The Lib Dems have a rare opportunity to make the case for migration

Rarely has there been so much space on the political spectrum for the Lib Dems and so little appetite on their behalf to fill it.

Ok, that maybe a little harsh: Ed Davey’s refusal to attend the banquet with Donald Trump is more than a stunt but by tying it to Gaza alone it has become a tactical weapon with which to outflank Keir Starmer, rather than a wider statement about the threat of authoritarianism and the corruption of democratic norms embodied by the US President.  It is the right target and the right action, but the wrong critique.

His call for a cross-party response to Musk’s weekend rant is potentiall more substantial, but the question now is whether this is a space he intends to own or he will revert to type.  

In contrast, the Lib Dem leadership has absented itself from the summer’s debate around immigration and small boats.  There is a compelling argument to be made that immigration numbers have little to do with small boats.  What’s more, the underpinning assumption behind the whole argument – that immigration is bad for Britain – is well worth challenging, but no one will challenge it, other than the far left who, as message-deliverers, merely damage their own cause.

Labour will not take on the anti-migrant narrative for fear that too many of its potential supporters may endorse it. But the Lib Dems voting pool is entirely different.  

There is not a single seat in which Reform were runners up to the Lib Dems and in only two seats were Reform even within 20% of the Lib Dems.   As the Lib Dems’ outgoing President and commentator reminds us just 1% of voters give even a 5/10 probability of considering voting for both the Lib Dems and Reform.  What’s more, whilst the Lib Dems’ main challengers in the seats they hold and aim to win next time round, are the Conservatives, the profile of the Conservative voters in those seats is to the left of the party, which is why they did not defect to Reform last time round.  

So, the Lib Dems have a freedom to express liberal views about immigration without it costing them electorally, while at the same time gaining from entering the national debate and perhaps shifting the centre of gravity of the immigration debate in a more rational direction.  

So, what might the Lib Dem argument look like?

First, they should argue that Liberal Democrats will make migrants pay their own way.  Asylum seekers could contribute billions to the UK economy if only they are allowed to work while they are awaiting decisions, paying taxes on their earnings and reducing dependency on welfare payouts.  They could then pay for their own housing rather than having to be housed in hotels at taxpayers’ expense.  

Second, they should point out, we desperately need migrants to undertake work to build new homes and maintain our health service – even to serve us coffee.  The ageing British population just doesn’t have the workers.  Anyone who has had any contact with the NHS in the last forty years will know it would collapse without foreign workers.  And the carers who look after us as we get older are overwhelmingly from overseas.  Without migration, the UK can’t maintain the services British people want.  

And third, Lib Dems should say, many migrants are refugees fleeing wars and terror in fear of their lives.   These are real people and we should treat them as we would want to be treated ourselves were we to face the same dilemmas.   This is the very core of British values and fair play.

In conclusion, the Lib Dem might say, “our immigration policy isn’t working – neither for refugees nor for Britain. We are a kind, generous and tolerant nation but, even if we weren’t, it would be in our own self-interest to think again about migration.”

This is an argument which desperately needs to be made, to challenge the current social media and tabloid narrative that is resulting in a counter-productive downward bidding war as to which party can clamp down hardest on the migrants.   

Only the Liberal Democrats have the political space to make an alternative case.  The challenge for them as they approach their Conference and their policy review is whether they seek to occupy it or if winning a handful more seats without impacting politics is enough?  

In the long term, to allow the authoritarian right to continue to set the political weather unchallenged, will cost all the mainstream political parties dear.

* Ben Rich is Chief Executive of Radix, the radical centre think tank. From 1992-95 he was Lib Dem Deputy Policy Director and from 1997-2001 Vice Chair of the Federal Policy Committee. He was Tim Farron’s Leadership Campaign Director and his interim chief of staff from 2015-16 and senior adviser to the Lib Dem Business & Entrepreneurs Network until December 2019.