NEXT STOPSKI LONDON – Public Perceptions of Labour Migration within the EU. The Case of Polish Labour Migrants in the British Press
Author: Justyna Frelak Joanna Fomina
Publisher: Institute of Public Affairs, Warsaw, Poland
ul. Szpitalna 5, lok. 22
00-031 Warsaw
Poland
Tel: +48 22 556 4266
Fax: +48 22 845 6863
http://www.isp.org.pl
This publication is based on a research project entitled “Public Perceptions of Labour Migration within the EU. The Case of Polish Labour Migrants in the British Press” funded by the Foundation for Population, Migration and Environment (PME).
Project co-ordinator: Justyna Frelak
Additional research: Miroslaw Bieniecki, Anna Korolec
The discourse on Polish immigration in the British press is strongly embedded into a few broader debates: on immigration, immigrant integration and the multicultural state, as well as the UK’s membership in the EU. Both the EU and immigration are highly sensitive issues in British politics. The British press is tuned to the readers’ Eurosceptic and anti-immigration attitudes, and for this reason one rarely finds a positive case for (Polish) immigration in newspapers.
Tabloids especially tend to put different types of migratory flows (legal economic migration, refugees, illegal migration, etc.) all into one bag. In this way the discussion on opening the UK labour market to workers from new EU member states is often contaminated by other largely unrelated issues, e.g. bogus asylum seekers.
The 2004 enlargement of the EU was presented in an ambiguous way. On the one hand, the entry of the former Soviet bloc states to the EU was presented in a congratulatory tone as a sure sign of achieving democratisation, higher standards of public life, and a free market economy by the new member states. On the other hand, tabloids especially also mourned the recently gained and lost again sovereignty of the Eastern European countries. Such incongruence can be explained by Euroscepticism characteristic for most of the British press.
The representations of Poland are often conflicting, even if found in the same newspaper or even the same article. All newspapers see Poland as a young liberal economy; it is the UK’s ally in keeping the federalisation of Europe at bay and a country that has already proved itself a reliable partner of Britain in the struggle against the Nazis. Yet, Poland is presented as a bureaucratic, somewhat backward country, currently ruled by populists, nationalists and religious fundamentalists. Poland is portrayed as a country with high unemployment, meagre wages and lack of opportunities, especially for young graduates.
The motivations to emigrate are presented as predominately economic, but newspapers also mention those of seeking career development opportunities, as well as of escaping an unfavourable political situation and malfunctioning institutions. It is rather centre-left newspapers that pay attention to the political situation as a motivation to leave the country.
Polish migrants are portrayed predominantly in favourable terms. Much attention is paid to Poles’ industriousness, reliability, good quality of work and readiness to work for moderate wages. They are also presented as dynamic, willing to integrate as well as taking an active stance on their (working) rights.
The main obstacle towards full integration is the lack of adequate knowledge of English, which is the reason many Poles are bound to accept
work below their professional skills.
Only a small share of articles dealt with Poles as criminal perpetrators. Lack of knowledge of traffic rules as well as ignoring the ban on drink-driving appear to be the most frequent offences.
The British press does not confine itself to presenting a stereotyped image of Polish migrants. In particular, readers of quality papers have been presented with an array of people of different walks of life, occupations, motivations and aspirations. The identified types of Polish migrants, which are classified according to their life and work patterns, are portrayed in the press – the storks (seasonal workers), hamsters (who save to invest in Poland), foragers (intentionally unpredictable), koala bears (without prospects, often jobless and homeless), and salmons (intending to stay in the UK). In 2007 the share of Poles who are non-menial workers represented in the press has been
increasing. What unites most Poles is their much-praised work ethic.
The perceptions of the impact of Polish migration are more complex and ambiguous. There are many conflicting messages sent out to the reader. As a rule, tabloids, with the Daily Mail being an unquestionable champion here, much more often beat the chauvinistic drum and associate social problems with Polish immigration than quality papers. In many instances, the depictions of the negative impact of the inflow of Polish migrants (the strain on public services, housing, etc.) have been in fact attacks on the government for its alleged failure to properly manage the opening of the labour market, or its unwillingness to have an open and sincere debate on immigration.
With regard to the economic impact, all newspapers acknowledge that the inflow of Poles has boosted the economy and benefited not only many businesses by filling in labour shortages but also regular people by making different services more affordable. However, in 2004 Polish immigration was also seen as dumping wages and causing unemployment for local workers as well as threatening the welfare state, with the fears of welfare system abuses and a huge strain on public services being most pronounced. The tabloids in particular often resorted to well-known anti-immigration arguments, or “genuine concerns” as they called them. In 2007 the arguments about Poles stealing jobs somewhat subsided, as more information about Polish migrants demanding higher pay started to appear in the newspapers.
Quality newspapers also devoted much attention to the strain on public services, yet they rather concentrated on the fact that the government
statistics were not reliable and thus public services were not financed adequately. In other words, these newspapers emphasised that it was not the decision to “invite” Eastern European migrants that was wrong, but rather the mismanagement of public services based on inaccurate (or perhaps deliberately underestimated) calculations.
Notably, even quality newspapers by and large disregarded the fact that since Poles work and pay taxes, they cannot be denied the protection of the welfare system. Such an opinion was voiced only once in the debate between two left-wing intellectuals, David Goodhart and Khalid Koser, published by the Guardian.
A separate strand in the press coverage of the economic impact was the so-called “Polish pound”, in other words the money earned and spent by diligent Poles. Newspapers often relate the steps taken by the ever-increasing number of businesses in order to attract the interest of the new consumer group (e.g. Polish-language-speaking staff, Polish brands).
There are also several major social problems that the press associates with the opening of the borders and the arrival of Polish labour migrants: an uncontrollable wave of illegal migration and trafficking in people, the rise in xenophobic attacks directed against the new migrants, the exploitation of Polish workers (sometimes by fellow Poles), the squalid living and working conditions, and homelessness. Polish immigrants are rarely held responsible for these problems, yet the presentation of their arrival in such a negative context by association makes the perception of their impact more negative.
Cultural contribution is not a very recurrent theme in the discussion of the impact of Polish migrants in the UK. However, newspapers have noticed that the presence of a new ethnic group has become increasingly more visible thanks to Polish food shops, a variety of newspapers published in Polish, Polish culture festivals, and Polish Sunday schools. It is rather quality press that pays attention to various aspects of the Polish cultural contribution.
Poles are treated as just another ethnic group in the multicultural society. Newspapers write about many instances of public institutions adapting to the needs of a new migrant group in a neutral way. Yet, sometimes the steps assisting Poles’ adaptation to the new country are reported in a negative tone, as undeserved or unmotivated special treatment and an additional strain on public services, which related to the broader debate on immigrant integration.
There are no instances of contrasting Poles with other A-8 countries’ migrants. However, Poles are better rated against migrants from the two
new members, Bulgaria and Romania: it is not only a matter of better professional skills, but also public safety.
Despite the presence of metaphors with negative connotations used to describe Polish immigration to the UK, the language should not be
considered as strongly discriminatory against Poles. All too often seemingly very negative metaphors are employed in rather neutral or even positive contexts. This dissonance should be blamed on the nature of the press language that tends to be sensational and exaggerated in order to attract the reader’s attention.
Ultimately the message sent out to the reader is muddled: Polish immigrants are highly appreciated, but post-enlargement Polish immigration – as any mass migration – has its costs and benefits, and may pose a threat to certain aspects of life in Britain.
nextstopskilondon.pdf (611.81 kB)
