Skip to main content

The UK risks alienating the world’s best talent

 Keir Starmer’s new immigration plan is an obvious and clumsy attempt to court Reform voters. What is worse is that it won’t make anyone happy: the Labour party has a traditionally immigrant-friendly stance and won’t be happy, Reform voters will see through this pathetic attempt to bring immigration numbers down, and highly skilled immigrants won’t be happy because they are being targeted unfairly.


The UK, and especially London, attracts millions of talented workers from all over the world. Some come to stay, and some leave after a while. They work in tech, finance, and pretty much all the sectors that make London the economic engine of the country. Let’s be clear about something from the start: the UK does NOT have enough homegrown talent to fill all the high-skilled vacancies in UK companies. These highly productive workers are a scarce and valuable resource, and unless we find a planet with (very) intelligent life tomorrow, we have to live with the fact that high-skilled workers are rare. And they are very well paid.


It is something of a miracle that in this economy and with this government high-skilled people still want to move to the UK. Maybe they haven’t heard of how bad things are over here, but who cares – they are coming and they are welcome. Yes, they are welcome, because it is people on the highest salaries that pay for the NHS, pensions, and pretty much anything you can think of. Many high-skilled workers make a multiple of the average UK salary, and attracting and retaining these individuals is essential for economic growth.


If UK companies become unable to attract this talent into the UK and hire them, they will simply hire these people somewhere else. What’s worse is that a company might simply not set up a base in the UK if the UK lacks both the human capital and the qualities to attract it. Similarly, people wanting to found a startup might think twice about setting up their company in the UK if hiring talent becomes harder (that is, even if Labour’s jobs tax hasn’t already deterred them).


Labour’s proposal does exactly this: it makes the UK less attractive for top talent compared to other countries. When people move countries, chances are that they think deeply about the consequences of their choice: salaries, quality of life, taxation, and access to permanent residence (ILR) and citizenship are all factors that determine how likely a person is to move to a certain country. Starmer’s proposal to double the time it takes to get ILR from 5 years to 10 years makes the UK a lot less attractive than other developed/comparable countries. Not to mention that these countries already have other advantages over the UK, like the US offering higher salaries and lower taxes.


On top of potentially losing out on top talent with top salaries, there is another economic disadvantage of making people gain ILR after 10 years instead of 5: once you get ILR you can do ‘whatever’ you want, like start your own company for example. Setting up a small business of your own isn’t feasible for people on a Skilled Worker visa, and forcing people to wait 10 years for ILR means people won’t be able to set up their own business as quickly. Again, less economic growth.


As if all of this wasn’t enough to deem the proposed reform completely misguided, here’s another thing: the increase to 10 years will apply to immigrants who are already living in the UK and who might be close to getting ILR. This is, frankly, immoral. People who have come to the UK under a certain set of rules should not have the rug pulled from under their feet, especially if they are well paid and paying much more tax than the average Brit. It is now faster for many of them to relocate to the US and get a green card over there – the Labour party has already taxed non-doms out of existence, but they don’t seem to have learnt anything from the exodus of millionaires creating a black hole in the state’s finances.


And so it happens that highly productive individuals are becoming a pawn in Labour’s political games. Meanwhile nobody has stopped the boats coming from France or knows how to do that, a phone is stolen every what, 2? 3 minutes?, crime keeps rising and criminals cannot be deported – in case Labour were wondering, THOSE are the issues driving the anti-immigration sentiment. Targeting high-skilled workers to drive overall immigration numbers down will only mean less revenue for the state, but it will have no impact on the immigration-related problems people are facing. A much better option would be to increase the salary threshold for people coming to the UK (something the Conservatives already did, and which is already driving the number of visas down) and find a way to deal with criminals.

Popular posts from this blog

The UK needs more, not less, austerity

  First of all let me say that this is a hill I’m willing to die on. In fact, when I hit “publish” and Starmer’s thought police inevitably come knocking on my door, I will proudly tell them that I regret none of what I’m about to write. My goal with this article is to divide my readers into two groups: the ones who love austerity (most of you will fall into this category by the time I’m done brainwashing you) and the ones who never have, and never will, understand the intricacies of primary school maths. Let’s start with a definition: what is austerity? Austerity is a broad term used to refer to policies that reduce the deficit/debt of a country, either via spending cuts, increased taxation, or both. The objective is to drive the deficit (and ultimately the debt) down, something that can hardly be argued is a bad thing to do, especially in countries that face the challenges of a rapidly ageing population. Quick note for everyone: the deficit is the difference between what the state...

Italy’s love for the big state is a cultural remnant of fascism

 Today we are going to make Italians mad. And no, we will not be breaking spaghetti – something that my Italian family has been doing for generations, no, centuries, before TikTok videos started circulating claiming that Italians don’t break spaghetti. We do, in fact, break our spaghetti, just like any sane person with a functioning brain would do when the spaghetti clearly doesn't fit into the pot. I actually used to sometimes not break my spaghetti, but now I always do so out of spite: it gives me both physical and emotional pleasure to know that the Italian gods are frowning upon my heartless breaking of spaghetti. As much as I would love to talk about how only people living in a hopeless country could get brutally angry about other people’s freedom to break spaghetti, and how this relates to Italy still being a fundamentally fascist-loving country at heart, the topic I suggest for today is the following: the link between Italians loving the big state and Italy having experienc...

There's only one way to reform the ISA regime

Rachel Reeves is out there looking for growth. And rumours have it that she's been looking at either abolishing the cash ISA, or reducing it in size. For those who are not familiar with ISAs, they are accounts for UK resident where you can save up to £20,000 a year, and not pay any tax on the interests - ever. There are multiple types of ISA, but mostly it boils down to: cash ISAs, and stocks and shares ISAs. A cash ISA is essentially like a deposit account that is tax free. Every year you can add £20k to it, and never pay tax on it. Stocks and shares ISAs allow you to invest your money in the stock market and not pay tax on capital gains. Pretty neat, especially considering the tax burden in the UK is at the highest level in decades. Now, back to Rachel Reeves and her mission to grow the UK economy. Many investment firms have complained to Reeves that too many people stash their money in cash ISAs, depriving the markets of some £290 billion of potential investment (data from FY22/...