Now what? European nationals and the general election

Now what? European nationals and the general election

Background

We held a roundtable on April 27^th to share experiences and feelings over the last year, to discuss current challenges, and to plan campaigning on rights-based issues ahead of or after the General Election, and to provide media contacts with an insight into the current landscape for Europeans living, working and studying in the UK. This is part of our “Meet a Migrant” series, which connects migrants and members of the press in order to build understanding and develop spokespeople.

Format

The session took the form of an open discussion involving a range of European nationals, journalists including writers for the Daily Telegraph and Sunday Times, and facilitated by the Migrant Voice team with support from Unison officers. Over 10 of the EU27 countries were represented by attendees. There were three parts to the discussion – people’s experiences between the referendum and now, people’s hopes and fears for the future, and people’s requests to politicians and influencers. 

Discussion

Migrant Voice staff introduced the discussion and set context. We covered the rise in reported hate incidents following Brexit, the legitimisation of anti-migrant rhetoric in the press, threats to EU nationals’ right to remain and likely shifts in policy after Brexit. We also discussed the potential there is now to build broader coalitions than before, and the need to organise together.

The conversation was opened by an academic and campaigner who focussed on addressing the psychological and mental health problems caused by migrants’ stress and confusion over their future in Britain. She told her own story of being an employer and contributing over the years, and having leave to remain not acknowledged and citizenship refused in spite of this. She said people were ‘falling through the cracks’ and plans to do more to offer mental health support and advice to those affected by relevant issues. Cases she had dealt with included insomnia and depression. A different participant mentioned the psychological impact of being continually asked to prove their worth by officials and the press.

Another contributor raised the impact of the situation on children – many of her grandchildren’s friends do not know where they will be living or what they’ll be doing, and this is also causing stress.

The discussion moved on to the DWP, and the difficulty surrounding red tape around the number of hours needed to qualify for permanent residency on work grounds. The point was raised that we remain in a transitional period and people don’t know what rules will apply to them in 2 years. People have found mortgage applications and similar denied. Participants also expressed fear for the welfare of more vulnerable migrants who would be the worst hit by the shifting landscape. Freelancers and those with irregular employment also face additional challenges.

A British citizen explained the case of his son and his son’s Swedish partner, who risk not being able to live together in either Sweden or the UK. He said that many younger people expected to be more mobile and able to move between countries and those medium term aspirations are now changing.

There were general worries about the growing gaps in worldview between different groups of people, and the legitimisation of both explicit hate speech and general anti-migrant sentiment growing up in the gaps.

There was some discussion around whether people would stay in Britain. Most participants had intended to stay for an extended period and were now considering their options. One had not intended to stay indefinitely anyway, and another participant wanted to stay but felt she didn’t want to beg or have to feel unwelcome. Another felt too rooted, with too many friendships and family connections, to countenance moving. There was some worry about the discourse of people supposedly abusing British hospitality when for many, the environment is inhospitable on arrival.

One participant said she felt worried speaking in a foreign accent in less diverse parts of the country, and that she was also worried about the effects that Brexit would have on career prospects both for her and others. Some were counting the days until they felt they had to leave, whereas others would be unable to return home. 

Another participant told the room how recent events had killed her sense of risk – previously she had felt as if the world was her oyster, and left Poland at 16 to explore. Her American partner was close to giving up his US passport but now intends to retain it after Brexit.

There were mixed feelings on the EU referendum. Those who expressed a view had been pro-Remain, but there was some focus on the importance of building bridges with Leave voters, understanding that many did not vote for anti-migrant reasons, and recognising some flaws with the EU. There was some mention of similar politics to the Leave campaign succeeding elsewhere in Europe. 

There was agreement around the need to challenge media bias, and also to actively deal with spin that divides migrant groups against each other; such as calling some migrants ‘expats.’

The meeting closed with agreement to keep these conversations going, raise them during the general election, and for participants to share ideas and support each other through the ongoing difficult process.

Resolutions

• Recurrent issues were raised with the application forms and lack of due process are a key issue to campaign on. Transparency and simplicity were named as important. The citizenship process was described as “opaque” and one participant cited having to hand in 2kg of documents.
• People were agreed on the need for political parties to pledge a unilateral guarantee of existing rights, and for this decision to be expressed in legislation immediately. This would ideally be automatic, or through as simple a process as possible for applicants. 
• Precarious housing and regular moving is an issue for young people and young migrants especially, and as a result they are not on council tax bills or registered to vote and cannot supply the necessary documents for permanent residency. People felt that we needed to make sure that this is considered, and that we should campaign to ensure such people do not fall through the cracks.
• People agreed on the need to celebrate the positives of migration and proactively push against anti-migration discourse.
• The hostile environment strategy does not work on its own terms or anyone else’s, and this needs pointing out.
• The difficulty of proving Comprehensive Sickness Insurance (a legal requirement) was raised as an issue. Self-employed people or students have struggled to cope with the sudden and retroactive implementation of this stipulation, and access to the NHS should count as proof.
• It is important for migrants to continue to have their voices heard and seek greater representation in public life – especially when EU nationals cannot vote in the upcoming election, and to scrutinise electoral candidates in the next few weeks. There was much discussion about the importance of political accountability.
• Interviews and stories will be placed in selected media outlets following the roundtable.