.
Potential trade-off
A large reduction in labour supply could reduce capacity or raise costs in health, care, hospitality, construction and universities. Retrospective changes to settlement rights would also face legal and implementation challenges.
Green Party
Green policy supports more safe routes, allowing asylum seekers to work while claims are processed and ending most immigration detention.
Expected benefit
Earlier employment could improve integration, increase tax receipts and reduce dependence on public support.
Potential trade-off
Wider routes and eligibility changes could alter application volumes and administrative demand. Reduced detention would require effective community-based case management.
Where there is common ground
All five approaches accept that immigration policy should be managed and that its effects on public services, the labour market and public finances should be measured. The disagreement is mainly about the scale of reduction, the legal frameworks to use and how to handle asylum.
Britain on Purpose: The Test
Immigration → Emigration → Net Migration → Work → Wages → Skills → Public Services → Fiscal Impact → Asylum → Returns. State the objective. Measure the result. Show the trade-off.
Less heat. More light. Facts first.