Immigration, Economy and Human Rights: Dispelling Myths and Exposing Dangers

Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, nor does it represent the views of any governmental body. The perspectives expressed are those of the author and should be considered in the light of broader research and official sources. You are advised to consult qualified professionals when dealing with immigration, human rights, or legal matters.

How migration affects the UK economy and why dehumanising political rhetoric puts us all at risk

Immigration Law Explained – Understanding UK Immigration Law

Immigration law in the UK determines who can enter, stay, work, study, or claim protection, and under what conditions. It is a complex system made up of domestic acts of Parliament, international treaties, Home Office rules, and case law.

The Core Legislation

The main laws governing immigration include:

⚖️ Immigration Act 1971

Establishes the foundation of modern immigration control.
Sets out the power to grant or refuse entry, detain individuals, and remove those without legal status.

⚖️ Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002

Governs asylum procedures.
Sets rules for appeals, accommodation, and the duties of the Home Office.

⚖️ Immigration Act 2014 & 2016

Introduced the “Hostile Environment”, making immigration enforcement part of daily life.
Requires landlords, employers, banks, and NHS services to check immigration status.
Made life significantly harder for people unable to prove their legal status.

⚖️ The Illegal Migration Act 2023

Aimed at stopping small-boat crossings.
States that anyone arriving “illegally” must be detained and removed, with limited rights to claim asylum.
Faces legal challenges because it conflicts with:
- The Refugee Convention (1951)
- The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
- The Human Rights Act 1998

⚖️ Human Rights Act 1998

Ensures that immigration decisions must respect human rights.
Key rights include:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Freedom from torture/inhuman treatment (Article 3)
- Right to family life (Article 8)

This act often protects people from removal if it would cause serious harm or violate their family unity.

Asylum Law: The Right to Seek Protection

Under the 1951 Refugee Convention, a person has the legal right to:

Enter a country to seek asylum
Have their claim examined fairly
Not to be returned to danger (non-refoulement)

Important:
It is not illegal to seek asylum, even without documents. Many refugees lose documents fleeing war or are forced to hand them over to smugglers.

Legal vs. “Illegal” Migration

The UK differentiates between:

Legal Migration

People entering on:

Work visas
Student visas
Family visas
Sponsorship schemes
Refugee resettlement programmes

They must follow the rules in the Immigration Rules, a detailed Home Office manual.

Irregular / Undocumented Migration

Often refers to:

People arriving by small boats
People are smuggled into the country
People overstaying visas

These individuals may still have a legal right to claim asylum.

Deportation vs. Removal

These terms are often confused:

Deportation

Used when someone is removed for criminal activity or if the Home Secretary believes their presence is “not conducive to the public good”.

Removal

Administrative process when someone has no legal right to stay (e.g., refused asylum).
Does not require a criminal offence.

Both processes are heavily regulated and can be appealed.

Digital Status and Immigration IDs

The UK is moving toward:

Digital immigration status instead of physical cards
Biometric data, including fingerprints and facial recognition

Critics argue this gives the state too much control and reduces transparency, fuelling concerns about authoritarianism.

Procedural Safeguards

Immigration law requires:

The right to legal representation
The right to appeal (except where restricted by the 2023 Act)
The right to humane, dignified treatment
Vulnerable individuals (children, victims of trafficking, disabled people) are to receive additional protection

When political rhetoric seeks to strip these protections away, it clashes directly with UK and international legal duties.

Political Rhetoric vs. the Law

When an MP advocates:

Deporting all migrants
Removing due process
Ending asylum rights
Reintroducing the death penalty

These positions can conflict with:

The Refugee Convention
The ECHR
The Human Rights Act
Anti-discrimination laws

The UK cannot simply abandon these obligations without fundamentally dismantling its human-rights framework.

What is immigration, really?

Immigration simply means people moving from one country to another to live, work, study, join a family, or seek safety. It’s not one thing and not one kind of person:

Some are highly-skilled workers (doctors, engineers, tech workers).
Some are care workers, cleaners, delivery drivers, and farm workers.
Some are students.
Some are refugees and asylum seekers who have fled war or persecution.

Policy debates often lump everyone together as “migrants” or “foreigners”, which hides the reality: immigration is diverse, and different groups have very different economic and social impacts.

How immigration affects the UK economy

Growth, productivity, and public finances

Research on the UK shows a fairly consistent picture:

Overall fiscal impact is small but often slightly positive. Studies compiled by the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford find that immigration’s net impact on public finances is typically between –1% and +1% of GDP, i.e. fairly modest either way, with recent migrants tending to make a more positive contribution than earlier arrivals. Migration Observatory
Recent migrants and many work visa holders are more likely to be in work, and often earn more than UK-born workers. This means they can pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits, especially when they’re of working age and have not reached retirement yet. UK in a Changing Europe
Net migration and GDP: The Office for Budget Responsibility notes that higher migration tends to increase total GDP and the size of the labour force, and that sharp reductions in migration are likely to reduce growth, tax receipts, and the capacity of key sectors such as health and care. Office for Budget Responsibility

In short, immigration is not the “magic growth solution”, but neither is it the economic catastrophe some claim. It usually brings modest gains, especially when people are working in sectors with labour shortages.

Filling key labour shortages

Many sectors rely heavily on migrant workers:

NHS and social care: Large numbers of doctors, nurses, carers, and support staff were trained abroad. Cutting migration too fast risks staff shortages, longer waiting lists, and poorer care.
Construction and “green” jobs: A report by the Centre for European Reform warns that tighter immigration rules are already threatening the UK’s ability to meet its housing targets and net-zero goals, because there aren’t enough workers in construction and green industries. The Guardian
Food production, hospitality, and logistics: Seasonal work and lower-paid roles are often hard to fill with domestic labour alone, especially outside big cities.

When we look beyond slogans, the evidence suggests that cutting migration sharply without a plan can mean fewer workers, slower growth, and pressure on public services, not the other way round.

Why do people flee their own countries

People rarely leave home, language, culture, and family for no reason. Common reasons include:

War and armed conflict: e.g., Syria, Ukraine, parts of Sudan, and other conflict zones.
Persecution: because of race, religion, political opinion, gender identity, sexual orientation, or membership of a particular social group.
State violence and repression: torture, arbitrary detention, “disappearances”, and lack of any legal protection.
Ethnic cleansing and genocide: being targeted simply because of who you are.
Climate change and environmental disaster: drought, flooding, crop failure, and resource conflicts.
Extreme poverty and economic collapse: where work literally cannot be found and basic needs are not met.
Human trafficking and modern slavery: people being moved against their will or under false promises.
Family reunion: joining a spouse, children, or parents who are already abroad.

Under the Refugee Convention 1951 and its 1967 Protocol, and under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as applied via the Human Rights Act 1998, people have a right to seek asylum and to be protected from refoulement (being sent back to a place where they face serious harm).

Education about immigration: facts vs myths

Some persistent myths:

“Most immigrants don’t work.”
In reality, migrants (especially recent ones) are often more likely to be in employment than UK-born citizens in many age groups. UK in a Changing Europe
“Migrants are the main cause of pressure on the NHS.”
Many migrants work in the NHS and social care. When they’re young and working, they often use fewer NHS resources than older UK-born residents but still pay taxes. Migration Observatory
“Immigration causes most crime.”
Crime is influenced by many factors (poverty, inequality, policing, demographics). The overall relationship between immigration and crime is complex and does not support the simple claim that migrants, as a group, are more criminal. Mainstream research does not show that immigration automatically increases crime rates.

Teaching these points in schools and public education can help people understand that “immigration” is not a single block problem but a huge mixture of human stories and economic realities.

Language and Legal Issues

What is actually being said (based on public sources)

Publicly available comments include:

Posts and statements referring to “lazy foreigners” and arguing that paying benefits or providing translators to “lazy foreigners” is a “scam” or “complete waste of money”. X (formerly Twitter)
Social media posts claiming that the UK is funding a “rapidly growing number of lazy foreigners to do sod all”. X (formerly Twitter)
Strong criticism of publicly funded translators, saying patients should “speak English”, and questioning why millions are spent on translation/interpretation for people claiming benefits or using the NHS. The Independent
Calls for “mass deportations” and statements such as “Every illegal immigrant must go. Not some. Not 500,000. All. ”Petitions – UK Government and Parliament
Recent calls in Parliament for a legally binding referendum on reintroducing the death penalty for certain crimes, including those committed by foreign nationals. Nation.Cymru

It’s important to be precise: talking explicitly about illegal migrants and “lazy foreigners”, not literally “all immigrants, including legal residents and British citizens of migrant background”. But the language is broad and highly inflammatory, and ordinary listeners may experience it as aimed at “all foreigners” or all people who look or sound “foreign”.

Racial Discrimination or Hatred?

From a legal perspective in England & Wales, some key frameworks are:

Equality Act 2010: protects people from discrimination and harassment based on race, nationality, ethnic origin, etc., in areas such as employment, services, and public functions. Public authorities also have a Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) to have due regard to eliminating discrimination and fostering good relations.
Public Order Act 1986 (Part III): makes it an offence to use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with the intention of stirring up racial hatred, or where racial hatred is likely to be stirred up.
Crime and Disorder Act 1998: creates racially or religiously aggravated forms of certain offences (e.g. assault, criminal damage, public order offences), which carry higher sentences.
Communications offences (formerly under s.127 Communications Act 2003 and now under newer harmful-communications legislation): cover sending grossly offensive or menacing messages via public networks, though these laws are narrow and controversial.
Human Rights Act 1998 / ECHR: Article 10 protects freedom of expression but allows restrictions for protecting the rights of others; Article 14 prohibits discrimination in the enjoyment of Convention rights.

Whether a particular speech crosses the criminal threshold for “stirring up racial hatred” or other offences depends on:

The precise wording
The context (e.g., rally, broadcast, social media reach)
The speaker’s intention
How likely is it that hatred will actually be stirred up

That’s ultimately a decision for courts and prosecutors.. However, from a social and ethical perspective, there is a strong argument that:

Branding “foreigners” as “lazy”, talking about creating a “hostile and unwelcoming environment” for “unvetted foreign invaders”, and calling for mass deportations is dehumanising rhetoric that targets people on the basis of nationality and perceived foreignness.
Such language normalises the idea that migrants are a threat to be removed, rather than human beings with rights and individual stories.
This can encourage prejudice, discrimination, and hostility in everyday life, even if it does not meet the criminal threshold for “incitement to racial hatred”.

Many politicians, charities, and commentators as xenophobic and inflammatory, and contribute to a hostile climate for migrants and people perceived as foreign.

Have Race-Related Hate Crimes Increased With Higher Migration?

Trends in recorded hate crimes

Home Office statistics for England and Wales show:

Total hate crimes recorded by police have more than tripled since 2012/13, when around 42,000 offences were recorded, to around 137,550 offences in the year ending March 2025. GOV.UK
Race-motivated hate crime is the largest category, accounting for around 70% of all hate crime (about 98,799 offences in the year ending March 2024). GOV.UK
There have been spikes in racial and religious hate crime at particular times, such as:
- Around the EU referendum
- After terrorist attacks
- Around protests and geopolitical events (e.g. Gaza war) Research Briefings

In the most recent data:

Year ending March 2024: 140,561 hate crimes (a 5% fall from 2023), with race hate crimes falling 5% that year but religious hate crimes rising 25%. GOV.UK
Year ending March 2025: 137,550 hate crimes, with race hate crimes up 6% and religious hate crimes up 3%, while disability, sexual orientation and transgender hate crimes fell. GOV.UK

So recorded race and religious hate crimes have increased substantially over the past decade, with some fluctuations year-to-year.

**Is this because of migrants?**

This is more complicated:

Increased numbers can be partly explained by better recording and a greater willingness to report hate crimes.
But there is also clear evidence of genuine spikes linked to events and hostile public rhetoric (e.g., around the EU referendum, terrorist incidents, or intense political debate). Research Briefings
Surveys show that ethnic minorities and many migrants feel unsafe and avoid certain places because of their ethnicity, religion or nationality. Around 10–20% of ethnic minority respondents in some studies report experiencing racial harassment, and many report feeling unsafe or avoiding public places for fear of attack. UK Parliament Committees

So while you can’t simply say “more migrants = more hate crime”, there is strong evidence that toxic debate and dehumanising language about migrants are associated with increases in racist harassment and fear, especially at flashpoint moments.

The human impact: being “foreign” in your own country

For people who:

were born in the UK,
hold British passports,
but have “foreign-sounding” names, different skin colours, or accents,

This climate can be terrifying. Research and testimony show:

Ethnic minority people are more likely to report racial harassment, feel unsafe, and avoid public spaces because of their background.
Hate crime victims often become more isolated, stay home more, and live with ongoing fear and trauma. Victim Support
Some groups, especially Black, Asian, Jewish and Muslim communities, report marked increases in both incidents and fear of racist attack in recent years.

So when politicians talk about “foreigners” as criminals, “invaders”, or “lazy”, it doesn’t only hit recent arrivals. It also hits British citizens who are constantly treated as if they don’t belong.

Many people in that situation do fear leaving their homes alone at night, worry about being assaulted, and feel they have to “hide” parts of who they are just to be safe.

What laws and values are at stake?

Summing up the legal and ethical side:

Equality Act 2010 and Human Rights Act 1998 commit the UK to equality and non-discrimination.
ECHR obligations require the state to protect people from violence and discrimination and to respect the right to life (which is one reason reintroducing the death penalty would clash with the UK’s current human-rights commitments).
Public Order Act 1986 and related legislation criminalise stirring up racial hatred.

While robust debate on immigration policy is legitimate, politicians also have a responsibility not to inflame racial tensions or demonise whole groups of people. When public figures use language like “lazy foreigners” or advocate a “hostile environment” for “foreign invaders”, they may:

Not only risk normalising discrimination and hostility,
But also undermine the rule of law and human-rights protections that are supposed to apply to everyone, regardless of their origin.

Migrants arriving by boat and undocumented migration

The UK has seen arrivals of people sometimes described as “boat people” (i.e., people crossing the English Channel in small vessels) and others who arrive without full documentation. These cases trigger different legal, policy and practical responses.

People who arrive without prior authorisation may apply for asylum: under the Immigration Act 1971 and the 1951 Refugee Convention they may claim refugee status if they fear persecution.
If their claim fails (and there is no right to stay), they may face removal (deportation) from the UK. However, in practice removal is often delayed for many reasons (lack of documentation, country of origin refusing to issue travel documents, appeals, backlog).
The UK government has introduced electronic or digital schemes for migrants: for instance the Home Office has used digital identity verification systems for some visa/immigration categories. But there is no widely published scheme that says all undocumented boat-arrivals immediately receive a “digital ID card” and full rights.
Many arrivals are temporarily accommodated in hotels or other short-term housing while their claims are processed. This is because local councils and the Home Office must provide housing (under the Housing Act 1996 and asylum-housing obligations) until decisions are made or removal takes place.

Why are migrants housed in hotels, and what’s the cost?

The housing of asylum seekers (including those arriving by boat) in hotels is often due to a shortage of long-term asylum housing and the urgent need to place people somewhere while their claim is considered.
The government publishes that they pay “contracted accommodation” costs—some figures: In recent years, the cost of asylum accommodation and support has been reported in the billions. For example, the National Audit Office reported that in 2022 the government forecast a total cost of “accommodation and support” for asylum seekers of £3.4 billion for that financial year in the UK.
As for benefits: asylum seekers are usually not eligible for mainstream benefits such as Universal Credit while their claim is in process, unless they receive specific support from the Home Office. For example, asylum seekers receive a weekly allowance (at a reduced rate) to cover essentials (food, clothing) while their claim is processed. As of recent years, that rate has been around £10–£12 per person per week (sometimes less) in accommodation provided by the Home Office.
These arrangements often attract public and political criticism, both in terms of cost to the taxpayer, and in the conditions of accommodation, delays in processing, and routes to removal or settlement.

Government policy: legal and undocumented migrants

The UK government has emphasised a “two-track” approach: those with legal routes (skilled visas, student visas, family routes) are processed under one system; those who arrive irregularly (by boat, hidden in vehicles, etc.) face a separate process.
For irregular arrivals, the government has said it aims to “increase removals”, “reduce incentives for dangerous irregular crossings”, and “close down small boat routes”. Example: the Illegal Migration Act 2023 gives the government new powers to detain and remove those arriving illegally (though subject to legal and human-rights constraints).
The government also uses hotel accommodation contracts and has expanded this during periods of increased arrivals.
Debate continues over digital identity verification, biometrics, refugee status determination and whether undocumented migrants receive “IDs” or are effectively invisible in the system until they apply—or get removed.

Conclusion

Is the UK becoming a “controlled” or “communist” state?

Some commentators claim that the increasing role of government in immigration control, housing, surveillance, biometric systems, and removal regimes indicates a drift towards greater state control. While the UK is not a communist state in the political-economic sense, it is true that immigration policy involves a high degree of state power: controlling who enters, stays, what rights they have, and how they are housed.

The key questions here are:

Should a liberal democratic state have such expansive powers of control over movement, status, and residence?
Are there adequate safeguards of human rights, transparency, due process, and accountability?
When politicians use rhetoric about “foreigners” as threats, combined with strong state powers to remove and detain, does the state risk undermining civil liberties and equality under the law?

These questions are especially relevant for our platform (Disabled Entrepreneur UK), given that we focus on rights, justice, and fair treatment for all, including marginalised groups.

www.FIRST4LAWYERS.com

Andrew Jones

+ posts

Andrew Jones is a seasoned journalist renowned for his expertise in current affairs, politics, economics and health reporting. With a career spanning over two decades, he has established himself as a trusted voice in the field, providing insightful analysis and thought-provoking commentary on some of the most pressing issues of our time.

Spread the love