Immigration: Are voters being influenced by disinformation and scaremongering?

The forthcoming Scottish Parliament elections come at a time of increasing global polarisation, instability, and hostility, which are influencing public discourse and voter thinking ahead of the elections – but is it a key issue for voters in Scotland?

Whilst the topic has dominated debate and has been used by far-right actors as a divisionary tactic within communities, polling continues to indicate that rather than immigration being the leading issue, it is the cost-of-living crisis, the economy, and health and social care that lead voters’ concerns (BBC/Survation, February 2026).

Over recent years, debate around immigration has become more prominent but has too often been shaped by disinformation and alarmist rhetoric rather than evidence and humanity. The Runnymede Trust analysed media reporting and parliamentary debates between 2010 and 2014 with a focus on how immigration was discussed. In this analysis they found the word “illegal” was most commonly used and assisted in creating a public notion that there was an inherent unlawfulness within the migrant community and with migration itself. It is crucial that public awareness is increased to recognise that seeking asylum is a legal, human right.

In the second phase of this study, the 2025 report analysed 52,990 news articles and 317 House of Commons debates on immigration between 2019 and the general election in July 2024. This analysis found a deeper link and higher usage of the word “illegal” in relation to immigration and specifically within news reporting. The most commonly named identities associated with the word “immigrants” were “Asian”, “Irish”, “Haitian”, “Muslim”, “Jewish”, “non-white”, “Venezuelan”, “Cuban” and “African”.

Scotland is not immune from this, and whilst immigration and asylum policy is fully reserved to Westminster, the impacts of this discourse can be felt within communities including in Glasgow, Aberdeen, Falkirk and Perth, where there has been an increasing presence of self-described “anti-migrant agitators” particularly outside hotels housing asylum seekers, who are legally awaiting the outcome of the asylum applications from the Home Office.

We have seen a rise of disinformation online and the spread of AI-generated content to create the illusion that asylum seekers, migrants, or people of colour are to be feared, that they are responsible for the majority of illegal activity in our communities, or that they have unfair access to support from government. All of this is inaccurate, but the sensationalist lies online spreads faster than the attempts at sharing the truth that come after it.  One such “story” that gained significant traction was the notion that asylum-seekers receive I-Phones from the Home Office; this is not true. A small number of asylum seekers may be donated second-hand phones via charities, but this is not a routine provision from the UK Government. Yet the myth is constantly repeated, used as a defence for anti-asylum views, and the original video remains online and has been viewed millions of times.

The attention on immigration and asylum across the UK (and influencing Scotland) has spread inaccuracies about the rights and opportunities migrants and asylum seekers have on arrival to the UK.

Here is the reality:

• Asylum seekers do not have access to benefits, they are given an allowance of £49.18/week to cover all their needs (e.g. food, clothing and toiletries).
• Asylum seekers do not live in luxury hotels; the vast majority are living in poor conditions with over-crowding and unhealthy food.
• The vast majority of new and temporary migrants have a restriction in their visas which state “no recourse to public funds” which means they do not have access to government support including social housing and the social security system.
• Home Office spending on asylum and migration in 2023/24 accounted for less than 0.5% of total UK government expenditure.
• Some asylum seekers are forced to take irregular and dangerous routes to pursue their legal right to asylum because the UK Government has closed down safe routes for those fleeing war and persecution. This includes those from nations such as Afghanistan, Sudan and Iraq.

Despite this reality, the pressure and attention on political parties (and the current UK Government) to take a hard-line on immigration and asylum has pushed policy positions which are not rooted in evidence-based approaches, and in fact, have the potential to cause adverse consequence on the issues voters in Scotland care about most; particularly health and social care and the economy. These reactionary policies are particularly short-sighted, given Home Office data for net migration for the year ending in July 2025 is at 204,000, a decrease of 401,000 from the previous year.

Current UK Government policy has closed the health and social care visa route for new, overseas applicants. This, whilst 44% of registered care services in Scotland report staff vacancies and estimates suggest that between 2025 and 2028, it’s expected there will be 24,500 people needed to fill job openings in this sector.

The UK Government is also proposing to change rules on “indefinite leave to remain” (the right for foreign national to work, study and live in the UK without a time limit) from applications being valid from 10 years of residence in the UK rather than the current five years. These changes would only create more uncertainty for people, exposing them to job losses, increasing visa fees, or other life changes for longer which would jeapordise their chances to be successful in having permanent residency. It also creates labour uncertainty for key sectors including social care and hospitality, and a longer and more expensive bureaucratic process for the Home Office itself. An example of how this hostile debate has influenced policy to side-line evidence and effectiveness.

Ahead of the Scottish Parliament elections voters deserve honesty and accuracy from politicians who seek to make decisions on our behalf. That requires taking the heat and the political posturing out of the so-called “debate” on immigration, and instead reminding ourselves that we are talking about human beings. We need to renew accountability within our democratic processes and institutions, to enable Scotland to have debates which build knowledge rather than foster division. By doing so, we create a nation where political participation feels more meaningful and decision-making on immigration or indeed, any issue, becomes more effective.

Talat Yaqoob FRSE, Independent Consultant and Researcher

The RSE’s blog series offers personal views on a variety of issues. These views are not those of the RSE and are intended to offer different perspectives on a range of current issues.