POLICY LEGACIES AND THE POLITICS OF LABOUR IMMIGRATION SELECTION AND CONTROL: THE PROCESSES AND DYNAMICS SHAPING NATIONAL-LEVEL POLICY DECISIONS DURING THE RECENT WAVE OF INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION CHRISTOPHER FREDERICK WRIGHT DEPARTMENT OF POLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES AND DARWIN COLLEGE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE THIS DISSERTATION IS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY SEPTEMBER 2010 DECLARATION This dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration, except where specifically indicated in the text. This dissertation does not exceed 80,000 words, as specified by the Degree Committee. Christopher Wright 15 September 2010 ii ABSTRACT Policy legacies and the politics of labour immigration selection and control: The processes and dynamics shaping national-level policy decisions during the recent wave of international migration Christopher Frederick Wright The two decades preceding the global financial crisis of 2008 saw an increase in international migration flows. This development was accompanied by the relaxation of immigration entry controls for select categories of foreign workers across the developed world. The scale of labour immigration, and the categories of foreign workers granted entry, varied considerably across states. To some extent, these developments transcended the traditional classifications of comparative immigration politics. This thesis examines the reform process in two states with contrasting policy legacies that adopted liberal labour immigration selection and control policies during the abovementioned period. The instrumental role that immigration has played in the process of nation-building in Australia has led it to be classified as a ‘traditional destination state’ with a positive immigration policy legacy. By contrast, immigration has not been significant in the formation of national identity in the United Kingdom. It has a more negative immigration policy legacy and is generally regarded as a ‘reluctant state’. Examining the reasons for liberal shifts in labour immigration policy in two states with different immigration politics allows insights to be gained into the processes of policy-making and the dynamics that underpin it. In Australia, labour immigration controls were relaxed incrementally and through a deliberative process. Reform was justified on the grounds that it fulfilled economic needs and objectives, and was consistent with an accepted definition of the national interest. In the UK, liberal shifts in labour immigration policy were the incidental consequence of the pursuit of objectives in other policy areas. Reform was implemented unilaterally, and in an uncoordinated manner characterised by an absence of consultation. The contrast in the manner in which reform was managed by the various actors, institutions and stakeholders involved in the process both reflected, and served to reinforce, the immigration policy legacies of the two states. Moreover, the Howard government used Australia’s positive legacy to construct a coherent narrative to justify the implementation of liberal reform. This generated greater immediate and lasting support for its reforms among stakeholders and the broader community. By contrast, lacking a similarly positive legacy, the Blair government in the UK found it difficult to create such a narrative, which contributed to the unpopularity of its reforms. This thesis therefore argues that policy legacies had a significant impact on the processes and dynamics that shaped labour immigration selection and control decisions during the recent wave of international migration. The cases demonstrate that a nation’s past immigration policy experiences shape its policy-making structures, as well as institutional and stakeholder policy preferences, which are core constituent components of a nation’s immigration politics. The UK case shows that even when reluctant states implement liberal labour immigration policies, these characteristics tend to create feedback effects that make it difficult for reform to be durable. The relationship between immigration policy and politics thus becomes self- reinforcing. But this does not necessarily mean that states’ immigration politics are rigid, since the institutions that help to make a nation’s immigration policy and shape its politics will inevitably undergo a process of adaptation in response to changing contexts. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis could not have been written without the support of a number of people. It has been both a pleasure and a privilege to study under my two supervisors, Professor Willy Brown and Dr Helen Thompson. They have provided valuable academic direction over the past four years, for which I am most grateful. Professor Brown and Dr Thompson have been wonderful sources of wisdom, encouragement and assistance, and I have learned much from them both. My thanks go to all of the people that agreed to be interviewed for generously offering their time and insights. I am obliged to James Jupp, John Nieuwenhuysen, Bob Birrell, Randall Hansen and Sarah Spencer for providing helpful advice when I was conducting fieldwork for the two case studies. The Political Science Program of the Research School of Social Sciences at the Australian National University kindly gave me a base from which conduct my research in Australia. The Cambridge Commonwealth Trust, the Cambridge Political Economy Society Trust, the Board of Graduate Studies, the Smuts Memorial Fund and Darwin College all contributed the funding that allowed me to undertake this doctorate, which has been immensely appreciated. The support, humour and tolerance of many friends and family members over the past four years has been invaluable. Special mention goes to Tomas Undurraga, Colm McLaughlin, Jenny Kaldor and Christian Downie, all of whom spent countless hours editing and proof reading substantial sections of this thesis – a big thanks to you all. Thank you to my parents, Lance and Ros, for the untold amount of encouragement and inspiration they have given over the past four years (and, of course, the preceding 25), and also for proof-reading various chapters. Finally, I truly could not have written this thesis without my partner Rosina, who has been there for me throughout the entire process – from accompanying me halfway across the world to undertake this degree, to providing vital encouragement in the final stretches of writing-up (as well offering her supreme editing skills) – words cannot express the depth of my gratitude. iv CONTENTS Abstract .................................................................................................................................iii! Acknowledgements ..............................................................................................................iv! List of figures ........................................................................................................................vi! List of acronyms..................................................................................................................viii Section I Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 1 The recent wave of international migration and the labour immigration selection and control policies of developed states......................... 2! Chapter 2 A review of the literature on the politics of labour immigration selection and control......................................................................................... 30 Section II Australia ...................................................................................................... 46! Chapter 3 The politics of Australian labour immigration policy prior to 1996 ................ 47! Chapter 4 The liberalisation of Australian labour immigration policy, 1996-2007.......... 69! Chapter 5 The structural and institutional dynamics of Australian policy change ........... 97! Section III The United Kingdom................................................................................. 136! Chapter 6 The politics of UK labour immigration policy prior to 1997 ......................... 137! Chapter 7 The liberalisation of UK labour immigration policy, 2000-2004................... 155! Chapter 8 The structural and institutional dynamics of UK policy change .................... 179! Section IV Conclusion................................................................................................. 212! Chapter 9 The impact of policy legacies on the processes and dynamics of labour immigration selection and control .................................................. 213! Appendix A Interviewees – Australian case study.......................................................... 238! Appendix B Interviewees – United Kingdom case study ............................................... 241! References .......................................................................................................................... 244! v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1! Inflows of foreign workers into various OECD states, 1995 to 2007 (selected years) ................................................................................................... 7! Figure 3.1! Overseas-born population from regions of Europe in Australia, 1947, 1961 and 1971 ........................................................................................ 55! Figure 3.2! Annual permanent immigration programme intakes, major categories and sub-categories,