One step forward, two steps back: Evaluating the institutions of British immigration policymaking

Article

This paper explores four key issues affecting the ability of British immigration policy and administration bodies to do - and to be seen to do - a good job.

Naturally, it focuses on the Home Office and the UK Border Agency, raising a number of questions that are still to be answered following the announced abolition of UKBA in March.

The key issues addressed are:

  • The Home Office's monopoly on immigration policymaking, even though it is a cross-cutting issue with impacts and implications for almost every department in Whitehall
  • The 'culture of caution' that threatens to suffocate the Home Office
  • The confused structure and poor communication that led the Home Office and UKBA to operate as almost completely separate organisations, widening the gap between policy and implementation
  • The tension between evidence-based policymaking and political demands, which undermines the ability of researchers and policymakers to make effective use of evidence to inform and support their decisions.

The author, doctoral researcher Erica Consterdine, conducted 51 interviews with current and former MPs and ministers, employers and employer associations, trade unions, NGOs, thinktanks and experts in the field, and civil servants, which informed and illustrate this paper.

Related items

  1. The Home Office building in London

    A ‘paradigm shift’ in asylum and immigration policy?

    In 2019, a package of asylum reforms known as the ‘paradigm shift’ was passed by a broad party consensus in the Danish parliament.
  2. A wide shot of the debating chamber at the Scottish parliament

    A return north: reflections on IPPR Scotland’s tenth anniversary conference

    There’s nothing like moving away from Scotland to remind you just how Scottish you are. 
  3. Newcastle street view of famous bridge and buildings

    The evolution of devolution: How the English devolution and community empowerment bill can go further

    The government’s early commitment to broadening and deepening devolution in England is very welcome, but the bill must be bold enough to make change that people can see and feel.