Points based discrimination
Since the Brexit vote, there has been much discussion on how exactly to implement the curbs on the movement of people that many people clearly voted for. And the scheme that has been mentioned most often is introducing a “points based system”, after Nigel Farage declared support for such a system based on the Australian model. But what would a points based system actually look like? And would it be better than the alternatives?
A points based system means assessing each application from potential migrants according to a set of criteria — for example, the sector in which they work, their education or skills levels, their knowledge of or ties with the UK, English language ability and so forth. Achieving a certain level on each criteria earns points; only applicants above a certain threshold of points are allowed in. Such a scheme sounds eminently reasonable since it allows us to define the characteristics that we would like to see from potential migrants and only accept people who meet those.
Yet in practice a points-based scheme would be a huge backward step because it is a very inefficient way of achieving the objective of reducing migration. Consider how such a scheme might work. To have a points-based system you need to have a set of criteria to score. Who determines the criteria? Clearly it would be impossible for all those involved in the referendum vote to decide this; instead it will be decided by a group of “experts”, or civil servants. But the criteria that they choose to score may not be the same as those that would be chosen by the public. Then consider the points — for each level of each criteria one would accrue a certain number of points (e.g. different levels of English language proficiency would obtain different scores). But who determines how many points each criteria should obtain? Again, a civil servant in the Home Office will almost certainly be tasked with making these up. But on what basis — there is no sensible basis for working out whether a level 2 at English is more or less important than having a degree, or a British cousin. The resulting scheme will apply its discrimination in an entirely arbitrary fashion.
But worse still, there isn’t even theoretically a correct answer to the question of which criteria matter most. This is because different criteria matter more for different kinds of activities. Consider a migrant who comes to the UK for a job as a tour guide for UK citizens; in this case excellent English is essential. But if their job is as a French teacher in an immersive French course, then speaking English is irrelevant. The same is true for all other criteria: having a degree is important if a degree is needed for the job; but a positive hindrance if the job is for low skilled workers (yes we need those too). There is NO sensible single set of criteria that will let in the people that we want and need — any single set of criteria will let in too few people for some types of activities and too many for others.
However, there are two groups of people who know how well suited migrant’s skills are for the UK market. The first group is employers. Employers don’t hire people randomly — they assess their qualifications and experience against the requirements for the job. They are much better placed than any civil servant to provide a nuanced view about the suitability of any particular migrant for employment in any specific job in the UK, since it is them that have to pay them. They have a much stronger incentive for getting it right. Hence one solution for the migration problem post-Brexit would be to let EU migrants come and live in the UK as they wish and give them a work permit should any employer decide that they are right for the job. This would ensure a perfect alignment between what employers actually need and the skills of the migrants. The only downside of this arrangement is that it is almost exactly what we have already.
The second group of people who have detailed knowledge of the suitability of migrant skills for the UK market are … migrants. We all know ourselves — we know what we are good at and what we are not. Hence the second solution to the problem would be to let EU migrants choose whether or not their skills are likely to be best deployed in the UK or in some other location in the EU. This is also an excellent solution since it allows migrants to take into account the myriad factors that might make them succeed or not in the various different locations throughout the EU — factors that often only they have knowledge of. The only “downside” of this arrangement is that it is called “free movement” and already included in the EU treaty.
Hence a points-basis system would discard the information from the two groups of people who actually know best whether migrants are likely to really add value — employers and migrants themselves — and instead institute a rigid, bureaucratic, one-size-fits-all, system that would provide employers with a poorer match for the skills that they need whilst keeping out migrants who might potentially add immensely to the UK’s economy (not to mention its linguistic and cultural diversity). The overall score for a points-based system? Nil points.
��-Rb��b
