here - United Kingdom Parliament

1731 Student Visas
6 JUNE 2013
Student Visas
1732
many of these students come from well-connected families,
and that among them will be the political leaders and
captains of industry of tomorrow. It is therefore crucial
to our long-term diplomatic and economic relationships
with their home countries that we warmly welcome
these young people, rather than making them feel unwanted,
as this Government are undoubtedly doing at the moment.
That is particularly important in the north-east, where
international links and trade and exports are fundamental
parts of the economy. The independent “North-east
Economic Review” recently commissioned by the local
enterprise partnership and authored by my noble colleague
Lord Adonis reported that the north-east is one of
the leading exporting areas of the UK, with over
1,500 companies exporting goods. In 2011 and 2012, it
was the only region in England to achieve a positive
balance of trade in goods, with figures of £2.5 billion in
2011 and £4.8 billion in 2012. So we do well, but we are
reliant in many ways on orders and investment from
overseas companies. The role that our universities play
in keeping and creating those relationships is crucial.
One country that often comes up when we talk about
the need to get more people over to the UK is China.
The University of Sunderland works hard to attract
Chinese students, as do other higher education institutions.
I was lucky enough to visit China in September 2011. I
visited the offices of the University of Sunderland in
Beijing, where I was able to talk to the local staff there
about the work they do. Their biggest concerns by far
were the new visa requirements, coupled with the way in
which some Chinese students they had recruited were
treated at customs when they arrived here in the UK.
Both those factors are a source of humiliation to
students. What will happen when word gets out that the
UK does not want them and that it will put them
through that kind of experience? Students who would
have come to the UK, and who might well have come to
Sunderland, will go elsewhere in the world. They want
to learn and develop their English, and they will go to
the USA, Australia, New Zealand or Canada, all of
which exclude students from their migrant figures and
are currently welcoming them with open arms. Those
countries are benefiting from our loss.
While I was in China I also visited Suzhou, where the
University of Liverpool has established a joint campus
with a local university, with the aim of providing
opportunities for UK students to visit an economically
and culturally significant area of China as well as
providing a form of embassy or advert for its UK
institution. I met a young man from Suzhou who had
been studying computer science at Liverpool and is now
doing his postgraduate qualification at University College
London. That shows that the process definitely works.
The development of more such partnerships and
recruitment drives in a country with which we desperately
need to build links is surely at risk, given the way in
which this Government’s attitude towards overseas students
is now seen in that country, and undoubtedly in others.
The University of Sunderland posed two questions
to me, which I believe cut to the heart of this debate. I
would be grateful if the Minister could address them in
his response—if indeed he is listening to what I am
saying. First, can the Government meet their net migration
targets without reducing the number of international
students coming to study at British universities? My
suspicion is that they probably cannot, and are therefore
knowingly and willingly accepting the devastating economic
impact that this policy will have on localities and regions,
particularly those with a track record of success in
global enterprise.
Secondly, what is more important to this Government:
economic growth and sustainability or a falsely painted
picture of immigration and immigrants that includes
those who choose to come and invest in the UK and
bring substantial short and long-term economic and
social advantage to our country? I am sure the Minister
will say that it is the former, but actions speak louder
than words, and the actions of this Government firmly
suggest that their priority is political headlines, rather
than what is right for our higher education sector and
for the country.
Of course we must tackle bogus colleges and bogus
students. Everyone agrees on that. I am afraid, however,
that such action is being used as a smokescreen to
justify this damaging and short-sighted policy. Well, the
Government are fooling nobody. We all know that this
is about using overseas students to reduce the net migration
figures in order to fulfil a promise made by the Prime
Minister that he would otherwise be unable to fulfil.
That is a disgrace, and it must stop. I hope that this
debate will spur a change in policy and a more grown-up
and thought-through approach. This Government are
well-practised in the art of the U-turn, and I hope that
we will see one being performed on this issue sooner
rather than later, before too much more damage is done
to our universities and our international reputation.
2.26 pm
Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Lab): I am pleased
that we are having this debate, as it will enable us to
draw attention to a number of issues relating to overseas
students in this country. We should start from the
premise that the students who come here to study and
work are a big help to our economy, to local economies
and to the experience of UK students in our higher
education institutions.
London First, in calling for the removal of students
from the UK migration target, states:
“Taking students out of the migration target would be the
strongest positive message that the government could send out
but, if this remains too politically difficult, then a more measured
and consistent approach to addressing applications for visas
would be a good first step.”
Many of us have met students in other countries who
are considering coming to the UK to study, and discovered
that they are put off by a number of factors. One is the
complication and cost of applying for a visa, as well as
the delays that often occur in that process. I know that
the Minister is aware of those problems, and I look
forward to hearing his response to this point. Those
students are also put off by the image that has been
created by the treatment of overseas students here.
I am not going to defend the bogus colleges that
purported to teach the English language to people in
London and other cities. They often short-changed
their students, many of whom ended up as victims of a
particularly nasty system. It is right to prosecute those
who were perpetrating that fraud against those students,
but we should have more sympathy with those genuine
students who came here thinking that they were going
to be taught English only to find that their college was a