Why the case for a 'Scottish visa' just got stronger
Indeed, it seems to be very much uppermost in the minds of many Scottish business owners. As exclusively revealed by The Herald today, 70% of businesses in Scotland support the introduction a tailored 'Scottish visa', according to the latest Understanding Business Survey, conducted by 56° and Diffley Partnership.
Such a scheme which would allow migrants to come to work in Scotland, as long as they live and maintain a tax code in the country, and presumably ease the pressure on the many companies which have struggled with skills shortages since the end of freedom of movement.
But this would not be unrestrained immigration. Asked what their most important considerations would be if a Scottish visa were introduced, the top two responses from businesses surveyed both related to protecting Scottish workers, with 37% each saying 'maintaining a balance between migrant workers and upskilling local talent' and 'protecting job opportunities for Scottish workers and preventing wage suppression' were important. Business also wanted to ensure that any visa scheme would be easy to navigate for both employers and workers, selected as a top consideration by 35%.
Clearly, immigration remains a hot political topic, and with feelings continuing to run high on the topic Starmer's reluctance to implement any big policy changes is perhaps understandable. Especially given that Labour's stance on Brexit was writ large in its election manifesto last year.
But for a Government that has made economic growth its central mission, and has now presided over a second consecutive month of GDP decline, it must surely be looking to all the levers it has at its disposal to stem the tide.
A Scottish visa, targeted at sectors and companies suffering the most acute skills shortages, would be a step in the right direction.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
3 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Hardcore Nats want to ‘dissolve the union' if Westminster blocks IndyRef2
They rejected a strategy by the First Minister INDY REBELS Hardcore Nats want to 'dissolve the union' if Westminster blocks IndyRef2 Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) NATS rebels want MSPs to 'dissolve' the Union if Westminster blocks their path to independence. The hardliners insist talks on a UK split must start if pro-indy parties win a majority of List votes at next May's Holyrood election. Sign up for the Politics newsletter Sign up 4 Hardcore Nats reckon the Union should be "dissolved" if pro-Indy parties get a majority of List MSPs Credit: Alamy 4 They rejected John Swinney's strategy Credit: PA 4 Longtime party activist Graeme McCormick is one of the people behind the strategy Credit: Graeme McCormick They have rejected John Swinney's strategy and instead want the party to back their hardline tactic. Mr Swinney said last month that a majority of SNP seats at May's Scottish Parliament election would be a mandate for a second referendum. But the rebel group of 43 branches want Holyrood to begin negotiations on leaving the UK if half of voters back any pro-independence party - meaning the SNP, Scottish Greens, Alba or any other nationalist candidate. If Westminster refuses to acknowledge this approach then Holyrood should immediately 'dissolve the union', they say. It comes despite a landmark Supreme Court judgement in 2022 which effectively ruled out any legal path to independence other than a referendum agreed to by Westminster. Scottish Conservative deputy leader Rachael Hamilton said: 'This spat just demonstrates how out of touch John Swinney and the SNP are with ordinary Scots. 'Under the nationalists, our public services are in meltdown and taxes are sky high. "But instead of fixing the mess they've created, they're fighting about how best to push their independence obsession. 'John Swinney should stop fixating on tearing up the UK and focus on his day job.' Alastair Cameron, chair of Scotland in Union, said: 'Imagine if the SNP spent as much time exploring how to save the NHS rather than fighting over different wheezes for an unwanted second referendum.' Five moments you missed from a weekend with Donald Trump in Scotland The SNP 'Group of 43' has submitted a motion for approval by the SNP's conference committee which states: 'Conference instructs the Party to prioritise obtaining a mandate from the sovereign Scottish people to deliver independence. 'This will be possible by achieving a majority of the popular vote on the sum of the Independence Supporting Parties' List Votes in the 2026 Scottish parliamentary election.' Longtime party activist Graeme McCormick, one of the people behind the strategy, told The Herald: 'As you can imagine in the SNP, there are lots of views on how to achieve independence. A few of us who have been involved in the movement for a long time came together to propose this plan. 'If we get a majority of pro-independence votes on the list, we'll open negotiations with the UK Government around independence. If the negotiations aren't successful, then we'll move to dissolve the union. It's perfectly legal to do so.' The group will meet at St Matthew's Church in Perth to 'plan strategic amendments' and 'decide together how we take this initiative forward.' An invitation to the meeting stated: 'We are done asking for referenda. Never again will we accept a Scottish SNP leader or First Minister going cap in hand to Westminster for permission to leave the Union. That time is past.' Kenny MacAskill, leader of the Alba Party and a former member of the radical '79 Group' that dragged the SNP to the left under Alex Salmond, said he 'recognised and welcomed the old radical fire that still exsits within the SNP membership'. He said: 'They are now way ahead of the SNP leadership on the question of delivering independence.'
The Sun
3 hours ago
- The Sun
Labour's border chaos is fuelling public fury and fear as dangerous foreign offenders vanish into thin air
Labour's not smashing it IT is little more than a year since Labour came to power promising to smash the people-smuggling gangs. Instead they have smashed the economy — with inflation up, unemployment up and business confidence at a record low. The only significant growth is in the number of illegal migrants coming here in small boats. Already over 25,000 have arrived this year — a 50 per cent rise on the 2024 figure by this stage, which was shocking enough. That number is dwarfed by the UK's astonishing 700,000 population increase in just a year — almost entirely due to legal immigration — which itself is utterly unsustainable. The arrival of thousands of mostly undocumented illegal migrants is symptomatic of just how badly Britain has lost control of its borders. It's not just the millions of pounds it costs taxpayers every day to shower the migrants with handouts and put them up in hotels, nor the fact that so many of them find black market jobs. Most of the arrivals are young men of fighting age — yet the authorities seem to have little idea who they are, even if they end up in court. National emergency We discovered earlier this week that the number of foreign sex offenders and violent criminals in prison in England and Wales is at a record high, and that 40 per cent of people charged with sex attacks in the capital were foreign nationals. Now we learn foreign criminals are simply walking free mid-trial and disappearing under false names because of a dangerous 'disconnect' between prosecutors and immigration enforcement. It is little wonder that people — not least mothers — worry about migrant hotels on their doorsteps, or that protests are growing, or that polls show immigration is the number one issue concerning voters. So what is the Government doing about this national emergency? Reform UK's rising star Laila Cunningham It seems to have no plan, beyond a sketchy one-in-one-out deal with France and setting up a spy unit to track anyone on social media discussing anti-migrant sentiment or two-tier justice. While Britain continues to house soaring numbers of uninvited guests in four-star hotels, America has seen a massive drop in illegal border crossings because tough detention centres and deportations await those who do. President Donald Trump has shown the problem CAN be tackled, if only the political will exists. The Government, which ditched the Rwanda scheme — the only viable deterrent — as its first act in power, has shown precious little will so far. It's about time Sir Keir Starmer realised the urgency of the situation... and started taking tough action of his own. 1
Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Telegraph
Brexit isn't to blame for the Tate's woes, wokery is
If in doubt, blame Brexit. This has been the go-to for every failing business, politician and cultural enterprise for the last decade. And, with the news that the Tate is suffering from embarrassingly low attendance figures, director Maria Balshaw has reached for the same old script. 'The combination of Brexit changing their educational and work opportunities and then Covid profoundly affecting the end of their studies and the way they choose to live their lives' is stopping European youngsters from coming, says Balshaw. This blame game is telling for a number of reasons. For starters, the idea that Erasmus kids were what was holding Tate's attendance figures together is ludicrous – Brexit hasn't stopped youngsters from holidaying in the UK. Perhaps more revealing is the fact that Balshaw seems more concerned with attracting members of the European Union than addressing the nonchalance among punters from her own isle. Tate Modern has recently announced a slew of late openings to attract a Gen-Z audience. Museums having to masquerade as clubs to get the youth in is not a sign of good health. But aside from the Remaniac whining that is so typical in arts circles, why are Tate's numbers so low? A clue might be found in the shake-up of another event in 2016 – not Brexit but the revamping of Tate Modern as a 'museum for the 21st century', along with its Switch House 10-floor extension. There was a conscious reorientation by former directors Nicholas Serota and Frances Morris towards a focus on the political – think decolonisation, deconstruction, and lots of woke little plaques. At one point, an accompanying explanation next to Tate Britain's early 17th-century Cholmondeley Ladies informed the public of a possible lesbian subtext, which might have caused alarm to the sisters who feature in the work. One section of the Tate extension called 'Performer and Participant' informs viewers that they will be 'directed by an artist and political activism'. For your average Goldsmiths student this might be an exciting opportunity, but most ordinary museum goers are there to see the great art – never mind the politics. Perhaps Tate's failures are down to its own institutional cowardice. Over the years, both Tate Modern and Tate Britain have acted like museums who are embarrassed not only of their own collections but by their very own existence. The formerly famous Tate restaurant was not reopened after the pandemic thanks to criticism of the murals on the wall by Rex Whistler that included images of slave boys. Despite explanatory plaques, booklets and other apologetic scripts being produced around the mural for years, the museum decided that hungry members of the public simply couldn't be trusted to eat next to such a work. You can once more view them, but only in the context of an installation 'contextualising', ie condemning, the work. Likewise, Sir Stanley Spencer's Resurrection, Cookham has been quietly filed away into storage after critics argued that he had used images from a 'National Geographic magazine' to paint the black figures, instead of using people he knew – despite the obvious lack of black people to befriend in 1920s Cookham. Museums are not supposed to be entertainment factories, serving the political whims of colourfully dressed members of our cultural elite. These institutions seem to have forgotten their duty to curate and conserve art history in its entirety, without layering modern political fashions onto the past. In her book published last year, Gathering of Strangers, Balshaw insisted that 'we should not go back to the turn of the twentieth century and the Victorian civilising mission that motivated many museums', but instead look to the heroes of climate justice for direction as to which content should end up on the hallowed walls of our museums. A choice between the Victorians and Just Stop Oil? I know which exhibition I'd rather go to.
