Migration Watch UK: News

BBC Newsnight Poll - Romanian and Bulgarian migration

This is a stunning survey, which the BBC has rather desperately tried to play down. The percentages look small but when multiplied by the size of the work force they produce large numbers. One percent of Romanians of working age (total 15.4 million) actively considering work in the UK amounts to 150,000 and four percent of working age Bulgarians (total 4.9 million) is another 200,000. Even if one takes only those making concrete plans, the number of Romanians is 61,000 and the number of Bulgarians 58,000 or nearly 120,000 in total.  Not all will come of course and polls of intentions are notoriously difficult but others may well come once their friends are installed. 

Commenting on the poll, Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK said:

“These figures suggest that the Migration Watch central estimate of 50,000 a year is distinctly cautious. Numbers suggested on the scale by this survey would make it impossible for the Government to sustain their target of tens of thousands, assuming they reach it by the end of the parliament.”

Please visit our website at www.migrationwatchuk.org

Follow us on Twitter @migrationwatchuk.org

18 Bogus Arguments for Mass Immigration

11 April, 2013

Immigration Mythology Briefing Paper 12.4 has been updated. The updated paper outlines the many myths that are put forward by the mass immigration lobby in support of the current levels of immigration and dispels each myth in turn.

The Prime Minister's Speech - The Public's View

A recent YouGov survey which received remarkably little media attention has shown striking public support for the Prime Minister's proposals outlined in his speech last week. (See here for the PM's speech)

The key findings in a survey conducted on 25-26 March 2013 were:

70% of respondents supported the policy of only allowing European migrants to claim jobseekers allowance for more than six months if they have a "reasonable prospect" of finding work, including 72% of Liberal Democrat voters.

78% supported a policy which would see the government doing more to charge foreign governments for the cost of treating overseas patients, including 76% of Liberal Democrat voters. 

81% of respondents would support a policy which disallowed migrants from joining the council house waiting list until they have lived in Britain for two years, including 73% of Liberal Democrat voters.

86% of respondents support a policy of increased fines for companies that employ illegal immigrants, including 83% of Liberal Democrat voters.

The survey can be found here. 

The Prime Minister's Immigration Speech

Commenting on David Cameron's speech on immigration this afternoon, Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK, said: 

"It is surely only fair that everybody should contribute to the welfare system before they can draw benefits. The devil is often in the detail but this speech sets out a broad  agenda for tightening access to the welfare state and it is the right one."

Briefing Note on Social Housing and Immigration

Demand exceeds supply

1  The Prime Minister’s speech proposed that immigrants should wait 2-5 years before joining the waiting list which, in England, has grown dramatically in recent years from around a million in 2001 to two million today[1].  

Immigration Status and Eligibility

2  Currently EEA nationals who are habitually resident in the UK have to be treated exactly the same as British citizens in their application for social housing[2]. This in effect means that EEA nationals can join the social housing register from day one.

3  Nationals from outside the EU can join the social housing register if they have Indefinite Leave to Remain or have been granted refugee status.

4  Recent reforms in the localism act allow local authorities to house homeless people in the private rented sector and to give some priority to people with a local connection.  However, most local authorities with large waiting lists have ignored the option of favouring those with a local connection.

The impact of recent immigration

5  Nationally around 1 in 10 new lets goes to foreign nationals but there is huge local variation. For example it appears that nearly half of the lets in the London boroughs of Ealing and Haringey go to foreign nationals[3].  In Peterborough and Boston in the Fens over a quarter of new lets go to foreign nationals[4]. 

6  It is difficult to get a complete picture at the local level because the survey question on nationality is optional. This has allowed some local authorities to avoid answering it. In London less than half the local authority lets had nationality data against them[5]. 

Recommendations

7  We recommend that the nationality question be made compulsory and that there be a public inquiry into the allocation of social housing in recent years, particularly in London.                                                                   

---

[1] Local Authority Housing Statistics https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6910/2039199.pdf

[2] http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingPaper/document/289

[3] Paragraph 22 http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingPaper/document/286

[4] Continuous Recording of Lettings and Sales https://core.communities.gov.uk/ Advanced Analysis of General Needs new lets by local authority where previous tenure not social housing.

[5] http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingPaper/document/286

 

Economic Incentives for Romanians and Bulgarians will be twice those for Polish workers now in Britain

Even on the minimum wage, migrant workers from Romania and Bulgaria would be immensely better off if they were to move to the UK when our labour market is opened to them next year. That is the conclusion of a study issued today by Migrationwatch. 

The study found that, after allowing for differences in the cost of living;

• A single worker would be 4 or 5 times better off than at home;
• A worker with a spouse and 2 children would be 8 or 9 times better off;
• The same family would be 4 times better off than a family on the average wage at home;
• A single worker who saved 20% of his take home pay in Britain would be saving every week up to 2 weeks pay on the minimum wage at home. A family would save 2 or 3 weeks pay every week.

A comparison with the situation of Polish workers already in Britain today shows that the economic incentives for Romanian and Bulgarian workers will be twice as great.

In addition, child benefit for two children (even if they remain in their home countries) amounts to a week’s take home pay at the minimum wage in Romania and rather more in Bulgaria.

If the worker should lose his job in Britain unemployment pay here is equivalent to more than twice the take home pay at the minimum wage in Romania or Bulgaria.

Commenting, Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migrationwatch said “The wage differences turn out be simply stunning. The previous government made a huge mistake by agreeing to accession treaties that granted full access to our labour market to workers from countries that have only 1/5^th of our GDP per head. Given that the economic incentives for Romanian and Bulgarian workers are twice those now enjoyed by Polish workers, it would be absurd to suggest that there will not be a significant inflow”.

EU Nationals and access to the British Welfare State

The government have said that they are reviewing access to benefits for EU migrants. Briefing paper No 4.19 outlines the present position as a yardstick against which any such measures can be judged. We also make two recommendations.  

EU Nationals and access to the British Welfare State

Summary

1 Once an EU National has been granted “habitual residence” the entire UK benefit system becomes available.  Habitual residence is, in practice, very easy to obtain even for the unemployed. In some circumstances it can, in effect, be obtained from day one.

Detail

2 All EU nationals have an initial right to reside in the UK for three months. Thereafter, EU nationals can extend their right of residence if they are:

   a jobseeker

   a worker

   a student

   self-employed person

   self-sufficient person

3 To gain full access to the welfare state the EU national has to be considered habitually resident[1]. Factors considered may include the applicant’s intention to be resident in the UK. This can be can be demonstrated by registering with a GP, putting your name on the electoral roll, registering your children with the Local Authority for school, having accommodation available, having your family with you or joining relatives already here. Cases are decided individually based on the applicant’s circumstances– there are no firm criteria which indicate habitual residence.

4 The time an applicant has been resident in the UK is also a factor. However some EU nationals, such as those who have worked in another EEA state, can be accepted as habitually resident immediately on arrival; for others the period of actual residence required is between one and three months[2]. 

5 EU nationals habitually resident as workers can access all the work related benefits in the same manner as a British national; these include working tax credit, child tax credit, contribution-based Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) and Employment and Support Allowance. They can also claim housing benefit and council tax benefit and be considered for social housing[3]. The local authority has to treat any application for social housing in the same way as it would treat an application from a British resident.

6 EU nationals unemployed and habitually resident as job-seekers can claim all the benefits an unemployed British resident can claim. This includes income-based JSA, child benefit, housing benefit and council tax benefit. There is no time limit to being a job-seeker and the benefits can be claimed for as long as someone is considered to be seeking employment.

7 This access to the welfare state will be fully extended to Romanian and Bulgarian nationals when transitional arrangements come to an end on 31 December 2013. Currently the easiest way for nationals of these countries to access the welfare state is to gain habitual residence as a self-employed person. Once habitual residence has been granted it is retained - regardless of whether the person remains self-employed or not.

8  There is no information on the amounts paid to foreign nationals as the UK’s benefit system does not currently record the nationality of claimants since nationality itself is not a condition of entitlement.   The government intend to record nationality when the Universal Credit system is introduced, beginning in October 2013.

Recommendation

9 It would be greatly preferable if benefits were conditional on an EU national acquiring “permanent residence”; this requires five years.

---

[1] Students and people considered self-sufficient do not have access to the full range of benefits.

[2] House of Commons Library Note, SN/SP/416 www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN00416.pdf

[3] http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/files/publications/FAQ-rights-benefits-A8-May-2011.pdf

Social Housing in London: What is the True Story?

There have long been suspicions that the public have not been told the full story about the impact of immigration on the queues for social housing.  Research by Migrationwatch into the situation in London, published today, confirms that there are important questions to be answered.  It finds that less than half the new lets by London councils included the nationality of the tenant.

The housing crisis that has developed in London means that the waiting list is ten times the number of new lets each year. That means that many, especially those with smaller families, will never get into social housing.  One fifth of all social housing in London is occupied by foreign nationals yet there has been little public debate on who should get social housing. Only a small proportion of the people that apply will get social housing. That is why it is there is an open debate and transparency about who should get it.

It is important to be clear that the debate should be about foreign nationals, not the foreign born. Many of the latter have become British citizens and, of course, should be treated like any other British citizen. However, foreign nationals are those who have not even been in Britain long enough to qualify or who do not wish to become citizens.

There can be no debate without the facts yet there are serious gaps in the information available.   One third of new lets by London’s Local Authorities are not even recorded in the official CORE data (Continuous Recording of Sales and Lettings) while others submit data but without the nationality of new tenants. Indeed, four London councils who, together, own a quarter of London’s local authority owned stock do not submit any information at all.

It is particularly striking that, when two other London Councils were challenged by Migrationwatch, the nationality data virtually disappeared in the returns that they submitted to the government the following year. Councils are legally obliged to submit data to CORE but can get away with omitting nationality on the claim that this particular question is not compulsory.

Commenting, Sir Andrew Green, Chairman Migrationwatch UK, said “It is deeply unsatisfactory that the information on new lets should be so chaotic given the huge importance of this issue to so many families. The government must make the nationality question compulsory.  This could provide the basis for a renewed debate on the criteria by which social housing should be allocated”.

Commenting on the Migrationwatch report, Frank Field MP and Nicholas Soames MP, Co-chairmen of the Cross Party group on Balanced Migration, said “This is a huge issue for many people. The government must now launch a full enquiry into what is going on in the allocation of social housing in London.”

See Briefing Paper No 7.15

Amnesty for London’s 500,000+ Illegal Immigrants – ‘An Appallingly Bad Idea’

The Mayor of London’s remarks in India about an amnesty for illegal immigrants in the capital would be a ‘kick in the teeth’ for the many thousands of young people struggling to find a job because of the unfair competition they face, says a think tank who have today issued a report on the situation in the capital .

Boris Johnson suggested that an amnesty for illegal immigrants is somehow inevitable but, says think tank Migration Watch UK, with an estimated 500,000+ illegal immigrants in London alone such plans would be a gross betrayal of those seeking legitimately to get into the jobs market.

The report points out, that every country that has tried amnesties has found that they simply increase the number of illegals who, often correctly, have assumed that they will also be offered a further amnesty in due course.

Secondly, they reward illegal behaviour at considerable expense to the tax payers.

Even more importantly, illegal immigrants come to (or stay on in) London precisely in order to work and, often, to send money home. They mainly do low skilled work, which is exactly the kind of job that young Londoners need to get into the labour market.

To get work, illegal immigrants undercut the wages of British workers while  reducing the opportunities for young Londoners. They also allow unscrupulous employers to compete unfairly with honest ones who provide decent wages and conditions.

One specific area which is highly topical at present is housing - especially social housing - where the impact of such an amnesty would be felt particularly strongly. All those granted an amnesty would be eligible for social housing and they would also have the right to bring their families to Britain. Those that had large families would move up the housing queue. A recent report from the London School of Economics assumes that only 40% would require social housing but, even on that extremely optimistic assumption, the costs of the public sector subsidy would be £6.2 billion.

It is also clear there was no public appetite for an amnesty of the kind mooted. A YouGov poll for the Sunday Times in January 2012 found that 67% believe that illegal immigrants should be deported immediately with no right of appeal. This is consistent with earlier polling.

The report recognized that it is clearly impossible to deport half a million people. It is, however, possible to discourage an illegal existence in Britain. Fines against employers for employing illegal workers should be much more vigorously enforced. Action should also be taken against those who provide accommodation for illegal immigrants. These measures, combined with the development of electronic border checking, should progressively reduce the scale of illegal immigration in Britain.

Commenting, Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK said “The problem of illegal immigration has to be tackled if opportunities for young people in Britain are to be improved. A situation in which nearly a quarter of young Londoners, and about half of young black Londoners, are unemployed simply cannot be allowed to continue.  Amnesties are an appallingly bad idea.  They have been a total failure in Italy and Spain; they have just sucked in more and more illegals. It is highly irresponsible to suggest that an amnesty in the UK is inevitable – especially in a country that is believed to be a major source of illegal immigrants,” he said.