Written by Willow Imam
Photography by Yuvi Chahar
On the 11th of November, LSE celebrated Migrant Solidarity Day, making posters to commemorate LSE’s support of the many international students and staff that fill its halls; one day later, the only Welsh Parliament member of Reform UK, the current most popular party in the UK, was found to have used a racial slur against Chinese people, which the leader of the party, Nigel Farage, called a “pretty minor offence”. This rhetorical shift surrounding immigrants to the UK perhaps cannot be clearer than in the proposed changes to UK migration laws.
Notably, for the 70% of students and 40% of staff at LSE that come from outside the UK, proposed changes include an international student levy that would make international fees more expensive, shortening the length of graduate visas from two years to 18 months and the hike of skilled worker visa salary requirements to £41,000, the second hike in as many years.
A demonstration of the unfairness of these proposals could be found last month, when the government announced a requirement for immigrants to be able to speak an A-level standard English, not two months after almost 30% of Year 11 students failed GCSE English.
With this in mind, some international students I knew in the Media and Communications and Sociology departments followed these changes to varying degrees. A Chinese student in the Sociology department said [they] followed them “closely”, whereas Kristeena, a postgraduate student from Jamaica, said she hadn’t: “I just assume every time there are proposed changes there will be more ways to make life harder for immigrants – so far I haven’t been wrong.”
Among students planning to stay in the UK, these proposals were met with a sense of “despondency and sadness”. They felt they “paid very high international tuition fees, followed every rule of the society, and worked hard”, but were being treated as a threat, left feeling undervalued and unwelcome by the government.
Many students thought this was part of a political game by the Labour Government in response to the popularity of Reform: one student spoke about feeling that international students, despite bringing so much to the UK, were being targeted “because tackling other, more complex forms of migration is harder”.
When asked about how it affected their ability to plan for the future, multiple students said it created a sense of precarity as they never knew if they would be able to afford to stay in the UK, with much of the standard guidance no longer applying the moment the law changed.
According to Kristeena, “it feels like the ground underneath us keeps shifting”. She reflected on “fellow international students who are self-funding their Graduate visa just to work in sectors they love, knowing they have almost zero chance of sponsorship after their visa expires”.
Sindhoora, a PhD student from India, affirmed this uncertainty, saying, “it makes it difficult for us to think we can stay back and get a job”.
The changes also narrow the career possibilities of international students who wish to stay in the UK. “Because of the high salary threshold for a Skilled Worker visa, very few firms outside of Finance or Law can offer such a high starting salary. This makes the already narrow career choices for international students even more hyper-focused on Investment Banking and Consulting.”
However, some felt that not all were being treated equally. Skilled migrants were seen as somewhat valuable, whilst international students are treated as nothing more than “cash cows”. There is also a contrast between the treatment of immigrants of certain origins: Sindhoora felt that immigrants from the Global South “are being framed as a problem in policy and news”.
There is a diversity in experience though, as one puts it: “For students who always intended to return to their home country after graduating, the government’s tone doesn’t seem to have a major impact.”
The culture of LSE was seen as beneficial as it allows for staff and students to discuss these issues with a “sympathetic ear and an open space”, as Sindhoora puts it. “It is different from my previous institute, where it was difficult to discuss these issues openly.”
Ultimately, the international students I spoke to wished the government understood that they only wanted to be treated as “equal human beings”, and that these policies are a detriment to the UK, as “the UK will witness a significant drop in the skilled and talented workers it claims to want to attract”.
For international students, the changes proposed by the Government have created a real sense of dejection about the current state of politics and uncertainty about their futures. Many international students feel that the government wants to use them as money makers or as chess pieces in a political game with Reform UK. As Sindhoora explained, “[w]e’re not an economic problem, a political problem or a burden” and “policy should be addressing existing problems, not inventing problems out of people”.
