Universities argue that any attempt to control our borders will harm universities but this is false. Many types of immigration do not affect universities and the problems that are caused in society by mass immigration can affect universities too.
Amidst the debate on the need to limit immigration university vice-chancellors are making their usual warnings of doom and gloom for universities if we do not have open immigration. They claim that foreign students will not want to go to British universities (and pay full tuition fees) if we as a country do not openly support mass immigration.
Our universities are important and enhance our international prestige but the interests of wider society should not necessarily outweigh the concerns, legitimate, of universities who are often more concerned with tuition fees that international students bring.
Immigrant numbers
Despite their fears significant numbers of immigrants could be barred from this country while not affecting students who would enrol at a British university. The year up to September 2013 saw net immigration at 212,000, and if you add the emigration numbers, the gross total would be over 500,000; though emigration figures, due to the government’s incompetence over this issue, could be an overestimate. According to the government’s own figures 206,814 student visas were issued, and many of these do not do degree courses. Therefore the immigration figures could easily accommodate a dramatic fall in immigration while leaving student numbers untouched.
But student visa themselves could be cut without affecting enrolment at universities because student visas are a means of illegal entry to this country. Migrants on student visas could work in the black economy and not attend a single lecture. Clamping down on bogus students would not be detrimental to universities. In the year up to 2013 universities reported 106,698 cases of students abusing their visas so this is a real and widespread problem.
Those issued with student visas may go to colleges that do not offer degree courses or colleges that are completely bogus themselves. So student numbers can be further cut without affecting universities. Vice-chancellors, with the lure of non-EU student tuition fees, tend to panic about the hypothetical loss of income.
Unskilled Migration
Clamping down on unskilled migrants would not be detrimental to the universities. Unskilled migrants can pushed indigenous youngsters out of the employment market and onto benefits. The unskilled migrants themselves will most likely end up in low-wage jobs and so will pay very little income tax, if any, and will be entitled to in-work benefits that will far outweigh their tax contribution. Not to mention the cost that any dependents will create in terms of education and healthcare. So there are problems that need to be dealt with that extend beyond universities and that do not benefit universities themselves.
Imported Criminality
Universities would not suffer if we checked potential migrants for criminal convictions and the public would be safer if we did. We have record numbers of foreigners in our prisons costing up to £50,000 a year per prisoner.
Diversity
The universities also claim that they would suffer from a lack of diversity. Basically, if our indigenous culture is too strong then our educational reputation will apparently become worthless in the minds of students potentially wanting to study here. They will apparently take in less of their course content if too many people speak English in our society. It would be difficult to see how universities would benefit from being situated amongst a society in meltdown amidst ethnic conflict and breakdown. Rapid transformation can atomise and destabilise a society as is happening in Britain.
The wider country does not have to undergo fundamental demographic and cultural transformation for university campuses to be diverse. They can be islands of diversity amidst a strong (now relatively speaking) homogenous society. However too much diversity on campuses imply a far reduced indigenous presence. There is seemingly no actual benefit to this but in our society diversity is treated as the very essence of what is good.
It also seems to reflect an underlying belief that foreigners will hate our culture as much as we are told we ought to by the cultural revolutionaries; that our cultural identity is somehow a slur on our country. But we have traditions of government that are respected across the globe and history that draws tourists. I would not imagine that many of these tourists are attracted by Newham’s mosques rather than the Tower of London or Buckingham Palace for example.
Debate on Immigration: Off-Putting?
They argue that potential students will be put off if we discuss immigration because they will feel unwelcome but the potential consequences of not controlling it will be more off-putting because this country will become less stable and more unsafe. Wider society should not suffer either just to make potential students feel more comfortable.
It is being argued that the ‘negativity’ of the immigration debate means that potential students from abroad feel that they are not welcome but it is the pro-immigration side that is mischaracterising the other side as anti-foreigner rather than pro-border control and patriotic desire to preserve our national identity. It is not the fact that border controls are being discussed that could put people off it, is how one side is trying to portray the whole debate.
They claim that the fall in student numbers is down to the publicity surrounding UKIP (UKIP has apparently made the news in India) but this could be a way of denigrating UKIP for ideological reasons because others point out that the drop in student numbers from Asia, in particular (Indian students fell %15 and Pakistanis %35 amid overall %6 fall in non-EU numbers), could be down to the global recession and the increase in tuition fees; the drop in numbers followed the increase in fees, and non-EU students pay full fees.
Economic Contribution
They argue that international students contribute £7.9 billion to the economy but this not an argument against controlling the borders. Those whom use student visas merely as a means of getting into the country may not contribute and may work in the black market. Migrants may live on benefits or they may claim in-work benefits that far outweigh tax contributions. They use public services such health and if they have children they will incur educational costs. So even if international students spend money here there are many migrants who do not make a net contribution; if we controlled migration to ensure that someone would make a contribution this could dwarf the international student contribution through savings. The £7.9 billion itself could be mitigated by other international migrants on student visas imposing costs or being bogus.
Economic arguments do not outweigh the threat to the indigenous culture from mass immigration nor do the tuition fees that the (legitimate) students pay decrease the instability caused.
resistancetoantidemocraticleft 
Leave a comment