Immigration and mobility in Valencia involve a broad cross-section of society, with foreign-born residents forming a meaningful share of the community. When nationalized citizens are included, estimates indicate that about 15% of Valencian residents have roots outside the region, which translates to roughly one in six people calling Valencia home. This demographic is a central topic in political discourse, influencing both policy proposals and implementation strategies across the region.
All major parties acknowledge the presence of this group and present different approaches in the lead-up to 28M elections. The center-right positions itself around practical, issue-focused reforms that aim to address everyday concerns faced by newcomers. The Popular Party emphasizes collaboration with the state to modernize the immigration appointment system, with the aim of reducing delays and increasing efficiency for those navigating entry and residency processes. Ciudadanos similarly advocates simplifying bureaucratic steps related to the integration of immigrants, promising streamlined procedures that could help newcomers settle more quickly.
For the PP, the policy emphasis includes granting Valencian status to people who arrive and establish themselves in the territory, along with targeted education plans for minors in receiving centers to ensure full participation in school life. Ciudadanos also proposes a fast-track process for validating foreign university degrees, aiming for a three-month timeframe if feasible, in contrast to the longer periods often observed under current norms. The party additionally calls for strengthened tools in the justice system to address hate speech and xenophobia.
Other proposals from the right focus on enhancing the effectiveness of initiatives already started by parties on the left, such as ongoing programs through Pangea or the Valencia Migration Strategy, with the idea of boosting impact and reducing red tape for participants and administrators alike.
Left-leaning groups present more ambitious reforms, though their day-to-day implications may take longer to materialize. The PSPV indicates the intention to collect ethnicity- and race-based statistics to measure the real conditions faced by immigrants and people of color, and to base future plans on those data. They also propose employment schemes with particular attention to women, and to make it easier to obtain documents and residency permits for immigrants who have completed vocational training or university studies. This orientation seeks to align integration with concrete educational and professional outcomes.
Compromís supports accelerating procedures through closer cooperation with Pangea and the Immigration Offices while also promising to strengthen the entire reception network for asylum seekers. A key element is broadening immigrant participation in shaping policies that affect them directly, ensuring their voices help guide public decisions.
Against bank exclusion
Unides Podem calls for a comprehensive legal framework to combat racism and xenophobia and for extending protections to newcomers in critical areas such as employment and health care. The party also advocates addressing financial inclusion by encouraging banks and other institutions to provide basic banking services to foreigners. A notable proposal, shared with Compromís, is to begin a process of closing immigration detention facilities and to eliminate repressive measures tied to immigration enforcement, underscoring a preference for humane, rights-based approaches.
Vox represents the most restrictive position on immigration among the major parties. It questions the viability of multicultural models and raises concerns about cultural integration. Its stance includes toughening policies around unaccompanied minors and drawing connections between immigration and crime, though official statistics from relevant authorities often challenge these assertions. The result is a debate that hinges as much on societal values as on practical governance.