Blair's secret scheme to make immigration more popular
Labour ministers came up with the 'marketing' strategy to overcome what they described as 'disproportionate' concerns about the issue and to communicate the 'big picture' to the public instead.
The plan, which aimed to steer public opinion towards a 'more sensible conversation on immigration', included details of Home Office -commissioned research which found that many Britons believed borders were 'open and overrun' .
In a handwritten note, Sir Tony described research he had been reading on immigration as 'pretty grim but utterly believable'.
The then prime minister was sent the 15-page strategy document in March 2004 by Lord Blunkett, the then home secretary, who shared it in 'strict confidence' and warned: 'You will see that this research, and the references to it in the paper, could be explosive in the wrong hands.'
The paper, titled 'Having a sensible conversation about migration', claimed that the then government had made 'real progress' in reducing the impact of stories about asylum seekers, so that they were 'no longer automatic front-page tabloid material every time'.
However, it then detailed public research which 'confirms that immigration is an issue of real concern to people' and noted there were 'no obvious signs of a breakthrough as a result of what has been achieved so far and little recognition or credit for what the government has done on asylum'.
It is not clear if the scheme was ever enacted.
However, the paper came weeks before Sir Tony opened Britain's borders to thousands of Eastern European migrants. The Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia joined the EU in 2004.
The decision by the then government to allow immediate unrestricted access to migrants from those countries was widely seen as having contributed to a major increase in immigration in the years that followed, with net EU migration surging to more than 200,000 a year.
'Public is looking for scapegoats'
Summing up the views of the public, the strategy document said: 'People feel they do not have permission to freely express their fears'.
It added: 'In a world of rapid change and uncertainty, people are fearful and look for explanations and scapegoats,' while claiming that 'a disproportionate amount of fear and uncertainty' was 'channelled towards' migration.
Discussing the communications challenges in getting across a pro-migration message, the paper included a textbook-style graphic of a human eye looking towards a circle with the words 'bogus', 'scroungers' and 'out of control', which blocked out another larger circle labelled the 'big picture'.
The paper said the 'big picture' was being crowded out by 'an almost cliched perception of all immigrants being 'bogus' and 'scroungers'.'
'The challenge is finding new ways to package and communicate these issues in a way that circumvents the eclipse and makes it easier for people to see the big picture,' it added.
'More sensible conversation needed'
The strategy document recommended a new approach to improve the public's 'understanding' of migration and 'correct public misconceptions about the scale, nature and potential benefits of managed migration' and 'open the way for a more sensible conversation on immigration'.
'Shifting public attitudes on immigration is a huge challenge', it added. 'It requires a radically different communication approach. Media fire-fighting, whilst important, will not be sufficient – there are too many fires to put out and editorial and public opinion are too entrenched.
'In effect, many parts of the media are party to generating and sustaining the eclipse. The more they are fed with immigration stories, the bigger the eclipse becomes and the more the big picture is obscured.'
The then government planned a campaign to show action was being taken to tackle the issue and to 'broaden the migration conversation and explain why managed migration is important to us as a nation.'
It hoped to 'reduce the impact of the media-driven 'eclipse' by ensuring that the action that the government is taking is seen as a concerted and cohesive programme, and that this package of measures is communicated to the public with impact.'
The paper detailed a table showing plans to advertise the advantages of migration and a PR campaign to demonstrate that migrants made a positive contribution to society.
The files relating to the strategy have only been released up to March 2004, before its planned launch in July that year.
In an annex on the findings of polling and focus group research, the paper revealed that participants were 'overwhelmingly of the view that the UK does not have an effective immigration policy' and that they 'feel that our traditional tolerance has been exploited and become a major weakness'.
It said: 'They have a sense that our borders are completely open and overrun.
'Both focus groups and polling suggest that these intolerant views can be held by people who really do value our multicultural society and are genuinely proud of our tolerant heritage. But they feel that the 'uncontrolled flood' of immigrants is undermining these noble aspirations.
'Strongly held negative impressions are more the result of anger that things have 'got to this state' rather than outright racism. There is real resentment of political correctness – which is considered a reason why immigration and race cannot be discussed openly and therefore tackled effectively.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
29 minutes ago
- The Independent
This weekend, 100,000 people stood up to fight against the demonisation of trans people
One hundred thousand people, let me repeat, 100,000 people joined Saturday's march for London Trans+ Pride. It broke 2024's record of 60,000 and extended the capital's reign as the largest trans rights protest in the world. But pride doesn't even begin to encompass the full breadth of emotion I feel: not only in making it happen, but in the tenacity of our community. This was my second year helping to organise the march – and I do apologise to any of those still hearing the echoes of my voice ringing out 'Claim your space, we have the whole of Whitehall!' through a megaphone. As a proud trans woman, working alongside the collective of 30 or so volunteers who put on this event every year is a privilege. I am by no means its voice, and there are many others more qualified to be the community's voice, such as artist Lewis G Burton, BBC presenter Dr Ronx and Heartstopper actor Yasmin Finney, who all made speeches in Parliament Square. But I am writing this as someone who found comfort and community here and wanted to give back. For me and for so many other people, Saturday's march represents the ultimate safe space. It is a day of protest and of joy, liberation and celebration. There wasn't anything like it when I started my transition some 15 years ago. I was lucky enough to know exactly who I was from a young age – just as my mother had known who she was, and my father had known who he was. My parents have been my most supportive allies, and I was so moved to see signs from other families along the march. I spent several years working as an organiser of large-scale events before joining London Trans+ Pride. And while my career may have been my foundation for this move into advocacy, nothing can prepare you for the energy of those marching. I'm not surprised that so many more people joined compared to 2024. It has come at a time when we need proactive activism and allyship more than ever. Following the explosion against trans+ rights in the last five years, from puberty blocker bans to the Supreme Court's contested ruling in April – that the legal definition of a woman is someone born biologically female – friends, family and total strangers have stepped up and demonstrated their support – and highlighted that most Britons have never, and will never, view trans people as a threat. Our team was supported by almost 600 volunteer stewards. These people come from all over the UK and give up their time to guide the march. We could not safely deliver an event of such magnitude every year without them, and we owe them so much. They, and the additional 35,000 marchers we saw yesterday, have stepped up at a time when visible support is so needed. We tend to see significant mainstream coverage about small protests against immigration, but little about the thousands of people supporting trans rights. We heard the author Caroline Litman speaking about her late daughter, Alice, and initiatives highlighted from ally support groups such as the Trans Solidarity Alliance and Not in Our Name, and the enviable strength and determination of Trans Kids Deserve Better. When I had time to look up from my work as a pink blur of headsets and event management forms, I could soak in the phenomenon engulfing me. I spent all day being moved by the placards, banners, flags, and by the humour. The progressive spins on viral trends were a favourite: 'Nothing beats a Jet2 Holiday; except top surgery.' British irony combined with the joy of medical autonomy: something I see regularly in my new career in gender-affirming healthcare – an area persistently targeted in the tirade against our community. In my role, I get to float between marchers, volunteers and community workers throughout the march and see all the variety of support there. And while my bones may be a little worse for wear after what can only be described as the job of a lifetime – and thank goodness for comfy shoes – I couldn't imagine anything better. But this lovely day is counterbalanced by the continued demonisation of women like me, people like this and communities like ours. Our rights appear to be being used as pawns on the world's political stage to distract from larger issues. London Trans+ Pride was, is and will always remain a testament to joy. It confirms us as human by showing up for each other and everyone else through the intersectionality of systemic oppression. 2025 continues to be a horrific year for human rights. But, thanks to everyone who marched and made history, today, the future for trans people feels a little brighter.
Daily Mail
29 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Apple and Google face calls to install 'kill switches' in mobile phones stolen by moped gangs to end resale market
Pressure is mounting on big tech companies to install remote 'kill switches' in mobile phones amid ongoing phone-theft epidemic. Senior Conservative politicians have urged the Labour Government to 'force' Apple and Google to end the criminal phone trade once and for all by rendering all stolen phones useless. Kill switches work by severing smartphones from the cloud once the devices have been reported to police as stolen. James Conway, who oversees Scotland Yard's phone-theft investigations, believes this will slash their market value on the black market, massively disincentivizing criminals from snatching them. This call to action comes after a Daily Mail investigation revealed that vulnerable youngsters are being groomed into stealing phones by county-lines gangs, which are then shipped abroad in bulk and sold around the world. Last night Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp told the Daily Mail: 'The Labour Government is presiding over a crime epidemic - with phone theft rife. 'Mobile phone companies should urgently implement 'Kill Switches' which prevent stolen phones from accessing the cloud globally. 'Google and Apple claim to have antitheft measures but these are clearly completely ineffective. This call to action comes after a Daily Mail investigation revealed that vulnerable youngsters are being groomed into stealing phones by county-lines gangs, which are then shipped abroad in bulk and sold around the world. 'If companies like Apple continue to refuse to do this voluntarily then the Government must urgently legislate to force them, by amending the Crime and Policing bill. 'Implementing a 'Kill Switch' is vital and the Government should legislate to compel big tech companies to do this if they're not going to do it voluntarily.' Meanwhile, Shadow Minister for Home Affairs, Alicia Kearns added: 'A remote kill switch would reclaim our streets and better protect us all from the plague of phone thieves in our cities. 'This is the sort of initiative phone companies should be introducing to better protect their customers and help tackle organised crime.' Some 80,000 phones are stolen in London every year, with around 80 per cent of this bounty ending up abroad. Across the entire United Kingdom, around 230 mobile phones are stolen every single day. Speaking to the Daily Mail last week, Commander James Conway, who oversees Scotland Yard's phone-theft investigations, explained that a 'kill switch' would ensure that a 'the [stolen device] wouldn't operate as a smartphone any more and would have next to zero value in that market.' In response to the growing phone-theft crisis several cyber security companies such as Nuke From Orbit have been established to make it easier for users to safeguard their accounts. Nuke From Orbit allows users to block access to multiple services and accounts simultaneously after the user's phone has been stolen. James O'Sullivan, CEO and Founder of Nuke From Orbit explained: 'As our lives become more reliant on mobile phones, the need to be able to disavow that device when stolen increases exponentially.' A spokesperson for Google said: 'Google's top priority is the safety of its users, and we are proud to bring constantly evolving, industry-leading security technologies to Android. 'Our freely available anti-theft features help users to protect their devices before, during, and after a theft. 'Users in locations at risk of phone theft can simply switch them on and stay protected.'
Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trans ruling means every lavatory user will need to be checked, museums claim
Staff will have to check the sex of visitors using lavatories after the Supreme Court's trans ruling, museum bosses have claimed. Museums Galleries Scotland, a national body that represents 455 non-national museums and receives £1.7 million a year in public funds, claims organisations will have to close while they reassess lavatory provisions. In April, the Supreme Court ruled that 'sex' in law is a person's biological sex, not gender identity. However, the Scottish Government has so far failed to produce guidance for public bodies on single-sex spaces such as lavatories. In its submission, the museums body says it has concerns the EHRC's initial guidance does not 'uphold the spirit of inclusion' and that the human rights body did not consult with trans people or trans organisations in its development. Policing of toilets is 'unfeasiable' The response goes on to say: 'When there is a need to 'prove' your sex, what proof will be acceptable given gender recognition certificates are not, nor are altered birth certificates – but how would you know? It is likely this role would fall on front-of-house staff, which we believe puts undue pressure on them to do this 'in a sensitive way which does not cause discrimination or harassment'. 'The practical application of policing toilets is unfeasible as, to avoid discrimination, it would require every single person using toilets to be checked adding substantial workload and staff costs to undertake this role.' Museums Galleries Scotland also raised concerns the interim guidance does not make reference to people with intersex conditions and states there are 1.1 million intersex people in the UK. Susan Smith, co-founder of For Women Scotland, said the Museums Galleries Scotland submission is 'a masterclass in legal idiocy and scientific illiteracy'. She said: 'The EHRC guidance aims to protect organisations and ensure they adhere to law: it is not supposed to set out the best way for public bodies to evade or trash their responsibility to protect the public from discrimination or harassment. ''Inclusion' covers all protected characteristics and rights have to be balanced. The time of prioritising the demands of trans-identifying men over the real needs of women and other groups is over.' Ms Smith said the assertion that staff would have to police toilets is 'wilfully misunderstanding' that having policies that align with the law 'does not mean they are required to vet every user'. MGS accused of 'scaremongering' Instead it means if women complain about a man being in the women's lavatories, it will be investigated. 'What is clear is that MGS have had unlawful policies for some time. All parties at the Supreme Court understood that self-identification has never been lawful, including the Scottish Government, which funds MGS,' Ms Smith said. 'Finally, it is outrageous that MGS are happy to spread debunked lies and attempt to scaremonger about serious medical conditions which they call 'intersex'. Last time we checked, museum staff were not endocrinologists. 'The status of people with Differences of Sex Development is not affected by the Supreme Court ruling and the wildly inflated numbers MSG cite should embarrass whoever submitted the report.' The museums body also states that members of the public have been 'policing toilets' at heritage sites by 'making assumptions based on stereotypes' and has created an 'environment of suspicion'. Dr Kath Murray, of the policy organisation Murray Blackburn Mackenzie, said: 'It is deeply concerning that a major national institution signed off and submitted such an ill-informed response to the EHRC consultation. 'The response fails to consider the needs of women and instead repeats trans activist talking points. The figures cited on the 'intersex' population have been widely debunked and bear no relevance to the implementation of the Supreme Court judgment.' The Nationalist government released its response to the consultation late on Friday night, claiming that services needed to justify why they were single-sex.
