Learning from others: how Portugal can shape a more constructive immigration future
A guest article by "an anti-Brexit Brit who lived 12 years in the UAE and now calls Portugal home," who prefers to remain anonymous.

I’ve lived across three very different national approaches to immigration: the UK's increasingly polarised and politicised stance, the UAE's strategic and largely depoliticised model, and Portugal’s current balancing act, still shaping its story.
As someone who has spent the past 18-months in Portugal after over a decade in the UAE and watched Britain unravel post-Brexit, I feel a growing concern: Portugal appears poised to repeat some of the same mistakes others have already made.
And in the process, may overlook a vital opportunity to harness migration as a positive, future-facing force.
Over the past few months, I’ve observed growing tension, increasingly hostile rhetoric, and a reactive tone emerging in Portugal’s public discourse on immigration.
This country, so often praised for its warmth and welcome, is at a crossroads.
The conversation around immigration is becoming more about control than contribution, more about fear than future.
The shift is subtle but real.
Let Brexit be a warning
The UK’s journey from multicultural optimism to migration scapegoating has had devastating impacts on integration, economic growth, and social cohesion. Is the UK better off post-Brexit?
Few serious observers think so.
While immigration technically continues, integration has worsened, with many communities feeling more isolated, more mistrustful, and more divided than ever.
Hate crimes in the UK spiked after the Brexit vote.
A recent report by the UK’s Centre for Social Justice shows that community cohesion and trust in institutions have both declined since 2016.
The country’s relationship with immigration is now one of defensive posturing, political weaponisation, and unworkable “solutions.”
Portugal Is Not the UK - Yet
Portugal, thankfully, is not yet down this road, but the signs are familiar.
There is a clear contradiction: while the country seeks to attract foreign talent to drive economic growth and offset population decline, it has not sufficiently invested in upgrading public infrastructure to support a growing and changing population.
Services like healthcare, education, transport, housing, and public safety have struggled to keep pace—not solely due to immigration, but as part of a broader failure to plan for long-term demographic and economic shifts.
Over the past decade, public investment in Portugal has remained consistently low, averaging just 2.1% of GDP per year—placing the country among the lowest in Europe.
Public investment fell from 5.3% of GDP in 2010 to just 2.7% in 2024, well before the significant rise in immigration that began in 2016.
This long-term underinvestment—driven by fiscal adjustment policies adopted in the wake of the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis (2007–2012) and maintained by successive governments—has had concrete consequences.
It has meant reduced investment in the construction and maintenance of essential infrastructure, such as railways, airports, schools, hospitals, and other vital assets that underpin a functioning economy.
Yet instead of acknowledging and addressing this structural neglect, some politicians and members of the public are choosing the easier path: blaming the very workers who were invited to help sustain the economy.
This blame game provides a scapegoat for historic underinvestment while offering the public a false sense of control: “We’ll solve the housing crisis by clamping down on immigration.”
But it’s not immigration that underfunded healthcare. It’s not migration that created housing shortages.
It’s decades of policy inertia.
And the public, experiencing very real pressure on services, are understandably frustrated.
But, just like the ‘Leave’ Campaign for Brexit, they’re being sold a fantasy: that tougher immigration laws will magically fix systemic problems that have little to do with migration.
This tactic isn’t just misleading; it’s dangerous.
The UAE’s Alternative Model: Migration as Nation-Building
Contrast this with the UAE, where immigration is not just tolerated, it’s strategically integrated into the nation's growth model.
The UAE has built its modern economy on the backs of a vast and diverse migrant workforce.
Nearly 90% of its population is foreign-born.
While there are real concerns, particularly around labour rights in certain sectors, there’s also a great deal to learn from how the UAE has treated immigration (and immigrants) as a national asset, not a threat.
In the UAE, immigration isn’t politicised in the same way it is in the West.
There are no election debates designed to vilify newcomers. Instead, migration policy is seen as a lever for growth, competitiveness, and geopolitical relevance.
The country has invested in infrastructure and services in anticipation of population growth, not as a reaction to it.
Whether it’s the city-scale planning or the streamlined visa systems designed to attract skilled professionals, immigration has been a nation-building strategy, not a societal fault line.
And it’s worked. In just a few decades, the UAE has transformed from a regional backwater into a global hub of commerce, tourism, logistics, and finance.
While this transformation has not been without serious challenges and criticisms, it is a remarkable case study in what a government can achieve when it sees migration not as a problem to contain but as a resource to harness.
Expats vs Immigrants: Portugal’s Unspoken Divide
Portugal is far from unique in this, but the distinction between “expats” and “immigrants” remains socially loaded.
In many ways, the terms are applied not as legal statuses but perceived social worth. Wealthy white professionals are often “expats”, even if they stay long-term, while people of colour or working-class migrants are more readily labelled “immigrants,” even when performing vital societal roles.
Portugal needs both. But it tends to want the former and need the latter. It seeks international entrepreneurs, digital nomads, and retirees with money, while also depending on cleaners, carers, builders, and nurses to keep its economy running and its services afloat.
This misalignment between desire and need creates blind spots.
The immigration policies Portugal praises are often those that court capital (golden visas, digital nomad schemes).
The ones it grumbles about are those bringing labour and life to its ageing, rural, and understaffed economy.
And when the latter groups strain under poorly planned infrastructure or face cultural tensions, it’s their fault, not the system’s.
So, What Should Portugal Do?
1. Separate infrastructure failure from immigration rhetoric. Fix the system, don’t scapegoat the people.
2. Treat immigration as strategic, not reactive. Build systems around long-term demographic, labor, and growth goals, not short-term political gains.
3. Invest in integration and equity. Help all newcomers, regardless of income or background, feel a part of society. Celebrate diversity, don’t tolerate it.
4. Learn from global models, but tailor them locally. The UAE and UK offer powerful case studies. Portugal can be something better: smart, humane, and prepared.
Portugal has a chance to chart a different path.
One rooted in strategy, compassion, and long-term thinking.
But only if it sees immigration not as a political liability, but as the nation-building tool it can truly be.
I read this piece with interest, but I wanted to share a quick thought on the comparison the anonymous author made to the UAE’s immigration model. While the UAE does integrate migration into its growth strategy, it’s important to recognize the stark differences in context.
For example, the UAE’s immigration policies are very restrictive regarding naturalization, and many migrant workers, such as Ethiopian domestic workers, face serious rights and labor protections issues (because of the restrictive kefala system (see more on this in the link I share below)). This creates a system where migrants often have limited social integration and legal protections.
I feel the comparison risks oversimplifying these complex realities and may not provide the most useful model for rethinking migration policies in Portugal.
For some reference on what I am talking about, here is a report from HRW https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/03/questions-and-answers-migrant-worker-abuses-uae-and-cop28#Q2
While the anonymous author writes well, her praise of the UAE Emirates surprised me. I’m not an expert, but some have said many of its 90% foreign born population are little better than slave labor. It also has huge oil wealth, which puts it in a very different situation than Portugal.