Memorandum by the Institute of Community
Cohesion
BACKGROUND
1. The Institute of Community Cohesion (iCoCo)
was established in 2005 to provide a new approach to race, diversity
and multiculturalism. Our work focuses on building positive and
harmonious community relations.
2. iCoCo represents a unique partnership
of academic, statutory and non-governmental bodies, which combine
the experience and expertise of four Universities—Coventry,
Warwick, DeMontfort and Leicester, with practitioners from a range
of diverse backgrounds and professions.
3. iCoCo works with local and national organisations,
advising on the best ways to promote community cohesion. In recent
months, it has undertaken much work in the field of migration,
mapping population change, assessing impact of new communities
upon service delivery and wider issues of cohesion in rapidly
changing communities.
4. The Institute of Community Cohesion works
to build a more cohesive society. We believe that:
— Diversity is good for society—socially,
culturally, economically.
— But, diverse societies work best
when they have a sense of social solidarity and mutual responsibility.
— Every individual will benefit from
a richer notion of citizenship and fuller involvement in civil
society.
5. We work to develop policy solutions that
enable us to live together rather than side by side; that promote
greater shared identity; that support new migrants to adapt to
life in Britain, that define what it means to be citizen and instil
a greater sense of civic responsibility amongst all those in our
society.
THE CHANGING
PATTERN AND
NATURE OF
MIGRATION
6. Recent migration has undoubtedly had
an impact upon community cohesion and, judging from opinion polls
and our own field research, opinion has become more opposed. However,
the economic case is nevertheless generally recognised and much
of the opposition relates to the failure to resolve resource conflicts
in a timely manner and to tackle relatively minor social and cultural
misunderstandings and to provide the necessary resources and re-assurance
to existing residents (see for example, the iCoCo research for
the LGA, Estimating the Scale and Impacts of Migration at a
Local Level).
7. We will not use this submission as the
place to repeat well-established statistics upon the changing
migration patterns the United Kingdom is experiencing. However,
there are some larger thematic points that we believe it is important
to raise.
8. Migration is not, in any case, simply
a matter of numbers. We now have a much greater diversity, with
over 300 languages in London schools. This is replicated on a
smaller scale across the country—for example, in Middlesbrough,
60 languages and 14 faiths can be found. We have also witnessed
a growth in diaspora communities, which are now much easier to
sustain, often with the benefit of new technology, across national
boundaries and aligned with faith as well as ethnicity.
9. As well as increasing in size and diversity,
migration flows have become more complex. For example,
while the numbers of asylum applicants has decreased, there is
some evidence of forced migrants using other migration pathways
to enter and remain in the UK, as overseas students or with work
permits.
10. There is also increased temporary and
circular migration. In the past, most international migration
to the UK was permanent or semi-permanent in nature. Today there
is much more temporary migration to the UK, usually of a circular
nature. We believe that circular migration poses particular challenges
for schools and those involved at a local level in promoting long-term
cohesion.
11. It is also crucial that migration is
not separated from wider issues of cohesion. Perceptions about
race, ethnicity and religion are at the heart of how well new
migrants are received into communities. Many migrants face the
same issues as previous migrant and minority communities, such
as racially aggravated violence, workplace discrimination, and
educational under-achievement.
12. In this respect, we find it disappointing
that migration issues have remained primarily with the Home Office
while wider cohesion policy is now with Communities and Local
Government. We believe that this leads to an over-emphasis upon
the control rather than integration side of migration.
COMMUNITY COHESION
13. Migration should not be seen outside
some of the wider challenges to community cohesion. Equating community
cohesion solely with one aspect—be it the impact of migration
or the desire to combat religious extremism can be unhelpful.
Community cohesion is multi-faceted and should be seen as a positive
programme to promote understanding and respect between different
communities, as well providing a response to a wide range of divisions
in society—for example, those based upon ethnicity, age,
faith, nationality, sexual orientation, within and between minority
ethnic communities and in respect of travellers and existing residents.
14. Longer term structural issues also need
to be addressed. Breaking down segregation in housing, schools
and employment is necessary not only to ensure that inequalities
are tackled, but also that interaction takes place in the course
of everyday life, rather than manufactured through special compensatory
schemes and projects. Positive action programmes to break down
ethnic/cultural stereotypes associated with particular occupations
have already been validated in a number of public and private
spheres. There has been less experience of such schemes in housing
and education, but they do exist and require more support and
development.
15. It is vital that community cohesion
is linked to wider social policy initiatives such as development
of citizenship education, building social capital and enhancing
democracy and local accountability.
16. Community Cohesion programmes are becoming
increasingly established at both the national and local level.
But capacity and skills are still very limited and we are concerned
about how national and local agencies can combine in future to
provide the necessary infrastructure to ensure that these challenges
are met. ICoCo has been established to fulfil at least part of
this role and we see this as being increasingly necessary, particularly
in the light in the demise of the Commission for Racial Equality.
At this stage, it is essential a small number of clear priorities
are established and are properly resourced national programmes.
IMPACT OF
MIGRATION ON
COHESION
17. It is clear that rapid and diverse migration
has an impact upon community cohesion. Natural movement of people
and instability within a community can have an impact upon the
social networks and the level of social capital in an area. Research
from Prof Robert Putnam, amongst others, demonstrates that this
impact can be negative in the short-term.
18. iCoCo, however, does not believe that
this negative correlation is intrinsic to the more diverse societies
and feels strongly that many of the negative impacts are due to
inappropriate policies and procedures for accommodating this change.
19. In particular, we believe that the greatest
threats to community cohesion are caused by:
— an unhelpful and negative national
discourse around migration which impacts locally;
— the inability of service providers
to accommodate the pace of change;
— insufficient data on population mobility
and therefore inappropriate funding mechanisms; and
— difficulties around the English language
and a general lack of clarity about the requirements of citizenship.
20. We set out the issues and some potential
solutions around each of these areas through the course of this
submission.
21. In addition, one of the primary challenges
posed to community cohesion from migration is the inequality and
high levels of social exclusion faced by many refugee and new
migrant communities. This is characterised by educational underachievement,
unemployment and labour market segregation. Somalis, for example,
are a particularly marginalised refugee group. Their numbers include
many young people who have undertaken most or all of their education
in the UK, speak fluent English, yet leave school with few qualifications
and are unsuccessful in finding work. The 2001 Census indicated
that 83% of adult Somalis were economically inactive.
22. This is also acute inequality in housing
provision. Most labour migrants and many refugees are living in
temporary, privately rented accommodation. Their transience and
mobility may compromise community cohesion.
23. Programmes to help socially excluded
migrant communities find work—for example, job clubs offering
long term support rather than short term courses—are therefore
needed.
MIGRATION POLICY
24. Migration has many beneficial impacts,
particularly in the economic sphere, and these are generally recognised
by business and public services providers. However, migration
is undoubtedly leading to an increase in the general population
and thus placing additional demands upon service providers.
25. Public and political debates about the
impact of migration services are gaining prominence, often fuelled
by media stories on acute strains on public services The highly
contested nature of these debates circumscribes the scope for
policymakers to respond.
26. Too much of the public and political
debate has concentrated upon numbers and securing borders, rather
than making the positive case for migration and policies to support
the integration of migrant communities and to provide adequate
resources to areas which are coping with population change.
27. iCoCo believes that the government's
failure to provide the context for migration is having a detrimental
impact on community cohesion. It is also counter-productive. Despite
all the rhetoric about "clampdowns" and stringent new
announcements, public concern about immigration has increased
in recent years. Therefore, it would be helpful if to deflate
tensions rather than add to perceptions that migrant communities
are here illegally or are a drain upon the state when they are
here.
28. This negative attitude is carried into
policy which can also be seen to be counter-productive. For example,
the limiting of the period of settlement to those granted Convention
refugee status to a period of five years, revocable at any time
during this period is hugely damaging to long-term cohesion. There
is a clear expectation that those with refugee status would return
if conditions improved in their home countries. This compromises
the integration plans of many of those granted refugee status
and serves as a negative incentive for them to learn the language,
develop social networks or get involved in civic life.
29. We also believe that a more realistic
policy in relation to irregular migrants is needed. This group
comprises clandestine entrants to the UK, migrants who use false
documents to gain entry to the UK, visa over-stayers, asylum over-stayers
of which there may be as many as 400,000 in the UK, as well as
irregular inter-EU secondary migrants who have secured legal status
to remain in one EU state, but move to reside illegally in another
EU state.
30. The hidden nature of irregular migration
makes the scale of it difficult to estimate. There have been a
number of attempts to do this, using different methodologies.
In 2005, the Home Office commissioned research that aimed to estimate
the irregular migration stock—the total population of irregular
migrants—in the UK. It estimated the irregular populations
as 310,000-570,000.
31. When considering what policy solutions
to pursue with regards to irregular migration, it is also worth
calculating the costs of deporting irregular migrants. The financial
costs are likely to be significant given that they must include
the cost of apprehension, detention, as well as transport. As
an example, in the UK, the average cost of carrying out the enforced
removal of a failed asylum seeker is around £11,000. If we
assume that the Government were to deport all irregular migrants
at this rate, this would imply a total removal cost of around
£4.7 billion, which compares to the enforcement budget for
removals, which was £270 million in 2006-07.
IMPACT OF
MIGRATION ON
SERVICE DELIVERY
32. The absolute scale of immigration may
present challenges to service delivery. Poorly funded public services
have the potential to act as a focus point for racial tensions.
33. Central Government needs to reassess
current funding formulas for local authorities to assist those
areas experiencing rapid population change.
34. Even if the increased local demand is
recognised in local population estimates and thence by increased
grant from the centre, there is often a lag between the additional
grant and the immediate demands upon services. In addition, many
areas are experiencing high levels of both in and out international
migration, and internal migration, which may have little effect
on net population but significant impact on service provision
and administration.
35. We also believe that there should be
some recognition of the short-term impact of high or rapid levels
of migration, independent of any net impact on population. We
have previously suggested greater use of discretionary funding
for authorities who are consistently the focus of migration as
well as the establishment of mobility fund which would enable
areas experiencing short-term changes to bid for one-off payments.
36. Schools are frequently central points
for dealing with the short-term impacts of migration. "Churn"
and mobility in class populations has been consistently seen as
placing additional demands upon education provision These pressures
include translation services, teaching numeracy and literacy,
understanding cultural differences, mid-term arrivals, and the
lack of records and assessments. In this respect, iCoCo views
the reduction in Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant funding as
a significant cause for concern.
37. Our work tells us that some of the demand
upon service is due in many cases to confusion or the lack of
clear guidance. For example, some migrants make inappropriate
use of A&E services and enter the health system at an emergency
stage rather than through earlier, preventative care. Also, vehicle
crime can come from a lack of awareness around correct documentation
or legal initiatives such as drink driving laws.
38. These can be addressed in part by greater
language provisions (see below) but also by dedicated information
and awareness campaigns. However, too often this is left to individual
public authorities at the local level. Greater national programmes
to help new migrants understand British laws and customs are needed.
DATA COLLECTION
AND FUNDING
39. We are concerned about the lack of adequate
resources in this area and believe that the economic benefits
of migration have not been invested into essential public services
and social programmes, which are essential if conflicts and divisions
are to be avoided and the barriers broken down to allow tolerance
and respect to develop.
40. There is general recognition that official
statistics on migration are inadequate and need to be improved,
particularly at a local level. The International Passenger Survey
(IPS) is the principal source of data for movement in and out
of the country but the sample is very small. Local allocation
depends ultimately on the 2001 Census rather than more recent
local data (although the Labour Force Survey (LFS) was used for
the first time in 2006 to allocate the IPS to regional level and
below this in London).
41. A range of evidence from administrative
data (such as NINO and NHS "Flag 42" data) and local
studies seriously questions the robustness of the national, and
particularly the local, estimates.
42. There is a range of administrative and
other data available which relates to migration, including NINO;
the Workers Registration Scheme (WRS) for A8 migrants; first health
registration of new arrivals—Flag 4; the annual School Census
(PLASC); the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) count of
students; Electoral Registers (ER); and the LFS, a sample survey
of 60,000 households per quarter. All have limitations, particularly
around recording de-registration, but taken together they can
offer a fuller picture and pick up, particularly, rapid change
and flows of migrants. There is also scope to enhance these sources
and make better use of the information they collect.
43. iCoCo therefore believes that agencies
at national and local level must work together and develop data
sources that provide more information about the size and composition
of local populations. This may well require data to be collected
in a slightly different way, to a common standard, or on the basis
of a common timescale.
44. It is essential that local authorities,
the police and many partners have up to date, reliable and accurate
data which can assist service planning and tension monitoring.
However, we feel that this should be supplemented by the re-introduction
of the mid-term census, (ie every five years), even if only on
a scaled down basis. With more detail on ethnicity than has hitherto
been collected to respond to the configuration of heritage groups
in specific localities which is becoming ever more complex. In
an era of ever more mobile people and dynamic populations we see
this as being essential.
45. As an interim measure, better use should
be made of NINO, PLASC, Flag4, HESA and Electoral Registration
data. We would suggest that key players should be brought together
to look at what data is available, how it can be used and what
enhancements might increase the usefulness of these sources for
monitoring.
LANGUAGE
46. Our work locally consistently tells
us that language remains one of the primary barriers in both advancing
the opportunities for new migrants and also bringing about social
integration. It is vital that the basic needs of new migrants
can be met—communicating essential information, supporting
their advice needs and communicating in emergencies.
47. The ability to communicate in English
(or Welsh) is, however, an essential skill without which full
participation in British Society is not possible. In particular,
job opportunities are very limited and the prospects for moving
out of poverty and low paid work are poor. Further, the opportunity
to understand and participate in democratic debate and discussion
is very limited.
48. We believe that English language classes
should be made freely available to all new migrants as well as
those who still rely solely upon their heritage languages.
49. It is right that there should be a clear
expectation that all citizens and denizens (residents without
citizenship) will learn English to a high standard. Such provision
is clearly not available in many areas at present and there is
no real expectation to either provide or acquire such skills,
other in respect of the longer term and limited "citizenship
test".
50. iCoCo has welcomed the recent announcement
by the Government that they will be targeting English classes
towards migrants who need language skills in order to integrate
with society.
51. However, we would urge the Government
to move further upon the requirement for businesses to contribute
to the costs of this service. Employers must accept their responsibilities
and agree to provide English language teaching for all employees.
This is needed not only for Health and Safety purposes and general
communications within the workforce but also for cohesion. As
employers are often getting the advantage of migrant labour, it
is only right that they should pay for at least some of the costs
incurred.
THE FUTURE
OF COMMUNITY
COHESION
52. It is clear to us that the policy and
practice of community cohesion has greatly advanced over the last
five years or so. The recent Commission on Integration and Cohesion
report has helped to consolidate that progress. A great many local
authorities now have community cohesion strategies and plans,
often set within the wider partnership context of sustainable
community strategies. Such strategies have been adopted across
the political spectrum and by voluntary and private sector agencies
and are succeeding in breaking down barriers, misunderstanding
and trust. It is essential, in our view, that this progress—and
the political consensus—is maintained and built upon with
an even greater level of commitment and resources.
| 
