'The new justice secretary, Alex Norris, must not be fearful of rocking the multicultural boat, writes the social integration expert
With reports that former justice secretary David Lammy was taking legal action to block the publication of crime rates among foreign nationals across England and Wales, the Labour Government is once again leaving itself open to the accusation of protecting multicultural dogma and providing cover for migrant criminality.
It has been reported the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) was seeking to overturn a decision by the Information Commissioner that data revealing the extent of foreign-national offending from 2018 to 2024 should be published. Under the 2000 Freedom of Information Act passed under New Labour, the Centre for Migration Control (CMC) think-tank asked the MoJ to provide the total number of convictions during this period, broken down by nationality and type of offence.
If as reported, the Ministry of Justice’s attempt to conceal data on the scale and severity of crimes committed by foreign nationals is an affront to democracy – threatening to further undermine state-citizen relations in a country where anti-establishment sentiments are already at fever pitch.
British civil society – including the research, policy, and media communities – should have the data available to make evaluations over the degree to which immigration is a national-security and public-safety matter.
This data should be part of the national conversation on admittedly sensitive matters regarding what I call the Three I’s – immigration, integration, and identity.
Are there certain groups of migrants which have a stronger tendency to commit certain types of crimes, such as sexual offences against women and girls? Are certain nationalities in the UK associated with higher rates of violence – if so, why is this the case? Which countries of origin are most strongly linked with failing to respect the rule of law – how socio-culturally and legally different are they to the UK?
These are all important questions to address but this can only be done through evidence-driven investigations based on relevant data.
The UK should follow the example of European-cousin nations such as Denmark and the Netherlands – both publish highly detailed and comprehensive migrant crime statistics.
This involves the continuous tracking and publication of crime-related data – including convictions broken down by migratory background and country of origin.
In Denmark, Statistics Denmark frequently updates a publicly accessible database which links the Central Criminal Register with demographic/population registers.
Through annual reports and existing databases such as ‘STRAFNA9’, criminal convictions are broken down by descendants of migrants and place of origin, as well as taking age and sex into consideration.
Meanwhile, in the Netherlands, Statistics Netherlands (CBS) maintains comprehensive registers, publishing a richness of longitudinal data on crime suspects and detainees by migration background – to the point of distinguishing between first-generation migrants and second-generation migrants.
This helps to make comparative analyses across the generations when it comes to a critical element of integration – respecting the country’s laws and rules.
The new justice secretary, Alex Norris, must not be fearful of rocking the multicultural boat and cultivate a culture of transparency at the MoJ when it comes to providing British civil society with the opportunities to make informed data-driven judgements on the impact of migrant criminality on wider society.
This is especially relevant, considering the threat posed by the ongoing small-boats emergency to female public safety – with the Labour Party repeatedly pledging to significantly reduce violence against women and girls.
The UK should follow in the footsteps of European counterparts such as Denmark and the Netherlands – in an era of immigration-induced diversity and integration-related troubles, a ‘public data revolution’ in the field of crime and justice is needed more than ever.
