In these deeply paranoid, terrorist-fearing times, politicians and pundits will decry our "porous borders" and another Washington hack will label Canada a security threat. But not even hundreds of miles of fences and 11,000 United States Border Patrol agents can secure the U.S.-Mexican border: last year, 580,000 arrests there comprised an estimated one-third of illegal border crossings. The other million made it.

But why, ask some economists, shouldn't the border be porous? In fact, The Economist in a 2001 article (Let the huddled masses in, March 29) declared: "Just as the free movement of capital, of goods and of profits benefits economies, so does the free movement of labour. For their own good, rich countries should be far less stingy about letting people in." Certainly anyone who spends three weeks in a freight tub has demonstrated greater willingness to work than many Canadians, including myself. Indeed, academic studies in the U.S. and the U.K. show illegal migrants -- even after their health, welfare and education costs are calculated -- benefit western economies. Moreover, they bring unquantifiable cultural capital -- adding new cuisine, music, dancing, meditation, art, to our communities.

The contemporary migrant must possess a university education and navigate a sea of red tape even to be considered for the immigration queue. But this only siphons skilled labour and the emerging middle-class from poor countries to rich ones. And many migrants who arrive without post-secondary education will acquire it here.

Tight borders and strict immigration controls encourage migrants to come and stay; an open policy allows skills to move freely, creating a circular process. Puerto Rico, like Mexico, is poor, but its residents may freely enter and leave the U.S. mainland to seek work. Rather than emptying into the wealthier economy, Puerto Rico's population has seen its net out-migration level off at zero.

Rooted in xenophobia, the anti-immigration movement is fond of perpetuating myths about migrants, the commonest being that they steal jobs. "But there is precious little evidence," writes The Economist, "that Joe White, whatever the pay, is willing to toil alongside Jos Blanco picking fruit in California."

In many western countries, shortages of skilled and unskilled labour are becoming acute. In 2010 millions of baby boomers will be turning 65; many have already begun to retire early. Who will fill their shoes?

When polled, over half of U.S. residents claim to want reduced immigration. But even the Bush administration recognizes America's reliance on foreign labour, announcing another limited amnesty for undocumented workers, providing them with legal status. Spain, too, despite protestations from its neighbours, is offering a similar deal to its migrant workforce. This will bring hundreds of thousands of hither-to-hidden salaries above ground into the tax base while improving working conditions.

Those searching for better lives will find means to circumvent physical and bureaucratic obstacles to migration. The U.S.-Mexican border attracts hordes of migrants willing to gamble on crossing the line between official ports-of-entry. Each year western countries receive millions of dubious claims for refugee status. Visitors will enter sham marriages to citizens and permanent residents -- anything to remain amid opportunity.

The protectionist policy of securing borders has not only failed to keep people out of western countries, but has put human lives at risk. Driving immigration underground has led to a boom in people trafficking, as migrants, in a practice tantamount to modern-day slavery, are obliged to spend years, sometimes a lifetime, to repay "debts" to those who have smuggled them in.

Others will perish on their journey. Last year over 220 dead Mexicans were found in Arizona alone; many more will disintegrate into the desert without ever being discovered. Meanwhile, the USBP reckons the number of illegal crossings is only growing."There are compelling moral and economic arguments why more people from poor countries should be allowed to move to rich ones," writes The Economist. An open policy would be not just more practical, but more humane.

Category: Editorial and Opinions
Uniform subject(s): Immigrants, emigrants and refugees
Length: Medium, 591 words