Suggestions likely to generate intense debate 26th April 2011: Less than a week after the Institute for Public Policy Research came out with a report on how to reduce irregular immigration, it has come under criticism.
Experts believe the report `No Easy Options: Irregular immigration in the UK’ will generate an intense deliberation on how the UK government should deal with approximately 618,000 irregular migrants in the country.
The report, published on 20th April 2011 by Tim Finch with Myriam Cherti `aims to tackle head-on one of the most difficult public policy issues in the UK: how to reduce irregular immigration’.
The IPPR says: `Given that the best recent estimate put the number of irregular immigrants in the UK at well over half a million, the scale of the phenomenon is one obvious reason why it demands attention.
`However, it is not scale alone, but rather scale allied to the harm it does which provides the compelling imperative to take action on irregular migration.
`The report sets out four key priorities for action – reducing real harm, containing irregularity, increasing public confidence and reducing irregularity – and policy recommendations to work both upstream (pre-arrival) and downstream, including: initiatives in origin countries; cooperation with transit countries; border security; targeting the irregular immigration industry; a risk-management approach to enforcement and return, and increasing returns.
The critics insist the IPPR makes it clear that since its previous report way back in 2006 the political stand has toughened up on the issue of irregular immigration. As a result, suggestions considered soft are not likely to find favour in the political circle.
As such, the report brings out steps considered politically feasible. No wonder, the suggestions are largely in sync with the government’s present policy, instead of facing up to current thinking.