Why UK Political Parties’ Use of Immigrants as Scapegoats Will Never Stop Any Time Soon

The scapegoating of immigrants is a persistent feature of UK political discourse, deeply embedded in the strategies of major parties and the broader political culture. Despite shifting public attitudes, changing demographics, and mounting evidence that immigrants contribute positively to society, politicians continue to blame migrants for the nation’s woes. This practice is unlikely to end soon due to a combination of political expediency, media influence, structural policy failures, and the evolving dynamics of party competition.

The Historical Roots and Enduring Power of Scapegoating

Scapegoating-blaming a vulnerable group for wider societal problems-is an ancient political tactic, as old as the concept of “divide and rule” itself2. In the UK, immigrants have long been cast as the convenient culprits for issues ranging from crime and NHS waiting times to housing shortages and the cost-of-living crisis123. This narrative is not only about policy; it is about constructing an “enemy” that can be blamed for systemic failures, thus diverting attention from the government’s own shortcomings31011.

This tactic has intensified in recent decades, particularly since the late 1990s, when policy changes under New Labour introduced forced dispersal and restricted the right to work for asylum seekers2. These measures set the stage for an ever more punitive and exclusionary immigration system, one that is now openly described as “explicitly racist” by critics2612.

Political Expediency and the Electoral Cycle

One of the main reasons scapegoating persists is its political utility. When politicians struggle to meet targets on the economy, public services, or social welfare, migrants-who lack the power to vote-become the default group to blame911. This is especially true during times of crisis or heightened political competition, such as the aftermath of the Brexit referendum or recent local elections where right-wing parties like Reform UK have made significant gains479.

Both the Conservative and Labour parties have adopted increasingly hardline stances on immigration, not necessarily because such policies are effective, but because they are seen as electorally advantageous479. The recent Labour proposal to bar all irregular arrivals from ever becoming citizens is a case in point: it is primarily symbolic, designed to signal toughness rather than address root causes9. This “race to the bottom” in rhetoric and policy is driven by a desire to outflank rivals on the right and shore up support among anxious voters9.

Media Amplification and the Normalisation of Hostility

The media plays a crucial role in amplifying and legitimising anti-immigrant narratives. Sensationalist coverage and misinformation-such as the false claims about migrant involvement in violent crime-fuel public anxiety and provide politicians with ready-made talking points510. This feedback loop between politicians and the press ensures that scapegoating remains a prominent feature of public debate, regardless of the facts810.

The impact is not just rhetorical. There has been a dramatic rise in hate crimes and violent attacks against migrants and minority communities in the past decade, a trend closely linked to inflammatory political and media discourse810. The normalisation of such rhetoric emboldens far-right groups and deepens social divisions, making it even harder for mainstream parties to shift away from scapegoating without risking political backlash510.

Structural Policy Failures and the Need for Distraction

Many of the problems for which migrants are blamed-such as NHS underfunding, housing shortages, and stagnant wages-are the result of long-term policy failures, not immigration131011. However, admitting this would require politicians to confront uncomfortable truths about austerity, privatisation, and systemic mismanagement311. Scapegoating immigrants offers a way to deflect responsibility and avoid the difficult work of genuine reform.

As one analysis notes, “The government could never say these worsening of the conditions of the people were not because of immigration but because of its own old-fashioned economic liberal policy of austerity”3. Instead, politicians continue to “peddle misinformation and proffer easy scapegoats”11, a strategy that is easier and less risky than addressing the underlying causes of public discontent.

The Populist Surge and the “Symbolic” Politics of Migration

The rise of populist parties and movements has further entrenched scapegoating as a political strategy. Parties like Reform UK have made immigration their central issue, forcing mainstream parties to adopt ever tougher rhetoric in an attempt to stem the electoral tide479. This dynamic is not unique to the UK; across Europe, migration has become a “political messaging tool rather than a serious area of governance”9.

This has led to a politics of symbolism, where headline-grabbing announcements and punitive policies take precedence over evidence-based solutions9. Measures such as increasing the wait time for citizenship or barring certain categories of migrants from naturalisation are unlikely to have any real impact on migration flows, but they serve to reassure voters that politicians are “in control”79.

Racialisation and the Two-Tier System

The scapegoating of immigrants is also deeply racialised. Policies and rhetoric often draw sharp lines between “deserving” and “undeserving” migrants, with non-white and Muslim communities facing particular hostility25610. The government’s “New Plan” for immigration explicitly creates a two-tier system, treating those who arrive via irregular routes as less worthy of protection or integration6.

This racialisation is reinforced by the use of language that frames migrants as “dishonest,” “dangerous,” or “criminal,” regardless of the evidence6. Such narratives not only justify harsh policies but also legitimise broader forms of exclusion and discrimination across society2510.

Why Will It Never Stop Any Time Soon?

Given these dynamics, the use of immigrants as scapegoats by UK political parties is unlikely to end in the near future. Several factors make this practice stubbornly persistent:

• Political Incentives: Blaming migrants is a low-risk, high-reward strategy for politicians facing electoral pressure or policy failure139.

• Media Collaboration: Sensationalist coverage and misinformation ensure that anti-immigrant narratives remain in the public eye5810.

• Populist Competition: The rise of right-wing populism forces mainstream parties to adopt ever tougher stances, normalising hostility479.

• Structural Failures: Deep-seated problems in health, housing, and welfare provide a constant supply of grievances to be redirected onto migrants1311.

• Racialisation: The targeting of specific ethnic and religious groups makes scapegoating a powerful tool for mobilising certain segments of the electorate25610.

• Lack of Accountability: Migrants, as non-voters, cannot retaliate at the ballot box, making them a politically “safe” target911.

The Human Cost and the Need for Change

While scapegoating may serve short-term political goals, it comes at a significant human cost. It deepens social divisions, fuels hate crimes, and undermines the integration and well-being of migrant communities5810. It also distracts from the real causes of the UK’s challenges, preventing the development of effective, evidence-based policies that could benefit everyone1911.

Yet, as long as the incentives for scapegoating remain-and as long as politicians and the media find it easier to blame migrants than to confront systemic failures-this pattern is unlikely to change. Only a fundamental shift in political culture, media responsibility, and public engagement can break the cycle. Until then, the scapegoating of immigrants will remain a central, if deeply damaging, feature of UK politics.

“Migrants have become government scapegoats for anything from increases in crime rates to the depletion of precious NHS resources, the shortage of available employment and, more recently, the driving up of living costs and the lack of housing, a view propagated for its usefulness by a greedy and corrupt UK Government.”2

In summary, the use of immigrants as scapegoats is not a temporary aberration but a structural feature of UK political life, reinforced by electoral incentives, media dynamics, and deep-rooted policy failures. Without significant change, this practice will persist-ensuring that immigrants remain the perennial “enemy” in the nation’s political imagination for the foreseeable future.