When Keir Starmer said: “If you want to live in the UK, you should speak English”, it laid bare an assumption – that English is the only language that counts in the UK.
This view not only overlooks the UK’s rich linguistic diversity, but also runs counter to the language policies being developed across the devolved nations.
While the UK government’s latest proposals on immigration treat English proficiency as the main pathway to integration, governments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are taking different approaches.
Immigration is a matter controlled by Westminster. But integration, including language education, is devolved. That means each UK nation sets its own direction.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
England
Despite frequent political emphasis on English language learning and testing as key to integration, England does not have a national strategy for migrant or refugee integration. It also does not have an England-wide policy for teaching English for speakers of other languages (Esol).
Instead, decisions about language classes are made locally but provision is uneven. In some areas, support is well-organised and accessible. In others, it’s barely there.
Despite the lack of national leadership, the Esol sector in England has long benefited from grassroots activism. Organisations like the National Association for Teaching English and Community Languages to Adults and English for Action have been vocal in campaigning for better funding. Researchers and teachers also continue to call for a joined-up strategy for migrant and refugee integration.
Wales
By contrast, the Welsh government has made language education a core part of its progressive integration policies. Its ambition to become the world’s first “nation of sanctuary” is backed up by practical measures. This includes a dedicated language education policy for migrants, focused primarily on Esol – the only one of its kind in the UK.
The first national Esol strategy was published in 2014, revised in 2018, and will be updated this year following a review.
The introduction of Welsh as an element of migrant language education is helping to build a more inclusive, multicultural society too. It shows learners that all languages, including their mother tongue, have a role to play in a modern, multilingual nation.
Scotland
Since 2014, Scotland has implemented three refugee integration strategies. The new Scots refugee integration strategy has been internationally recognised as a model of good practice. It adopts a multilingual, intercultural approach, emphasising that language learning should include home languages and the language or languages of the new community, which may include Gaelic, Scots and English.
Scotland had two successive adult Esol strategies from 2007 to 2020. These were developed in consultation with Esol learners and detailed clear progression routes into further training, education and employment. But they were discontinued in favour of a broader adult learning strategy in 2022 which covers all adult learners rather than just the needs of migrants.
It was a decision criticised by some due to concerns about losing focus on the specific needs of Esol learners, and reducing the voice of Esol learners and teachers in Scotland.
Northern Ireland
In Northern Ireland, there is no dedicated migrant language policy yet. But its draft refugee integration strategy does at least acknowledge the importance of language in helping migrants feel “valued and respected”.
In 2022, the Identity and Language (Northern Ireland) Act granted official status to the Irish language, and to Ulster-Scots as a minority language. Nevertheless, the Northern Ireland refugee integration strategy focuses solely on English language classes as the primary language education provision.
What all UK nations share, however, is chronic underfunding. Adult education, where Esol funding sits across all four nations, now faces yet more cuts meaning many language learners will continue to face long waiting lists for classes.
But how language education for migrants, especially migrants seeking sanctuary in the UK is perceived, organised and provided is critical to fostering inclusion, promoting integration and bestowing a sense of belonging. Developing competency in the dominant language or languages of the host nation can enable migrants to navigate health, housing or social security systems. It can help them cope with the needs of daily life and to use their skills and knowledge to enter work or education.
Read more: How the Welsh language is being promoted to help migrants feel at home
Many people seeking sanctuary have experienced trauma from undergoing forced migration. This makes it vital that language provision is trauma-informed and recognises a learner’s existing multilingual skills. It’s also important that it is shaped around their needs, not just on externally imposed assessments of English proficiency.
The value of multilingualism
Multilingual education is more than just a nice thing to have. There is growing evidence that valuing the languages refugees already speak, and recognising their linguistic skills as assets, improves wellbeing, builds confidence and enhances social inclusion.
Too often in the UK, language learning is treated as a condition for acceptance, rather than a right that can enable belonging. That risks undermining the very integration that policymakers claim to support.
If the UK is serious about being a modern, inclusive and multicultural state, it must embrace the reality that it is also multilingual, and that different nations may choose different routes to welcome those seeking sanctuary.
The authors wish to thank their respective universities for the support they have received in researching this issue. They would also like to thank their co-researchers Sylvia Warnecke and Mel Engman and their co-authors on their recently published policy briefing.
Gwennan Higham and Sarah Cox do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
