Conclusions and recommendations
Scotland’s immigration needs
1.Migration to Scotland has helped to create a prosperous and diverse nation with a thriving economy and a tolerant, diverse society. We welcome the benefits that migrants have brought to Scotland, and acknowledge the importance of ensuring that future immigration policy enables Scotland to continue to attract people from overseas to work, raise their families and contribute to Scottish society. (Paragraph 20)
2.Scotland faces a number of demographic challenges. The population of more than a third of Scotland’s local authority areas is projected to decline, and future population growth in Scotland is expected to be entirely dependent on inward migration. Like the rest of the UK the population is ageing, and a declining proportion of the population is of working age. None of these challenges are unique to Scotland; however, these problems are especially pronounced in Scotland and must be accounted for in the debate about the future of migration. (Paragraph 21)
3.Reducing migration will have a negative effect on population and economic growth in Scotland, with this in mind we recommend the UK Government reviews its target to reduce migration to the UK. It should also consider how Scotland can increase its share of migrants who come to the UK. (Paragraph 22)
4.Immigration is not the only solution to meeting Scotland’s demographic and economic challenges, and both the UK and the Scottish Governments have levers and powers which they can use to grow Scotland’s population and support its economy. However, migration policy is a key part of responding to these challenges, particularly given Scotland’s dependence on immigration for its future. (Paragraph 28)
Lessons from the current immigration system for non-EU nationals
5.The existing points-based UK immigration system for recruiting skilled workers from outside the EU is complicated and bureaucratic. The former Home Secretary herself has acknowledged the need to reform and simplify the system. The Tier 2 system is used proportionately less by businesses in Scotland than in England. The evidence we heard indicated that this is because of the complexity and expense for visa sponsors, especially for small businesses. (Paragraph 36)
6.Measures introduced by the Government in order to meet its target to reduce net migration have added further complexity and cost into the immigration systems. The cap on the total number of Tier 2 visas issued each month is intended to help reduce net inward migration, but we heard evidence that in practice it prioritises those roles with the very highest salaries to the exclusion of other criteria—disadvantaging Scottish businesses in favour of those in London and the South East who offer the highest salaries. While we welcome the decision to remove doctors and nurses from the current cap the underlying issue of what happens when the cap is hit remains. We recommend that the Government review how the visa cap operates to ensure that it does not disproportionately benefit London and the South East at the expense of the rest of the UK—including Scotland. (Paragraph 41)
7.The Immigration Minister told us that the existence of the shortage occupation list for Scotland indicated that the UK immigration system was able to take account of Scotland’s needs. However, at present, there are few additional roles on the Scottish list and we heard that Scottish businesses and sectors struggled to get roles, where they are experiencing a shortage, on the list. There is also no process for groups which have made a submission to the Migration Advisory Committee to receive a formal response or explanation if their proposal is rejected. We recommend that the Migration Advisory Committee review how the shortage occupation list is compiled, how the business and academic communities are engaged in this process, and how it communicates the outcome of its reviews, particularly to groups that have been unsuccessful in suggesting roles are included on the list. The Government should also empower the MAC to conduct regular reviews of the shortage occupation list for Scotland without requiring a specific commission from the UK Government. (Paragraph 47)
8.It is not clear whether the immigration skills charge is meeting its objective of supporting investment in improving the skills of the UK workforce or incentivising employers to try and fill vacancies with domestic workers. We recommend that the Government commission the MAC to investigate whether the skills charge is an effective tool for encouraging investment in the domestic workforce before deciding whether to replicate the charge in the post-Brexit immigration system. (Paragraph 51)
9.Given that one of the main purposes of the immigration skills charge is to incentivise employers to recruit locally, it is perverse that the charge applies to jobs which are included on the shortage occupation list—where the Government has acknowledged there is a shortage of domestic workers to fill these roles. We recommend that jobs which are on the shortage occupation list be exempt from the immigration skills charge. (Paragraph 52)
EU migration and the impact of Brexit
10.We heard from witnesses that uncertainty over the future rights and status of EU citizens was causing difficulties for both employers and employees. We welcome the progress made between the EU and the UK on EU citizens’ rights and emphasise the importance of agreement being secured on this issue in the final deal. We also welcome the assurances given by the Immigration Minister that the Government has now started a comprehensive communications campaign to provide greater clarity to EU citizens throughout the UK. We recommend that the UK Government work with the Scottish Government and all parts of Scottish society to reach all EU citizens currently residing in Scotland, and Scottish businesses employing EU workers to ensure they have all the information they need to successfully apply for settled status. (Paragraph 60)
11.Post-Brexit immigration policy for EU citizens will have a substantial impact on Scotland’s businesses and public service delivery. A key benefit of the current freedom of movement is the lack of administrative and financial burdens for both employers and employees, which is in marked contrast to the current system for recruiting non-EU workers. The overwhelming message we received from employers was that if freedom of movement ends when the UK leaves the EU, employers will need another route for recruiting workers from outside the UK. Any post-Brexit system for recruiting non-UK workers must be straightforward enough to be used by small businesses. Given businesses’ concerns about the complexity and cost of the current Tier 2 visa system, which we explored in the previous chapter, the existing points based UK immigration system would need substantial reform and simplification if it is to be able to provide a suitable basis for replacing freedom of movement. (Paragraph 74)
12.It is essential that any future immigration system provides businesses with the ability to recruit workers who do not meet the existing Tier 2 skilled worker criteria. We heard from different business sectors about the range of skills, training, qualifications and expertise required in different roles and heard evidence about a number of urgent labour shortages in highly skilled roles in a range of occupations across Scotland, from agriculture and fisheries to the care sector. The Government must ensure that the future immigration system has a more sophisticated way to make judgements on migrant workers skills than the current system which focuses purely on salary level and whether the role requires a degree. (Paragraph 75)
13.There is evidence that access to the UK and EEA labour markets is already insufficient to meet the current demand for seasonal agriculture workers. We recommend that the Government introduce a new Seasonal Agricultural Workers Scheme at the earliest possible date. The UK Government must consult the Scottish agricultural sector on the design of this scheme to ensure that it meets its needs. (Paragraph 79)
International students
14.The Higher Education sector is an important asset to the Scottish economy and encouraging international students to live and study in Scotland is an effective way of bringing new talent to the country. We do not believe it makes sense for the Government to include student numbers in the net migration target, whilst at the same time investing in ways of encouraging more students to come to the UK. Whilst we accept that the actual impact of student numbers on the target may well be minimal, we believe that the message given by current policy is confused and counter-productive. We recommend that student numbers are removed from the figures used to monitor the net migration target, and that the Government clarifies its message to welcome international students to the UK. (Paragraph 84)
15.We agree with the Government that immigration policy should encourage talented and highly qualified people to seek work in the UK, and we believe that post-study work visa schemes are an effective way of doing so. We welcome the Government’s Tier 4 visa pilot to enable one-year Masters degree students to stay on for six months after the end of their course and are pleased that this has finally been extended to two Scottish universities. We recommend that the UK Government closely monitors the pilot with a view to its extension. (Paragraph 91)
16.We call on the UK Government to work with the Scottish Government to explore the possibility of introducing a broader post study work scheme for international higher education students graduating from Scottish further and higher education institutions. In the absence of a UK wide scheme, we recommend that the Government ask the Migration Advisory Committee to include an assessment of Scotland-specific post-study work visa schemes in its forthcoming report on international students. (Paragraph 92)
Increasing Scottish influence on immigration policy
17.The UK and Scottish Governments both recognise the importance of reflecting Scottish interests in immigration policy, but it appears that current mechanisms do not adequately enable this to happen. We recommend that the UK Government reviews how the Scotland specific shortage occupation list is agreed, including considering having a Scottish representative involved in the decision-making process. We also recommend that the UK Government reviews how it engages with the devolved administrations on areas of policy—such as immigration—which are reserved but of clear importance to the devolved administrations. (Paragraph 98)
18.Greater differentiation within the UK system might provide a way to better match immigration policy with local needs. During our inquiry we heard evidence on sub-national schemes. More work is needed to determine the advantages and disadvantages of greater differentiation within the UK. We recommend that the Government commission a review of all options for increased regional differentiation, particularly for Scotland, in the UK immigration system which sets out the impacts this would have on businesses, local employment and communities. (Paragraph 109)
Published: 11 July 2018