To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the potential impact on economic growth of trends in the number of visas granted to highly skilled people.
The Government have published assessments estimating the impact of high-skilled migrants on the UK economy when changes to the Immigration Rules have been made. Skilled workers are estimated to be net contributors to the economy, particularly those in higher-skilled occupations.
I thank my noble friend for his Answer. Since I tabled this Question, there have been changes to the planned settlement arrangements for the UK. It is encouraging to see that there are no changes for the global talent visa and high earners, but there are changes for their spouses. It is now clear that they will be decided separately, potentially meaning that a high-earning applicant could receive settlement within three years, yet a stay-at-home spouse might never be eligible. Such a move would obviously have a detrimental impact on talent attraction and growth. Will the Minister look again at the eligibility of spouses for settlement in the forthcoming consultation?
I thank my noble friend for that question. She is asking about the partners of highly skilled people being required to earn settlement in their own right, as part of plans announced by the Home Secretary last week. As my noble friend referred to, those plans are currently subject to a public consultation. She asks for a commitment to look again. We will, of course, consider the responses to the consultation carefully and in the round before announcing the Government’s next steps, and we will be particularly concerned to avoid some of the unintended consequences that have beset immigration policy in the past.
My Lords, have the Government looked at the counterfactual of people leaving these shores, specifically in medical, economic and finance areas, and what that means for our economy? If not, why not?
I thank the noble Lord for that question. The Government look at all this in the round. As I think everyone in your Lordship’s House knows, the overall intention is to reduce net migration, but we are committed to the high skills routes and I am very happy to provide more detail on that later. We will continue to measure not only the incomers but the net effect.
My Lords, nearly six months ago, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Department for Business and Trade jointly launched a taskforce and a £54 million fund to, in their words,
“attract world-class researchers and their teams to the UK”.
As the Minister knows, teams of researchers contain all sorts of different people, but some of the key people are not necessarily the best paid people in that team, and those salary restrictions may well not meet the Home Office’s criteria. What is the Home Office doing to work with the taskforce to make sure that a whole team can come to the United Kingdom, which would probably affect whether it came or not? How many visas have been applied for so far under this taskforce and how many have been granted?
As I just said in response to my noble friend, this is all currently under consultation. We will, of course, look at all the routes in the way the noble Lord asks me to. To be clear, salary levels are not the only things that will influence our approach to global talent, high-potential individuals and the various schemes that we have. As I have already said, we will be careful to avoid the unintended consequences. On the specific question about numbers, I do not have them now but I am happy to write to the noble Lord.
My Lords, following up on my noble friend Lord Hintze’s question, can the Minister—who has already addressed the economic impact of high skilled visas—say what the economic impact of the Government’s policies is? We know that nearly 1,800 high net worth individuals have left the country, and on Monday the Business Secretary acknowledged that Labour’s tax rises have made wealthy people feel the need to leave. Does the Minister agree that we would not need to have such a focus on more immigration if we did not have so many wealthy tax- payers leaving?
No, I do not agree, as it happens. I feel strongly that we have done the right things from our side on the tax changes—although it is way above my pay grade. I am sure everyone knows that the highly talented, the innovators and the entrepreneurs are internationally mobile, and we should make arrangements to attract the brightest and the best to Britain. These two matters are not connected.
My Lords, a few weeks ago, your Lordships’ House’s Science and Technology Committee published a major report on the financing and scaling of UK science and technology. It set out the factors behind the science and technology growth emergency, which is so damaging to the economy. It also highlighted that a Government who are serious about growth and wealth creation must not keep in place costly and bureaucratic visa barriers to the scientists and entrepreneurs they hope to attract to the UK. Does the Minister agree that when talented scientists and technologists want to move here, the UK should be rolling out the red carpet rather than red tape?
How could I disagree? Let me make the situation absolutely clear. The Government, as everybody knows, are moving to an earned settlement approach but we are committed to increasing the numbers of exactly the kind of people the noble Lord refers to. They do not have a big impact on the overall total. On 14 October, the Government announced that they aim to double the number of highly skilled people coming to the UK on our high skills route, including the best researchers, designers, and creatives working in film and TV, to ensure continued competitiveness in those sectors. On the high-potential individuals, on 4 November, eligibility was expanded from the top 50 to the top 100 international universities, up to a cap of 8,000 applications. I hope that demonstrates to your Lordships’ House our commitment to attracting this talent. Perhaps I could take the opportunity to say that I am an immigrant myself and I pay testament to this country’s culture of fairness and opportunity—and I can tell you that I am neither global talent nor high potential.
My Lords, one of the unintended consequences to which the Minister referred is that hard-pressed and hard-working prison officers, who happen to earn less than £41,700 per year, will, as a result of this Government’s policies, find themselves deported when their visas expire. Given the impact that will have on the already strained criminal justice system, will the Minister undertake to ask his colleagues to think again about that policy?
I thank my noble friend for that question. I pay tribute to his experience and commitment in this area. I too have history in the prison system, as it were: I was lead non-executive director of the Prison Service for many years, so I know first-hand some of the recruitment and retention problems that it faces. I totally understand the problem but, as I have said, these are all matters under consultation and we will make sure to try to avoid unintended consequences where we can. We take very seriously the problem that my noble friend has highlighted.