🌍 Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill

• Debate Overview: The session was a Second Reading debate on the Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill, aimed at granting Scotland control over its immigration policy.

• Key Points by Stephen Gethins (SNP):
  • The Bill is timely and addresses Scotland’s specific immigration needs, amidst demographic and economic challenges post-Brexit.
  • It is open to amendments, with Gethins expressing a willingness to work with other parties, especially Scottish Labour, to refine the proposal.
  • He criticized the UK’s Brexit policy for damaging Scotland’s economy and rights, advocating for rejoining the EU.
  • Gethins highlighted the support from various Scottish sectors (hospitality, tourism, care, higher education) for a tailored immigration policy to address workforce shortages.
• Labour’s Response:
  • Richard Quigley argued that the Bill would introduce unnecessary bureaucracy and complexity, questioning the SNP’s competence given past infrastructure failures (e.g., ferry fiasco).
  • Ian Murray (Secretary of State for Scotland) emphasized that the UK Government opposes devolving immigration, citing national security and the need for a unified system. He proposed focusing on domestic skills rather than immigration.
  • Labour MPs expressed concerns about creating internal UK borders and the practicality and cost of implementing a separate Scottish immigration system.
• Conservative Perspective:
  • Andrew Bowie strongly opposed the Bill, arguing it as unworkable and detrimental, noting the SNP’s broader governance failures.
• SNP’s Further Arguments:
  • Pete Wishart highlighted Scotland’s demographic crisis, with a falling birth rate and aging population, underscoring the necessity of immigration to sustain growth.
  • He challenged the UK Government’s social policies (e.g., two-child benefit cap) that hinder population growth.
  • Wishart advocated for a Scottish visa system similar to regional policies in Canada, Australia, and Belgium.
• Broader Discussion:
  • Discussions included the impact of Brexit on migration, the need for a balanced approach to attract migrants, and the relationship between immigration and other devolved policies like education and housing.
  • There was a call for constructive dialogue and collaboration between the Scottish and UK Governments to address Scotland’s specific immigration challenges.
• Outcome and Next Steps:
  • The debate did not lead to a vote on the Bill, with suggestions from both sides that more discussion and scrutiny in Committee could be beneficial.
  • The session adjourned, with the debate to be resumed on another date, indicating ongoing discussion and potential for further refinement of the Bill.

The session exhibits a moderate level of disagreement, typically characterized by debates and differing opinions, but without overly heated exchanges or intense confrontations. Here’s a detailed breakdown of the disagreement displayed during the session:

1. Disagreement on Devolution of Immigration Powers: The primary contention is over the Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill, which aims to devolve immigration powers to Scotland. Stephen Gethins (SNP) argues for the Bill, emphasizing the need for Scotland-specific immigration solutions. However, Andrew Bowie (Conservative) labels the idea as “absurd and unworkable” and opposes devolution outright. Ian Murray (Labour) also opposes the Bill, stating that it won’t benefit Scotland and that the UK should maintain a unified approach to immigration.

2. Criticism of SNP’s Governance: Labour and Conservative MPs frequently criticize the SNP’s governance in Scotland. Richard Quigley (Labour) and Andrew Bowie (Conservative) repeatedly mention SNP failures in managing public services like ferries and healthcare, suggesting these failures undermine the SNP’s capability to handle immigration. Pete Wishart (SNP) counters by highlighting the support from various Scottish sectors for the Bill and criticizes Labour and Conservatives for not addressing Scottish needs adequately.

3. Economic and Policy Arguments: Stephen Gethins argues that immigration is crucial for sectors like hospitality and care in Scotland, stating that Brexit has negatively impacted these sectors. Conversely, Labour members, such as Ian Murray and Gareth Snell, argue that the SNP’s focus on immigration as a solution is misguided and that the root issues are more about economic and skills policy.

4. Interventions and Counterpoints: The session features numerous interventions where MPs challenge each other’s statements. For instance, Johanna Baxter (Labour) questions the SNP’s ability to boost the Scottish economy through devolution, leading to a back-and-forth with Stephen Gethins. These exchanges demonstrate disagreement but are generally conducted within the norms of parliamentary debate.

5. Tensions Over Brexit and National Policies: There’s clear disagreement about the impact of Brexit and the UK government’s broader policy directions. Gethins argues that Brexit has been disastrous for Scotland, whereas Ian Murray acknowledges issues with migration but defends the UK government’s efforts to manage it through a national strategy.

Overall, while the disagreement is evident through varied opinions and critiques, it remains within a moderate range. The debate is robust but does not devolve into personal attacks or extreme polarization, maintaining a level of parliamentary courtesy.