Increased diversity has historically been a source of strength for liberal democracies. But by failing to respond to the rise in immigration with a clear integration strategy, governments have allowed avoidable tensions to be created. In the UK, concerns about growing social segregation, intolerance and extremism, have raised questions about the rights and obligations of citizens. Progressive politicians need to address these concerns and make integration a key part of their policy agenda, not only for electoral reasons, but because integration really matters.
Where communities live separately, with fewer interactions between people from different backgrounds, mistrust, anxiety and prejudice grow. Conversely, closer integration can have positive impacts, not only in reducing anxiety and prejudice, but also in enabling people to achieve better and more productive lives for themselves, well and their families, which in turn, creates more prosperity within their communities. Similarly, integration and shared common values and behaviours – such as respect for the rule of law, democracy, equality and tolerance – are inhibitors of division, hate and extremism. They can make societies stronger, more equal, more united and better able to stand together against populism.
Unfortunately, while political leaders sometimes pay lip service to integration, they often fail to follow through in implementing change. This is to a certain extent understandable. In a liberal democratic society, there will always be limits to the extent the state can influence how people live together. But a laissez-faire approach, whereby integration is expected to occur organically, also leaves the risk of a dangerous policy vacuum, leaving space for extremists to sow division and fear.
Part of what makes it so difficult for governments to successfully promote integration is that the term itself is contested. Historically, integration has often been confused with assimilation—understood as a one-way trajectory of becoming like the rest of the population, with a focus on forced adaptation by migrants. At the other end of the spectrum, integration has been muddled with multiculturalism, which prioritises a group-based identity politics – and has been criticised for reinforcing separate identities, rather than helping to bridge community divides.
Another difficult—and often related—issue is how the state should respond to illiberal cultural practices and/ or behaviours in minority communities, with examples such as forced marriages or Haredi Jews’ refusal to work. There is a sense that public institutions have too often been willing to turn a blind eye to such practices, for fear of causing offence and being accused of prejudice. The recent case of Muslim parents campaigning against LGBT lessons in Parkfield community school makes the point. The response should be a clear defence of our common values, irrespective of ethnicity or faith.
If politicians have found it difficult to articulate a positive case for integration, the good news is that there is widespread public support for policies that promote social integration. Indeed, whereas immigration generally polarises and divides voters, integration appears to garner consensus. The vast majority of Brits support ensuring people who come to the UK become ‘one of us’ by learning the language, becoming part of the community and working hard. This isn’t unique to the UK. The EU’s 2017 Eurobarometer survey on the integration of immigrants found that 69% of Europeans view integration as a necessary investment for the long-term future of their country.
This is why in a new report, we’re calling on governments to catch up with the public. They need to be far bolder on the question of integration. To start with, genuine integration cannot simply apply to minorities. It must be about the whole of society, entailing both a sense of belonging for newcomers and a sense of ease with the pace of change for majority citizens. Equally, a positive vision of integration cannot be limited to economic or cultural factors in isolation. To date, conversations about integration among the political right have tended to focus on values, while the left has focused on economic aspects. Instead, a holistic approach must encompass all the various components of everyday life, from securing a job to sharing cultural norms.
Similarly, an effective integration strategy in the UK needs to look at the role of government in encouraging migrants to put down roots, for example, by lowering the costs of citizenship and ensuring there is sufficient provision to learn English. It needs to take a more proactive role in building mixed communities, whether through planning regulation which prevents social segregation by developers, the setting of school admissions, or cracking down on the kinds of work-placed segregation still prevalent in parts of our labour market. A proactive integration strategy should no longer be seen as a choice, but a necessity.
Harvey Redgrave is a senior policy fellow at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, and co-author of The Glue That Binds: Integration in a Time of Populism