We must continue to welcome foreign students with open arms

Restricting numbers would be a mistake, even if they add to pressure on the housing market

This week’s revelation that net migration added about half a million to the British population over the past year has, to say the least, divided opinion. The figures were good news for those worried about labour shortages. But others are more anxious about the additional pressures on public services, infrastructure and the housing market.

The Government has already suggested that it will respond by tightening restrictions on the numbers of international students coming to British universities. This might help us hit to some arbitrary target for net migration, but it is still a bad idea.

First, the facts. In the year to June, an estimated 504,000 more people arrived long-term in Britain than left. This is a record number and, of course, far above the original target set by David Cameron of reducing net migration to the “tens of thousands”.

The official data on international migration are notoriously unreliable and often revised. The latest figures are also distorted by some special factors, notably the lifting of Covid restrictions and an influx of people fleeing the war in Ukraine. The underlying trend is therefore almost certainly weaker.

Viewed more positively, the figures add to evidence that the end of freedom of movement from the European Union after Brexit is doing little harm to the overall supply of workers. Indeed, the net inflow of non-EU nationals (509,000) in the year to June was 10 times as large as the net outflow of EU nationals (51,000).

However, the figure that seems to be gaining most attention is the jump in the number of non-EU nationals arriving on study visas, to 277,000 from 143,000 in the previous year.

This leap mainly reflects the easing of travel restrictions and the resumption of in-person teaching, so is unlikely to be the start of an upward trend. It will also include some students who delayed the start of their studies by one year due to the pandemic. But overseas students are a tempting target if the Government wants to get net migration down.

That would be an odd policy choice. For a start, it would be hamstringing one of our top exports. Further education is clearly an area where Britain has a comparative advantage and one we should continue to exploit.

Restricting the number of overseas students would contribute to the labour shortage too. Many students also take paid work while they are here, including in sectors such as hospitality where demand is currently high. Unlike migrants crossing the Channel in small boats, or “family reunions” involving large numbers of elderly relatives, foreign students typically pay for themselves.

Some are worried that the new Graduate Visa route, where students can apply to work in Britain for up to three years after completing their studies, could mean that people are overstaying their welcome. But this does not make a lot of sense, especially when job vacancies are so high. In reality, most overseas students do leave at their end of their studies anyway.

There are still some valid concerns. One might be the additional demand on local public services, such as GPs or schools. But overseas students are typically young and relatively healthy, and do not usually bring children with them.

Another is the pressure on the housing market. The large number of overseas students may be making it harder for British students to find accommodation. But unless overall student numbers are reduced, restricting the number from overseas would not have much impact on housing demand.

What’s more, the student housing market is largely separate, with many living on campus or other specific accommodation that is not really competing with housing for the wider community.

There are also worries that our universities may have become too dependent on foreign students, particularly from China and the Middle East. They can be charged much higher fees, limiting the number of places for British students, or those

from the rest of Europe or poorer developing countries. This is a particular problem on postgraduate courses. This has all sorts of unintended consequences, including lower academic standards and more emphasis on teaching numbers rather than the quality of research. But this is an argument for reforming British student finance, rather than just tightening the restrictions on all overseas students.

There is a balance to be struck too. A good mix of overseas students brings a wider range of experiences and knowledge, and adds to cultural diversity.

The proposed solution doesn’t make much sense either. It is being suggested that foreign students may be barred from coming to Britain unless they win a place at a “top” university.

This is presumably based on the idea that these top students are the most valuable, in some way, or at least less likely to slip out of education into illegal work. It is understandable that there might be some scepticism about people coming from around the world to read “squirrel studies” at the University of West Peckham (yes, I have made that up). But trying to distinguish between universities, let alone individual courses, would open up a whole new can of worms.

As it happens, the institutions that take the most foreign students already include many of the big names, such as Manchester and Imperial College

London, which would presumably qualify as “top” universities anyway. But what about the many excellent courses at universities that are perhaps less prestigious, including in areas of the country in need of levelling up?

If pressure on housing supply is the main concern, why not restrict the numbers at universities in the South, or those without campus accommodation, regardless of where they appear in some academic league table? Judging by alternative surveys of student satisfaction, these league tables are poor guides to the quality of education anyway.

Note I have not yet appealed to the importance of “soft power”. I am a little sceptical that welcoming a large number of students from, say, China, will have much impact on our future relations with the regime in Beijing. But it would be odd to dismiss the positive effects on Britain’s global image altogether, on top of the more tangible economic and educational benefits.

The upshot is that trying to reduce net migration by targeting overseas students at the “wrong” universities would be a short-sighted policy. There might be some sensible tweaks, such as reducing the number of dependents that overseas students can bring with them. But global Britain should still celebrate the fact that so many of the world’s brightest want to study here.