Mind the gap: public and government views on migration diverge

The views and policies on immigration among countries in Latin America and the Caribbean are virtually the same as those of the more developed countries, i.e., few governments view immigration levels as too high or have policies to lower them. Also, as is the case elsewhere, few African or Asian governments have policies to lower the immigration of highly skilled workers. On the contrary, countries such as Indonesia, Singapore and South Africa are seeking highly skilled workers to enhance their labour forces and advance their economies.

In addition to the migration gap between governments and the public, law enforcement officials and policymakers are viewed by the public as lax in implementing approved policies and enforcing existing laws relating to immigration.

For many, simply the presence of tens of millions of unlawful residents in the labour force attests to such laxity. By and large, authorities tend to tolerate those who continue to remain or even work unlawfully in the country, unless they commit a serious crime or are considered a national security risk. While this tolerance may be beneficial for the immigrants - especially those unlawfully resident - and their supporters, this accommodating behaviour does not escape the attention of the general public and contributes to undermining the public trust and the rule of law.

Governmental authorities frequently overlook enforcing policies and laws on immigration to maintain good relations with immigrant and illegal alien communities as well as to curry favour with current and likely future voting supporters. For instance, the Marxist government in West Bengal, India is reported to be lax in dealing with immigrants from neighbouring Bangladesh as they provide a vote bank.

In addition, powerful interest groups, such as business communities, political elites, ethnic associations and labour-exporting nations, actively lobby and pressure governments for policies that promote immigration and advance legalisation or amnesty for illegal aliens. For example, the US Chamber of Commerce strongly advocates a continuation and expansion of both temporary and permanent visa programs for highly skilled workers and pushes for comprehensive immigration reform that includes a pathway to legalisation of undocumented workers.

The benefits derived from these pro-immigration lobbying efforts are considerable for these various groups. Developing countries, for example, are able to export their excess labour as well as receive large sums of valuable foreign-exchange remittances. Last year such remittances amounted to over $300 billion.

Businesses are able to operate with an amenable and low-cost labour force, to recruit highly skilled foreign workers at discount rates, and to expand consumer demand and hence boost corporate profits. Government officials and political elites gain from promises of political backing and campaign financing, enhanced overseas influence, greater numbers of supportive voters, prospects of increased tax revenues as well as a larger pool of potential recruits for the military. Ethnic associations also gain with additional members reinforcing their culture, adding to their coffers and strengthening their political and voting clout.

Governments and most mainstream political parties are failing to acknowledge, let alone address, the worrisome gap between public opinion and official current and proposed policies on immigration. The consequences of this neglect are likely to become even more serious over time, giving rise, among other things, to increased xenophobia, vigilantism, violence and political extremism as well as the strengthening of radical factions on both the left and right. Some of these troubling developments, e.g., rising xenophobia and the success of nationalist parties, have recently become markedly more visible in such countries as Italy, Greece and Switzerland.

Governments need to address the migration gap as a priority today or risk confronting even more serious, costly and harmful societal troubles in the near future. Good first steps include forthright and candid dialogues between government officials and concerned citizens on the various costs and benefits of immigration as well as genuine consideration of immigration policies and programs that take into account the interests, concerns and welfare of the general public.