Labour MPs face a serious dilemma on asylum seekers – but this is not the way out of it | Polly Toynbee

This is how Labour MPs see it. They face brutal dilemmas and miserable choices. How to manage our asylum system is one of the worst. Through their constituency work, they will have met refugees with tragic stories of war and fear, of terrifying journeys across the world, of gangsters on night-time beaches. But MPs’ experience of hearing those heart-rending stories clash head-on with what they see as political necessity, demanding they block their ears and harden their hearts. A life in politics is not for the squeamish. Wes Streeting, a practising Christian, yesterday writhed while answering questions on LBC radio about the home secretary’s tough plans for deterring small boat arrivals. The flavour of his reply reflected how many on Labour’s benches feel. Confronted with the government’s intention to deport more families with children – ending what Shabana Mahmood said was feeble “hesitancy” – he sought a bogus escape by claiming many would leave voluntarily, making forced removals “low”. But when pushed, he said yes, removals must be enforced. Was he comfortable with that? “Honestly? Comfortable? No. But is it the right thing to do for the country? Yes.” The dilemmas are deep, morally and electorally. They affect MPs from “red wall” seats whose vote is being swallowed by Reform; MPs in seats with large ethnic minority populations who are losing to independents; and those in university seats where votes vanish leftwards. All of them have different anxieties about immigration – but all can read the polls. The polling group More in Common finds not just the wider public, but a majority of Labour and Green voters – yes Labour and Green – support much of the government’s Danish-style ruthlessness. “In both language and substance, Shabana Mahmood is much more in line with the median Brit than either the Labour left or Reform,” says Luke Tryl, director of More in Common. His polling finds that on the harshest items, a majority of both Labour and Green voters back these plans: prioritising sending asylum seekers home rather than integrating them in the UK; requiring financial guarantees before bringing in family. A majority of Labour voters, and more Green supporters than not, also support giving refugees only a temporary right to stay; only allowing permanent residency if they speak good English and have a full-time job; and only granting asylum to those personally targeted by a regime, not just fleeing wars. There are 59 active, state-based conflicts around the world, more than at any time since the second world war. All of this shows why, although Labour MPs may hate facing up to it, any rebellion against the home secretary’s measures is unlikely to be seismic. Expect the government to moderate the cruellest proposals but stick to the rest. The new plan would send refugees home when the regime they fled has fallen, though their homelands may never be as safe as Europe. Only 6.6% of the world population lives under a full democracy. The bill also proposes to extend the wait before refugees can qualify for indefinite leave to remain or settled status. While Mahmood’s legislation will pass, Labour should have thought more seriously about how to launch a policy designed to appease this dark strand in the national psyche. Leaving large numbers of migrants in limbo in the UK will hinder social integration, almost undermining the concept of refugee status. People have very different views of asylum seekers awaiting a verdict on the one hand, and migrants beckoned here with visas on the other. But what most people also feel about the positives of immigration went missing this week. The underlying assumption, as in most of this government’s policies, is that public opinion is fixed: the hard right may successfully sway it, but Labour never dares try. Yet if it’s politically necessary to deter small boat arrivals, it’s just as essential to talk up the value of welcoming migrants for a thriving economy and every aspect of society. Mahmood, the daughter of Pakistani immigrants, may be its personification, but this needs repeating daily, to refute racist claims. Of all the apparent foreigners the haters spit at, only a tiny fraction are refugees or asylum seekers. A much larger number who come every year are economic migrants, because employers need their skills. Keep saying it. The OBR calculates that the higher the rate of net migration, the more GDP will rise. Arrivals on the skilled worker route make a net household fiscal contribution of £12,000, according to the latest figures from the government’s migration advisory committee. Employment rates of working age non-UK nationals are slightly higher than UK nationals, with EU nationals higher still. A fifth of the NHS workforce in England is made up of non-UK nationals, including over a third of doctors in hospital and community services. The RCN warned on Thursday that 46,000 foreign nurses may leave the UK due to the proposed changes to indefinite leave to remain: the rest of the world will welcome them. Yet there are still 111,000 care vacancies in England alone. Cash-strapped universities depend heavily on international students for almost a quarter of their income – £12bn per year. International students boost export earnings by around £23bn. Key scientists chased out of US universities by Trump need a rapid welcome. Because stopping the boats is almost impossible, the impact of these new Home Office deterrents is uncertain. Where are the battalions of skilled processors to check every migrant’s status every two years for 10 or 20 years? Deportations need an agreed, Europe-wide system. The risk is that cutting “net” numbers is easiest by restricting work and study visas, yet only 4% support fewer students or workers coming to Britain, according to a poll by British Future. In a long list of occupations, from academics and engineers to care workers, fruit-pickers and caterers, a majority don’t want any particular occupational group cut. People, quite reasonably, want control. Labour points to Denmark’s success in deterring arrivals. What bitter irony that on Wednesday, Denmark’s Social Democrats lost control of Copenhagen to the left, with those tough migration rules partly to blame. Polly Toynbee is a Guardian columnist