Skip to main content

Racist assumptions, stereotypes influence UK Home Office raids on 'immigrants'

By Aaron Gates-Lincoln* 

It is no secret that the UK government’s current attitude towards issues in immigration are harsh and punitive based. Recently, Priti Patel has faced much criticism as Home Secretary for implementing a large range of policy that many argue is regressive and unnecessarily ruthless as she attempts to deter migrants from wishing to enter the UK. One method that has faced heavy criticism as of late is that of frequent immigration raids within local communities.
The Home Office is estimated to undertake dozens of raids every week. In 2018, they performed on average 43 raids every week, however once the Covid-19 pandemic hit in 2020, such raids were mostly suspended for public health and safety reasons. As we are now edging towards the removal of all Covid-restrictions, the use of immigration raids has once again returned to its place as a core method of controlling immigration within the UK.
Over half of all raids take place in people’s workplaces, in the attempt to find and detain migrants that the UK Home Office suspect to be illegally living and working in the UK. The raids can also take place in people’s homes and in places of worship. Over the past 5 years there has also been a rise in immigration raids in care homes, with 190 being raided since 2016.
Such frequent raids are not cheap for the UK government. The Immigration Enforcement arm of the Home Office employs around 5,000 people and has a budget of about £392 million a year. This is a very large sum of money and can only be justifiable if it serves its purpose and serves it well.
However, this is certainly not the case. In 2019, not even 1 in 10 immigration raids resulted in someone being deported or removed from the UK -- despite that being their primary aim. In the same year, the Home Office raided 18 care homes in which none of them resulted in a deportation. These numbers are damning in regard to the worth and value of immigration raids. When comparing costs and benefits, it is hard to argue why raids have become such a primary method of immigration control.
In many communities, it has been argued by the public that they cause immense disruption, especially in workplaces and places of worship. Furthermore, migrant communities are forced to live in constant fear that their doors could be forcibly knocked down and themselves or family members removed from the country without so much of a warning.
This fear is exacerbated by the ‘intelligence-led’ methods used by the Home Office in determining where and who should be raided. The UK government has promoted a negative societal view of migrants, which has influenced many members of the public to feel like it is their duty to ‘tip off’ the Home Office if they feel someone is living in their community illegally. 
It has estimated that the Home Office receives around 50,000 ‘tip offs’ a year. Combined with the fact that doctors, landlords and employers are all legally required to check the immigration status of people they encounter, or face penalisation, much of the Home Office’s job is done for them.
This atmosphere is unhealthy for communities and can also be exacerbated by racial tensions within society. Although no official statistics of race and immigration raids exist, it could be expected that near to zero ‘tip offs’ lead to the raid of a white person’s home or workplace.
The Home Office fails to record race or ethnicity of those caught up in raids, but data does show that one in five people questioned about their immigration status are not migrants at all, and are British citizens. This raises the debate whether existing stereotypes and racist assumptions influence tip offs to be based off of race rather than actual fears of immigration violations.
Many communities fall for the anti-migrant rhetoric projected by the Home Office and forget that fundamentally the UK is multicultural
In addition to this, it has actually also been found that 1 in 5 people quizzed by the Home Office after a raid are indeed British citizens. This simply showcases the danger that racial stereotypes can play in ‘intelligence-led’ immigration methods.
It is important to understand that this environment fostered by the Home Office is not necessarily for what they could argue as ‘the good of the country’ but is actually for-profit reasons. Instead of having to hire their own intelligence officials, this role is outsourced to members of the public who believe it is their duty to perform such actions to protect their community.
With this in mind, it is clear that many communities fall for the anti-migrant rhetoric projected by the Home Office and forget that fundamentally the UK is multicultural and is built on diverse communities. Nearly all communities will have undocumented migrants living within them, and most of these migrants have been in the UK for over 5 years. 
They may have children and whole families that live here and help the communities that they reside within. A large degree of undocumented migrants also will have previously had legal status but lost it due to systemic barriers within the Home Office.
It is because of this that people must turn their criticisms towards the Home Office, and away from blaming migrants for situations that they are not in control of. Even if one is in favour of strong immigration enforcement, it is becoming hard to argue for the value and worth of immigration raids in the modern day.
First and foremost, it is essential that the UK immigration system is reformed, to allow undocumented migrants access to support to gain legal status’ such as indefinite leave to remain and even citizenship. Furthermore, it is necessary that the British public work to undo the critical view of migrants that the government has promoted for decades, in order to promote quality and diversity in our communities. Lastly, it is essential, for the safety of migrants and the wellbeing of communities that immigration raids are ceased and new methods of enforcement are explored.
---
*Writer for Immigration News and Immigration Advice Service, UK

Comments

TRENDING

US govt funding 'dubious PR firm' to discredit anti-GM, anti-pesticide activists

By Our Representative  The Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA) has vocally condemned the financial support provided by the US Government to questionable public relations firms aimed at undermining the efforts of activists opposed to pesticides and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in India. 

Modi govt distancing from Adanis? MoEFCC 'defers' 1500 MW project in Western Ghats

By Rajiv Shah  Is the Narendra Modi government, in its third but  what would appear to be a weaker avatar, seeking to show that it would keep a distance, albeit temporarily, from its most favorite business house, the Adanis? It would seem so if the latest move of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) latest to "defer" the Adani Energy’s application for 1500 MW Warasgaon-Warangi Pump Storage Project is any indication.

Bayer's business model: 'Monopoly control over chemicals, seeds'

By Bharat Dogra*  The Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) has rendered a great public service by very recently publishing a report titled ‘Bayer’s Toxic Trails’ which reveals how the German agrochemical giant Bayer has been lobbying hard to promote glyphosate and GMOs, or trying to “capture public policy to pursue its private interests.” This report, written by Joao Camargo and Hans Van Scharen, follows Bayer’s toxic trail as “it maintains monopolistic control of the seed and pesticides markets, fights off regulatory challenges to its toxic products, tries to limit legal liability, and exercises political influence.” 

Militants, with ten times number of arms compared to those in J&K, 'roaming freely' in Manipur

By Sandeep Pandey*  The violence which shows no sign of abating in the ongoing Meitei-Kuki conflict in Manipur is a matter of concern. The alienation of the two communities and hatred generated for each other is unprecedented. The Meiteis cannot leave Manipur by road because the next district North on the way to Kohima in Nagaland is Kangpokpi, a Kuki dominated area where the young Kuki men and women are guarding the district borders and would not let any Meitei pass through the national highway. 

105,000 sign protest petition, allege Nestlé’s 'double standard' over added sugar in baby food

By Kritischer Konsum*    105,000 people have signed a petition calling on Nestlé to stop adding sugar to its baby food products marketed in lower-income countries. It was handed over today at the multinational’s headquarters in Vevey, where the NGOs Public Eye, IBFAN and EKO dumped the symbolic equivalent of 10 million sugar cubes, representing the added sugar consumed each day by babies fed with Cerelac cereals. In Switzerland, such products are sold with no added sugar. The leading baby food corporation must put an end to this harmful double standard.

Can voting truly resolve the Kashmir issue? Past experience suggests optimism may be misplaced

By Raqif Makhdoomi*  In the politically charged atmosphere of Jammu and Kashmir, election slogans resonated deeply: "Jail Ka Badla, Vote Sa" (Jail’s Revenge, Vote) and "Article 370 Ka Badla, Vote Sa" (Article 370’s Revenge, Vote). These catchphrases dominated the assembly election campaigns, particularly across Kashmir. 

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

NITI Aayog’s pandemic preparedness report learns 'all the wrong lessons' from Covid-19 response

Counterview Desk The Universal Health Organisation (UHO), a forum seeking to offer "impartial, truthful, unbiased and relevant information on health" so as to ensure that every citizen makes informed choices pertaining to health, has said that the NITI Aayog’s Report on Future Pandemic Preparedness , though labelled as prepared by an “expert” group, "falls flat" for "even a layperson". 

How retraints were imposed on academic freedom on the IIM-Ahmedabad campus

By Sandeep Pandey*  This is the seventh consecutive academic year when I would have gone as a visiting faculty member to the Indian Institute of Management at Ahmedabad to teach an Elective course on Transformational Social Movements to the second year of Post Graduate Programme students. But the invitation has not come so far and it looks like it is the end of my teaching stint at IIM, at least, so long as the Bhartiya Janata Party remains in power at the centre.