On the 12th of January 2023, the House of Commons was called upon to address the controversial debate surrounding skills and labour shortage in the UK. There is no universal definition for these just as there is no single cause or solution to them. The economists Blank and Stigler described labour shortages as occurring when “(…) the number of workers available (the supply) increases less rapidly than the number demanded at the salaries paid in the recent past”. This issue is not new, but the volume of discussion around it is unprecedented. Indeed, on the 10th of January 2023, the European Commission met with representatives from Member States in Brussels to launch the new Labour Migration Platform. By bringing together policy specialists from the migration and employment sectors, the initiative aims to promote  partnerships with third countries in the hopes of attracting new “talents”. The alarming trend of a declining working-age population has been on the agenda of European policymakers for years. Following Brexit, however, the Europeans’ cooperation is not something the UK will be able to benefit from. The British government will have to develop its own strategy to solve this chronic labour market shortage amid challenges presented by Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic, the latter of which has resulted in over 1.3 million workers leaving the country. 

In the presence of labour shortages, migration can be an effective strategy to replenish the labour force. Employers usually welcome this option as it prevents them from being bound by the stricter national preferences on wages and employment conditions. However, despite skyrocketing numbers of visa applications from non-EU citizens, the UK Government expressly decided against relying on migration to mend their labour shortages. Indeed, the Government is actively looking to restrict migration. From a certain economic perspective, this seems oddly placed, as more liberal policies regarding immigration would benefit not only the most affected sectors of the economy by filling vacancies, stimulating the overall demand and potentially reducing  inflation, but they would also play an important role in the socioeconomic integration of migrants. Current legislation, for instance, forbids access to the labour market for refugees and asylum seekers for a period of 12 months upon arrival, leading to serious long-term impacts on their inclusion and well-being. Based on the recommendation of the Government’s own Migratory Advisory Committee, migrants and asylum seekers should be considered a valuable resource considering the precarious conditions of the UK labour market. Instead, the UK Government chooses to keep potential workers inactive and reliant on the welfare system. This is troublesome, given that the HM Treasury could save as much as £650 million by allowing  asylum seekers to find employment, as estimated by Helen Dempster et al. This hostility towards immigration has recently manifested as the “Stop the Boats” Bill issued by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, which aimed to prevent undocumented migrants from reaching the country via small boats. The political will to contain low-skilled immigration is often attributed to the attempt to avoid downward pressures on wages that would risk spurring conflict between immigrants and locals. However, according to recent statistics, some sectors particularly badly hit by labour shortages, such as manufacturing and construction, have seen a steep rise in the wages offered to fill the vacancies. Nevertheless, the problem persists as British workers appear largely uninterested in taking up these jobs, regardless of the higher wages on offer. 

Asylum seekers and low-skilled workers are not the only targets of the Government’s stringent migration measures. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced his intention to clamp down on student visas after issued numbers peaked in 2022. The Government’s goal is to reduce the number of international students taking vaguely defined “low-quality” university courses. Whilst such a move would typically aim to assuage domestic concerns over more competitive foreign labour, the Government is facing strong criticism from human rights activists and business groups to loosen migration policies with the aim of revitalising labour markets. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, nevertheless, adheres firmly to the fundamental principles of Brexit: to curb net migration and take back control over the British borders. To show his commitment to  this political goal, he is considering other options to address labour shortages, ranging from the provision of incentives for the over-50s to resume work to providing training to transfer the necessary skills demanded by the affected sectors. 

The main issue with this narrative is that the primary causes of labour shortages can be difficult to identify, and even more difficult to resolve in an appropriate time frame. Training and upskilling programmes aimed at providing local staff with the required skills can take substantial time. In this context, government intervention becomes crucial to alleviate an already critical situation, especially in light of the social and economic consequences stemming from recent shocks such as the Covid-19 pandemic and Brexit. 

This indiscriminate opposition to migration as a potential option within a broader set of measures for an effective economic recovery benefits nobody and is proven to be financially inconvenient. This is especially the case given the high numbers of asylum seekers already in the UK willing to fill the labour shortage and start building their life as an active part of British society. Among the last set of anti-immigration policies that the Government has launched in recent weeks, there is Operation Brycem, aimed at preventing any migrant worker without a regular permit from being employed. On the 2nd of March, the Home Office arrested six undocumented migrants operating as domestic workers within the care sector, one of the most understaffed sectors in the UK. What we are witnessing is an example of how political discourses and practices can distract from the tangible policy problems that the UK Government is currently struggling to cope with. This dynamic is likely doomed to last as long as the ultimate priority is going to be electoral power over British economic recovery. The lack of inventiveness and openness  towards new solutions risks fuelling  concerns and the negative sentiments characterising what former leader of the Labour Party Lord Neil Kinnock  deemed this “age of anxiety” even further.