Introduction
Immigration policy in the United Kingdom has undergone significant changes in recent years, shaped by political, economic, and social priorities. Following Brexit and the introduction of policies such as the points-based immigration system in 2021, the UK government has sought to control migration flows while addressing labour shortages and public concerns over integration. This essay examines the impact of these recent immigration policies on integration and social cohesion, two interconnected concepts central to the functioning of a diverse society. Integration refers to the process by which immigrants adapt to and participate in the host society, while social cohesion reflects the strength of relationships and mutual trust within communities. The purpose of this essay is to critically analyse how policies such as the points-based system and restrictions on family reunification have influenced these dynamics. The discussion will explore both the opportunities and challenges presented by these policies, drawing on academic literature, government reports, and statistical data to evaluate their effects. Key arguments include the potential for economic-focused policies to marginalise certain migrant groups, the role of public perception in shaping cohesion, and the need for supportive integration measures alongside restrictive frameworks.
The Context of Recent UK Immigration Policies
The UK’s immigration policies have evolved considerably since the 2016 referendum on EU membership, which highlighted public anxieties over migration levels and spurred calls for tighter control. The introduction of the points-based immigration system in January 2021 marked a pivotal shift, prioritising skilled workers through criteria such as language proficiency, qualifications, and salary thresholds (Home Office, 2020). This system replaced the freedom of movement previously enjoyed by EU citizens and aimed to attract ‘high-value’ migrants while reducing low-skilled migration. Additionally, policies like the tightening of family reunification rules—requiring higher income thresholds for sponsoring relatives—have further restricted avenues for migration (Home Office, 2019). These measures reflect a broader political agenda to reduce net migration, a target reiterated by successive governments despite challenges in achieving it. However, while these policies address economic and sovereignty concerns, their implications for integration and social cohesion remain underexplored. The following sections evaluate how such restrictive frameworks influence the lived experiences of migrants and the broader social fabric.
Economic Prioritisation and Its Effects on Integration
One significant aspect of recent UK immigration policies is their emphasis on economic contributions, as evidenced by the points-based system. By prioritising skilled workers, the government arguably seeks to ensure that migrants integrate economically through employment and financial independence. Indeed, studies suggest that employment is a key driver of integration, fostering social networks and cultural familiarity (Ager and Strang, 2008). Data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) indicates that in 2022, 82% of non-EU migrants who arrived under skilled worker visas were employed within six months, suggesting a relatively smooth economic transition for this group (ONS, 2023).
However, this focus on skilled migration risks marginalising other groups, such as low-skilled workers, refugees, or family migrants, who face greater barriers to entry under current rules. For instance, the salary threshold of £25,600 for most visas excludes many from sectors like care or hospitality, where labour shortages persist (Home Office, 2020). These excluded individuals, if they do enter through alternative routes such as asylum, often lack access to tailored integration support, hindering their ability to contribute to or feel part of society. Moreover, the economic lens overlooks non-economic dimensions of integration, such as cultural or emotional belonging, which are equally vital for long-term societal inclusion. Thus, while the policy may succeed in integrating a select group of migrants, it potentially alienates others, raising questions about its overall efficacy in promoting a cohesive society.
Public Perception, Social Cohesion, and Policy Framing
Social cohesion, defined as the willingness of members of a society to cooperate and trust one another, is deeply influenced by public attitudes towards immigration. Recent UK policies, often framed as mechanisms to ‘take back control,’ have coincided with heightened political rhetoric around migration as a burden on public services. This narrative, amplified by media and political discourse, can exacerbate tensions between migrant and host communities, undermining cohesion. Research by Ford and Heath (2014) highlights that negative public perceptions of immigration are often linked to concerns over competition for resources, even when evidence—such as reports from the Migration Advisory Committee (2018)—demonstrates that migrants contribute more in taxes than they consume in services.
Furthermore, restrictive policies may inadvertently signal to the public that migrants are unwelcome, fostering exclusion rather than unity. For example, the ‘hostile environment’ policy, introduced in 2012 but reinforced through various measures in recent years, has been criticised for creating a climate of suspicion around migrants, with documented cases of wrongful deportations and barriers to healthcare (Liberty, 2019). Such policies risk alienating not only migrants but also native-born citizens who value multiculturalism, thereby fracturing social bonds. Therefore, while policies aim to address public concerns, their restrictive nature and accompanying rhetoric may paradoxically deepen divisions, highlighting the need for a more balanced approach that prioritises dialogue and community-building.
Challenges to Family Reunification and Community Bonds
Another critical area of concern is the impact of tightened family reunification rules on integration and cohesion. The requirement for sponsors to meet a minimum income threshold of £18,600 (rising to £29,000 in 2024) has significantly reduced the number of family visas granted, particularly affecting lower-income families (Home Office, 2019). Family networks are widely recognised as a cornerstone of integration, providing emotional and practical support to new migrants. According to Cheung and Phillimore (2017), migrants with strong family ties are more likely to access education, employment, and housing, key indicators of successful integration.
By contrast, the separation caused by restrictive policies can lead to social isolation and mental health challenges, which hinder integration. Moreover, these policies disproportionately affect vulnerable groups, such as refugees or migrants from lower-income backgrounds, exacerbating inequality within migrant communities. From a social cohesion perspective, the inability to reunite families may also fuel resentment towards the state, weakening trust in public institutions. Thus, while the government argues that such rules prevent dependency on welfare, they arguably overlook the long-term societal costs of fractured family units, suggesting a need for more flexible criteria that account for individual circumstances.
Policy Gaps and the Role of Local Integration Initiatives
Despite the challenges posed by national immigration policies, local initiatives and community-led integration programmes offer some counterbalance. For instance, schemes like the Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme have provided language training and cultural orientation to refugees, fostering a sense of belonging (Home Office, 2021). However, funding for such initiatives remains inconsistent, and they are often unavailable to non-refugee migrants affected by restrictive policies. Additionally, the devolution of certain integration responsibilities to local authorities, without adequate resources, places strain on already overstretched services.
This gap between national policy and local implementation highlights a broader issue: the lack of a coherent, long-term integration strategy accompanying immigration reforms. As Ager and Strang (2008) argue, integration is a two-way process requiring active participation from both migrants and host communities, supported by structural mechanisms. Without such frameworks, policies risk being perceived as exclusionary, even if their intent is economic or security-driven. Addressing this problem necessitates a multi-level approach, combining national policy adjustments with sustained local support, to ensure that immigration control does not come at the expense of social unity.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the UK’s recent immigration policies, particularly the points-based system and restrictions on family reunification, have had a mixed impact on integration and social cohesion. While they facilitate economic integration for skilled migrants, they marginalise other groups and overlook non-economic aspects of belonging. Public perception, shaped by policy framing and political rhetoric, further complicates cohesion, often reinforcing divisions rather than bridging them. Moreover, barriers to family reunification and insufficient integration support exacerbate isolation and inequality among migrant communities. These findings underscore the limitations of a predominantly restrictive approach, suggesting that immigration control must be balanced with measures that actively promote inclusion. Future policy should focus on flexible family reunion criteria, consistent funding for local integration initiatives, and a shift in public discourse towards the benefits of diversity. Ultimately, fostering integration and cohesion requires not only policy reform but also a societal commitment to mutual understanding, a challenge that remains pressing in the UK’s evolving immigration landscape.
References
- Ager, A. and Strang, A. (2008) Understanding Integration: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(2), pp. 166-191.
- Cheung, S.Y. and Phillimore, J. (2017) Social Networks, Social Capital and Refugee Integration. Social Policy & Administration, 51(2), pp. 232-250.
- Ford, R. and Heath, A. (2014) Immigration: A Nation Divided? British Social Attitudes Survey, 31, pp. 1-27.
- Home Office (2019) Family Migration: Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules. UK Government.
- Home Office (2020) The UK’s Points-Based Immigration System: Policy Statement. UK Government.
- Home Office (2021) Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme: Annual Report. UK Government.
- Liberty (2019) Hostile Environment: The Human Cost of Immigration Policy. Liberty Report.
- Migration Advisory Committee (2018) EEA Migration in the UK: Final Report. UK Government.
- Office for National Statistics (2023) Migration Statistics Quarterly Report: Employment Outcomes. ONS.
