World news and discussion on TalkFuse.
DANIEL HANNAN: Picture that sums up how the entire migrant industry regards the taxpayers of this country
Daniel Hannan argues that the UK’s handling of irregular migration weakens public confidence in the distinction between citizens and people without permission to live or work in the country. He links a photograph of a Channel migrant making an insulting gesture to what he describes as a system that grants benefits and legal protections without requiring reciprocal duties.
He points to the Employment Rights Act, which he says allows people working illegally to sue employers, and to Equality and Human Rights Commission guidance on protecting employees from harassment. He also cites a September employment tribunal award of more than £5,000 to a Malaysian migrant in Cumbria who had no legal right to work. The article frames these examples through philosopher John Locke’s idea of a social compact between citizens and the state, and argues for selecting migrants likely to contribute.
In short
- Hannan says irregular migrants’ employment rights undermine the citizen-state compact.
- He cites a tribunal award of more than £5,000 to a migrant without work permission.
- The article calls for a more selective immigration policy.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
A political community can reasonably expect its laws and public systems to sustain confidence that membership carries reciprocal duties as well as protections. On this view, enforcing immigration and work rules consistently, and prioritising admission of people likely to contribute, helps maintain trust among taxpayers and the legitimacy of the social compact.
The case against
People without permission to work remain vulnerable to exploitation, so allowing them to challenge unlawful treatment can uphold basic labour standards and deter employers from profiting from their precarious status. These protections need not confer a right to remain or erase the distinction between citizens and migrants; they can reflect the principle that employment law applies to people in the country while immigration rules are enforced separately.
Explained simply
Irregular migration refers to people entering or staying in the UK without the required permission. Decisions about their treatment involve immigration law, employment rules and protections against discrimination, which can apply in workplaces regardless of a person’s immigration status.
Daniel Hannan is a British political commentator and former Conservative politician. His argument invokes John Locke, a 17th-century philosopher whose idea of a social compact describes an exchange of people’s duties to society for the state’s protection; how that idea applies to migrants and legal rights is disputed.
The debate matters because it concerns how the UK enforces immigration rules while applying employment protections, and how those choices affect public confidence in the fairness of the system.