The Bar - We welcome people who want to become part of Britain. But becoming part of Britain has requirements.

 There are two positions that increasingly dominate arguments about immigration.

One says, in effect, open the doors. People should be free to come, regardless of where they come from, what they contribute, or whether they integrate into the society they have entered.

The other says, in effect, close the doors. Immigration itself is the problem, and the answer is to admit as few people as possible.

I reject both.

I believe Britain can be a country that welcomes immigrants while also expecting something of them.

That is not contradictory.

In fact, I think it is the only sustainable way to understand immigration: Britain can welcome people without making permanent membership unconditional.

Come to Britain. But understand what Britain is asking of you.

My starting point is remarkably simple:

We welcome people who want to become part of Britain, but becoming part of Britain has requirements.

If you want to come here to work, build a career, raise a family and make a life, then come.

But Britain is not merely a geographical location in which you happen to reside. It is a society: a collection of institutions, laws, customs, responsibilities and shared expectations.

If you want to make that society your permanent home, it is reasonable for that society to ask whether you have made a reasonable effort to participate in it.

That means, above all, integration.

Not cultural uniformity. Not abandoning your religion, your ancestry, your food, your music or your personal traditions.

Integration does not mean becoming indistinguishable from someone whose family has lived in Britain for generations.

It means being able to participate in the society you have chosen to join.

Immigration should be a choice on both sides

There is something important about making immigration requirements explicit.

The immigrant should know the rules before making the decision to come.

Britain should not say:

"Come here and discover the conditions later."

Nor should an immigrant be expected to discover after arrival that the country has expectations they were never told about.

Instead, the proposition should be straightforward:

These are the conditions for living here. These are the conditions for settling here permanently. These are the conditions for citizenship.

You can decide whether that bargain suits you.

If it does, welcome.

If it doesn't, there are other countries in the world.

That isn't hostility. It is transparency.

Settlement should be earned

I believe there is an important distinction between entering Britain and becoming permanently settled in Britain.

A person can be given permission to live and work here without being automatically entitled to permanent membership of the country.

Permanent settlement should be something earned.

And what should someone have to demonstrate?

At minimum, I would expect three things.

First: self-sufficiency.

If you come to Britain to work, the expectation should be that you support yourself through work and contribute to the society around you.

That does not mean treating every person who falls on hard times as a moral failure. People become unemployed, sick or vulnerable in every society.

But as a general principle, immigration should not be built around an expectation that the British taxpayer will provide an alternative income.

The basic proposition should be:

You came here to build a life. Build it.

Second: English.

If you intend to live permanently in Britain, you should be able to communicate in the language overwhelmingly shared by the society you have joined.

I would therefore make a meaningful level of English a condition of permanent settlement.

Not because other languages are unwelcome. They aren't.

Britain should have no problem with people speaking Polish, Urdu, Mandarin, Arabic, French, Spanish or any other language in their homes and communities.

But there needs to be a common language through which citizens can communicate with one another.

That language is English.

Third: basic competence.

I would go further and require immigrants seeking permanent settlement to demonstrate Functional Skills Level 2 in English and mathematics.

This isn't an examination of someone's worth.

It isn't a demand that everyone become an academic.

It is a basic standard of functional competence.

If someone wants to make Britain their permanent home, I don't think it is unreasonable to expect them to acquire the basic skills necessary to navigate modern British society.

The point isn't punishment. It's incentives.

This is where my philosophy differs from simply saying that immigration should be "tougher."

The purpose of these requirements is not to punish immigrants.

It is to establish incentives.

If settlement is automatic regardless of behaviour, there is little reason for settlement itself to encourage integration.

If, instead, permanent settlement requires self-sufficiency, English proficiency and basic competence, then the immigration system rewards precisely the behaviours that a successful immigration policy should want.

Change the incentives, change the behaviours.

That principle applies throughout society.

If Britain wants people to learn English, there should be an incentive to learn English.

If Britain wants immigrants to participate economically, there should be an incentive to work.

If Britain wants people to integrate into British society, there should be an incentive to integrate.

The immigration system should make those expectations clear.

This is not a demand for cultural assimilation

There is an important distinction between integration and assimilation.

I am not arguing that immigrants should cease being Indian, Nigerian, Polish, Chinese, Pakistani, Romanian, Jamaican or anything else.

Nor am I arguing that Britain should become culturally uniform.

A British society containing people with different backgrounds can still have common foundations.

You can retain your family's traditions while learning English.

You can practise your religion while participating in British civic life.

You can cook the food you grew up with while working alongside people from completely different backgrounds.

You don't have to stop being yourself.

But if you choose Britain as your permanent home, you should make an effort to become part of Britain as well.

Citizenship should mean something

There is a tendency to treat citizenship as an administrative endpoint: live somewhere long enough, fill in the paperwork, and eventually the passport follows.

I think citizenship should mean more than that.

Citizenship represents membership.

It says:

This is my country. These are my fellow citizens. These are my institutions. These are my responsibilities.

That doesn't mean citizenship should be reserved for some imaginary "perfect Briton."

Britain has never been populated by one type of person, and it never will be.

It means simply that citizenship should represent a genuine connection to the country.

A person who has learned the language, supported themselves, participated in society and demonstrated a willingness to integrate has done something meaningful.

They have not merely lived in Britain.

They have chosen to join it.

The bar should be clear

The most important part of this philosophy is perhaps the simplest:

Tell people the bar before they arrive.

Don't invite people into Britain under one set of expectations and then change the rules halfway through.

Don't pretend there are no expectations.

Don't make the requirements so complicated that nobody knows what they are.

Set the bar.

Publish it.

Make it measurable.

Give people the opportunity to meet it.

And then apply it consistently.

That is fairer to Britain and, importantly, it is fairer to immigrants.

Because an immigrant deciding whether to come to Britain deserves to know exactly what Britain expects.

If the requirements are acceptable, come.

If they aren't, don't.

There is nothing inherently hostile about saying that.

Every country has a right to determine the conditions under which people become permanent members of its political community.

Britain can be welcoming without being unconditional

I want Britain to remain a country that people want to come to.

I want people to look at Britain and think:

"I can build a life there."

But I also want the answer to the next question to be clear:

"What does Britain expect from me?"

The answer should be equally clear.

Work.

Contribute.

Learn English.

Acquire the basic skills necessary to function independently.

Respect the laws and institutions of the country.

Make a genuine effort to integrate.

And if, after knowing those conditions, you decide that Britain is somewhere you want to call home, then come.

You are welcome.

But becoming part of Britain has requirements.

That isn't a rejection of immigration.

It is an assertion that membership means something.

And if you don't like the bar, you are perfectly free to choose a different country.