November 13, 2009
In his speech on 12 November, the Prime Minster made no mention of the official population projections which show that the population will reach 70 million in 2029. Some commentators have claimed that these projections are "meaningless". Migrationwatch research (see Briefing Paper 9.25) puts this issue in prospective and shows that 70 million is very likely unless the government take very strong measures to cut back immigration.
70% of Labour voters in Britain want a sharp cut in immigration.
78% of voters in Alan Johnson’s own constituency oppose his attitude to immigration.
New opinion polls, published today, show the Home Secretary is clearly out of touch with the public. Last week Alan Johnson told a House of Commons Committee that ‘he does not lie awake at night’ worrying that the population of the UK will reach 70 million and that he would not put a cap on the number of immigrants settling in the UK.
A YouGov opinion poll, conducted shortly afterwards for think tank Migrationwatch, shows that his views are completely at odds with the vast majority of the population:
- 81% are worried (45% of which are ‘very worried’) about the prospect of a population of 70 million in 2028.
- 78% say that Alan Johnson is out of touch with people like them.
- 76% want to see net immigration cut from its present level of 237,000 a year to 50,000 or less a year. Of that 76%,32% want to see a policy of “one in, one out” while 22% want to see no immigration at all.
The party affiliations are also of interest...
Research conducted by think-tank Migrationwatch shows that the amounts raised by the “migrant tax” are paltry compared with the significant amounts spent on government programmes specifically to help migrants.
Under the Government’s new scheme, to be announced formally on 19 March, anyone from outside the EU applying for student or work visa will be required to pay a new tax of £50 into the Migration Trust Fund, which the Government claims will be used to help local communities pay for public services in areas where there are high levels of migrant workers. The Government claims that this will raise £35 million a year. However, the Government spends over £500 million a year on schemes specifically to help migrants alone – quite apart from the extra cost of migrants to the public services.
Commenting on the announcement, Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migrationwatch, said:
'The Government say the new tax will raise £35 million per year. This may sound impressive, but it is a drop in the ocean compared with the huge sums spent each year by the Government as it tries to help society cope with the impact of immigration both nationally and at the local level. A rough estimate shows that, for every £1 the Government spends on schemes specifically to help migrants, its new tax will only raise about 7p. And that spending does not allow for the fact that one new home will have to be built every six minutes for new immigrants; nor the additional costs to the NHS and education services; nor the countless other costs to local services that large-scale immigration brings. Our population will hit 70 million in 20 years. 70 per cent of the increase will be thanks to immigration: this new tax will not begin to foot the bill that this population increase will present to British taxpayers.’
The table below lists only some of the Government spending on initiatives specifically relating to immigrants.
|
Name of fund/area of funding |
Department |
Amount |
Description |
|
ESOL |
DIUS |
£289m (2006/7) |
Funding for English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) training. |
|
Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant |
DCSF |
£187.6m (2008-9) |
For schools working with English as an Additional Language. |
|
Cohesion |
CLG |
£50m (over three years) - £16.6m per year. |
£50million over the next three years to support local areas in preventing and managing community tensions. This comprises: £34million in area based grant; £3million to support the National Improvement and Efficiency Strategy to develop regional and local capacity to meet community cohesion challenges; £4.5 million to help schools and others offer positive activities for young people with a focus on community cohesion; and £7.5 million to support inter-faith work. |
|
Connecting Communities Plus grants programme |
CLG |
£18m (over three years - £6m per year) |
Funding for activities which encourage race equality and community cohesion. |
|
Migration Statistics Improvement Programme |
Cross-departmental |
£12m |
£12 million cross-government programme led by ONS and the National Statistician to improve the population and migration statistics, including those at the local level. Will deliver improved local estimates and projections by 2010, in time to calculate the next three year local government finance settlement from 2011-12. |
|
|
DCSF |
£6m (2008/9) |
To support schools with a rapid growth in pupil numbers and/or increase in pupils who have English as an Additional Language. |
|
Rough sleepers (London Boroughs) |
CLG |
£600,000 |
For central London Boroughs for their work with EEA nationals who are rough sleepers. |
|
|
Total |
£517.8m |
Per year |
A new poll out today demonstrates there is massive backing for a substantial cut in immigration levels from supporters of all parties and shows that a programme of ‘Balanced Migration’ into the UK could have a major effect on voting intentions in a future election.
The YouGov poll, which the Cross party Group on Balanced Migration asked Migrationwatch to commission, found that were the Conservatives to adopt such a policy - in which the number of people allowed to settle in the UK in any year was broadly similar to those who left - they would be likely to improve their support among a significant number of Labour and Liberal Democrat voters.
81 per cent of Labour voters want to see a substantial reduction in current immigration numbers. Of those, 36 per cent think that Balanced Migration is about the right level, but the other 45 per cent think even that is too high.
83 per cent of Liberal Democrats want to see much lower immigration. Of these, 43 per cent support Balanced Migration, while 40 per cent believe the limit should be even lower.
89 per cent of Conservatives want a sharp reduction in immigration. Of these, 23 per cent support Balanced Migration, while 66 per cent want even tougher limits.
Among BME respondents, 75 per cent wanted much lower immigration, of whom 36 per cent supported Balanced Migration and 39 per cent wanted even tougher limits.
The poll also showed that 33 per cent of the electorate were more likely to vote Conservative if David Cameron were to adopt Balanced Migration as a policy; only 5 per cent would be less likely to support him – a net gain of 28 per cent.
Of Labour voters, 13 per cent would be more inclined to vote Conservative, with 9 per cent less inclined. 24 per cent of Liberal Democrats would be more likely to vote Conservative and 8 per cent less likely.
Commenting, Migrationwatch chairman Sir Andrew Green said:
'This poll clearly shows that voters from across the board, including the ethnic minorities, strongly support a policy at least as firm as Balanced Migration. Concern about the present massive uncontrolled level of immigration is not a partisan issue. I hope that all the political parties will now get the message and engage in a constructive debate about Balanced Migration in the months ahead.
'Balanced Migration is the only policy on the table which accommodates both the needs of business and the growing concern of voters about the impact of immigration on our community cohesion, public services and infrastructure. Our proposals will allow immigrants to work for a limited period, while ending their present almost automatic right to settle. This policy would eventually stabilise the population of the at 65 million by mid-century, as opposed to the 78.6 million now projected.’
Following the evidence which we gave to the Economic Committee of the House of Lords, Migrationwatch were invited by a Cross Party Group of Parliamentarians to put forward suggestions as to how immigration issues should be tackled in a way that took account and also tackles the need to preserve the competitiveness of the economy but also tackled the numbers.
In response, they prepared a policy document which, for the first time brings together in one place the case against the very large scale immigration which has been allowed to develop. The Cross Party Group, which was announced today, accepted the broad lines of the document and will pursue its recommendations.
in Amnesty, Arranged Marriages, Asylum, Cohesion, Economics, Education, Employment, European Union, Health, History, Housing, Human Rights, Legal Matters, Migration Trends, Policy, Population, Refugees, Visas/Work Permits, Welfare Benefits | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Technorati Tags: Benefits of Balanced Migration, Eastern European Immigration, History of Immigration to UK, Points Based System
Commentary by Sir Andrew Green, Chairman, Migration Watch UK, in The Daily Telegraph on 24 October, 2007
These population projections mark a turning point in the national dialogue. The public have at last become aware of the enormous impact of present levels of immigration on the future of our society.
Official figures now indicate that England's population will increase by nearly 16 million by mid century - that is twice the population of Greater London.
This increase will be 90 per cent due to immigration. These numbers are, frankly, alarming. Our schools and hospitals are already struggling and we have a major housing crisis. The new projections imply that we will have to build 260 houses every day of the week for the next 20 years just to house new immigrants.
Put another way, of Gordon Brown's much vaunted 3 million new houses by 2020, one and a quarter million will be needed for new immigrants.
It is not only a matter of bricks and mortar.
The very glue of our society is being weakened under the impact of rapidly growing communities of very diverse cultures - some of whom have little intention of integrating with us.
The latest report of the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) warned that "segregation - residentially, socially and in the workplace - is growing."
It went on to warn that our society is "fracturing" and that "bonds of solidarity across different groups have reduced and tensions between people have increased."
How can a society already in such difficulties possibly absorb newcomers on the scale now projected? Hard as it is to believe, we have stumbled into this situation.
It was completely unplanned - indeed, hardly discussed for fear of accusations of racism. It is, without doubt, the result of the government losing control of our borders.
They like to point to globalisation as the cause but, in fact, the numbers started to take off in 1997 with a rocket propelled boost in 2004 when, almost alone in the European Union, the government opened our labour market to the new members.
They have since tried to camouflage their mistakes by claiming that all this is good for our economy.
The truth is that it is good for some employers, particularly in marginal industries, but we cannot allow immigration policy to be driven by employers for their own financial benefit. All the more so as the effects are very uneven.
It is low paid British workers whose wages are held down by competition from the new arrivals.
Overall, immigration may add £6 billion to production as the government claim, but it adds a similar proportion to our population.
As a result, the benefit to the native British population is trivial.
What can be done? We have no choice but to cut back the numbers very sharply.
This requires a clear political commitment as a first step with policies built around it.
The Conservatives have taken this step. So far, the government have ducked this critical decision.
Instead, they have formed a couple of committees.
That falls far short of the decisive action that is required if we are to avoid very serious difficulties in our society.
Draft minutes of oral evidence given by Professor Robert Rowthorn, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge and Professor Stephen Nickell, Nuffield College Oxford, of the economic impact of immigration on the UK, to the House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs on 9 October, 2007 are available for viewing on the Parliamentary web site.
The Government's new Migration Impacts Forum confirms that mass immigration is placing a huge strain on housing, health, education and policing in virtually all regions of the UK.
It claims that immigrants contribute £6 billion a year to the economy; but fails to mention any costs to the British taxpayer. David Coleman, Professor of Demography at Oxford University, quoted in the Daily Mail puts the annual bill to the taxpayer at almost £8.8 billion.
Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migrationwatch was interviewed about the Forum's conclusions on BBC Radio 4's Today programme this morning.
In 'The truth Migration Watch doesn't want you to know' (Opinion, last week), Jasper Gerard completely misrepresents our position. We, too, favour integration. Indeed, we regard it as essential to the future harmony of our society. We just don't believe it is possible at present rates of immigration.
The government's own figures show that foreign immigrants are arriving at 1,300 a day and leaving at only 500 a day. The net inflow under Labour has been two million and immigration will now add a further one million to our population every five years. In practical terms, we will have to build 200 houses every day of the week for the next 20 years just to house new immigrants.
By all means let us strive for integration, but first make the task manageable by getting the inflow sharply down.
AF Green
Chairman, Migration Watch UK Guildford, Surrey
FITTING TOGETHER: Trevor Phillips stated that "people like Andrew Green at Migrationwatch are saying these new arrivals can't fit in. I believe that shows contempt for the tolerance of the British people". In fact, I have never said anything of the kind. Migrationwatch believes that integration is perfectly possible but not on the massive scale we now face, with 1,300 new arrivals every day.
It is ironic that Phillips should make this remark in the very week that his Commission for Racial Equality reported that "our society is fracturing. The pace of change over the past few years has unsettled many and caused people to retreat into and reinforce narrower ethnic and religious ties".
I couldn't have put it better myself.
Sir Andrew Green, Chairman, Migrationwatch UK
