Migration Watch UK: News

The British in Europe

There are 407,000 British workers in other countries of the European Union, compared to over 1.4 million workers from another EU country in the UK.

To see the full Briefing Paper No 4.21 click here.

What They Say: Extracts from the Media and Internet

The London Evening Standard - 28 March, 2013: Immigration: why the public is right by David Goodhart

“I had not given immigration much thought.…….though as a journalist of Leftish sympathies I was reflexively in favour of it…” “What changed that was hearing Tory intellectual David Willetts speak about the risk of too much diversity undermining the moral consensus on which the welfare state depends.”

“It seemed like such a good idea that I’d never thought of.”… “There was an element of intellectual opportunism about it. I thought he was on to a really, really big thing.”

“Unlike most members of my political tribe of north London liberals I have come to believe that public opinion is broadly right about immigration. Britain has had too much of it, too quickly, especially in recent years, and much of it, especially for the least well off, has not produced self-evident economic benefit.”

To see other extracts on What They Say click here

Sir Andrew Green Comments on NIESR report on Romanian and Bulgarian Migration

This morning the National Institute of Economic and Social Research published a paper which failed to estimate the number of Romanian and Bulgarian migrants who will come to the UK when transitional controls end on 1 January 2014. 

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

“This report is a bucket of whitewash. In 60 pages it produces no estimate whatever of the likely future scale of Romanian and Bulgarian migration to the UK. It doesn't even address the only estimate published so far – by Migration Watch UK which has a strong record in these matters. It brushes aside any indication of an increase in migration from these countries whose workers are amongst the most mobile in the EU. Furthermore it avoids tackling the key question of how many Romanian and Bulgarian migrants now in Spain and Italy might transfer to Britain. “ 

Guardian headline contradicted by research quoted in the same article

An article in the Guardian “Comment is free” site on the 30 January reported a poll by Ires, a Romanian polling agency, which found that 15% of Romanians resident in Romania were “very interested” in working abroad of whom 1 in 4 would choose the UK as the preferred destination.

4% of the adult population of Romania is around 600,000. A substantial number. More relevant perhaps are numbers in the age group most likely to migrate, the 15-39 year olds. This age group makes up about 9 million people in Romania of which 4% is 360,000. This broadly corresponds to our estimate of net migration from Romania and Bulgaria of between 30,000 and 70,000 a year.

Sir Andrew Green's Letter in The Daily Telegraph

Curbing Immigration 

Sir,

I am most grateful for your generous endorsement of Migrationwatch in today’s editorial (“Labour has no right to lecture on immigration”).

Looking ahead, we must recognize that many are shell shocked by the pace of change in our society, now underscored by the census results.  Integrating the nearly three million immigrants who have arrived in the last ten years will be vital to the harmony of our society but this cannot be achieved unless the inflows are brought under control.

That is why, in our view, David Cameron’s historic pledge was - and is – of central importance.   By setting a clear objective he has given direction and coherence to immigration policy.   We now project that he has a fighting chance of achieving it, provided that he sticks to his guns. Special interest groups will, of course, continue to fight their corners but the public interest in getting immigration under control is surely overwhelming.

© Copyright of Sir Andrew Green

Speech by Labour Party Leader, Ed Miliband this morning

Following the speech made this morning by the Labour Party Leader, Ed Miliband, Sir Andrew Green said:

"The steps which Ed Miliband outlined to promote integration are perfectly sensible but there was a glaring gap in his speech - namely his failure to say anything significant about limiting the scale of future immigration. Apparently, he is only going to "look at the whole system". Does he seriously think that we can integrate three million migrants into our community every ten years? Until Labour undertake to place limits on immigration they will not get a hearing from the British public."

Note to editors: The 2011 census reported that 3.8 million people born abroad and resident in the UK arrived into England and Wales in the last ten years.

Follow us on Twitter @migrationwatch

Visit our website at www.migrationwatchuk.org

Is the fall in net immigration due to a fall in student numbers?

Immigration data

The latest net migration statistics to March 2012 show a significant fall in net migration to 183,000 - a reduction of 59,000 from the figure for year ending March 2011.  According to the ONS News release “this reduction in immigration was largely due to fewer people arriving to study….” In fact, the main reason was an increase in both British and non-EU emigration.    There was a fall in non EU immigration but only 12,000 of this came from a reduction of non-EU student immigration.

Visa data

Separately, student visa data was also published today and is more up to date as it includes the second and third quarters of 2012. This data on applications for student visas is broken down by the type of institution; Higher education, further education, language schools and independent schools [1].

In the year ending September 2012 the total number of applications for student visas was 211,000 - a fall of 74,000 from the previous year. However, it is important to segregate the different types of institution.

This overall fall was a result of applications to further education colleges falling from almost 100,000 in the whole year ending September 2011 to 33,000 in the following year. Applications to universities (“Higher Education Institutions”) were actually up by 1% at 155,800 compared with 154,500 for the previous year.

The fall in applications to colleges reflects the tightening of the system as well as measures to tackle bogus colleges and bogus students. To the extent that the fall is due to a reduction in bogus students, net migration will be unaffected in future years as those “students” would not have left in any case.

Commenting on these figures Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK, said “This is good news. It shows that the government can bring net migration down without damaging the valuable higher education sector.  The strident reaction of the universities to the government’s measures over the past year or two has done nothing to promote Britain’s reputation as a welcoming destination for study.

 [1] Certificates of Acceptance of Studies, table cs.07.q http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/immigration-asylum-research/immigration-tabs-q3-2012/before-entry1-q3-2012-tabs

Footnote: The IPS data is still useless for estimating net student immigration. These latest figures, taken at face value, would suggest that it was 157,000 in the year to Q1 2012.  This is because the survey still cannot distinguish between departing students and departing workers.  This deficiency is being corrected and the first estimate of net non EU student migration (for calendar 2012) will become available in August 2013.

Migration Statistics

This morning the ONS released the latest net migration statistics for the year ending March 2012, showing that net migration has fallen to 183,000 from 242,000 the previous year.

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

"At last we can see some light at the end of the tunnel. We can now see the first effects of the government’s measures to reduce immigration. There is a distance to go but they are on the right track."

Immigration Control is no Barrier to Economic Recovery

Introduction: The Economist and others, such as Jonathan Portes (Director of the NIESR) are wrong to claim that immigration control is acting as a barrier to economic recovery. A careful examination of the immigration statistics does not support their exaggerated claims. That is not to say that the bureaucracy cannot be improved and Migrationwatch will be making some suggestions in this regard. Meanwhile we examine the evidence.

1. Nobody disputes the importance of reviving economic growth but, on examining the facts, it is very hard to argue that recent reforms to the immigration system constitute any significant impediment to a resumption of growth.

2. In his blog of 23 August 2012 (See here) Mr. Portes described recent changes to skilled migration as “a set of new burdensome and bureaucratic rules and regulations” which make it more difficult for businesses to employ the workers they want and, as a consequence, reduce growth and make us poorer.

3. It is hard to see what, in practice, he is referring to. There is no limit on Intra-Company Transfers (ICT’s) nor, of course, on any form of recruitment from the EEA - a pool of over 500 million people. Tier 1, the route for self-starters, was effectively closed after evidence that a significant proportion ended up in unskilled roles such as shop assistants, security guards, supermarket cashiers, and care assistants. (See here) Tier 2, employer sponsored skilled labour, was capped at 20,700 a year but in it first year, only about half that quota has been taken up. (See here) Improved routes have been introduced for entrepreneurs and investors. (See here)

4. The same blog also refers to Mr. Portes’ evidence to the Treasury Select Committee in March 2011 (See here) in which he claimed that, “by applying simple arithmetic to official publications”, he had calculated that the cap on skilled migration would reduce UK output by £2 – 4 billion over the whole 5 year period of this Parliament.  According to his evidence about half of this was pure population effect.

5. These calculations were based on the Home Office Impact Assessment.  It estimated that there would be a reduction of 11,000 a year in skilled immigrants (and their dependants), or 50,000 over the whole period, and it stated that those excluded would be, on average, about twice as productive as current UK residents.

6. In practice, the cap has not been reached so no significant number of genuinely skilled workers has been excluded. Indeed, the preliminary evidence suggests that most of the reduction was in chefs and care workers – hardly vital to productivity and growth. Other economic migrants might have been excluded by the higher threshold for Tier 2 but that implies that they were of somewhat lower skills and unlikely to be twice as productive as British workers. Mr. Portes recognised that his calculation could prove exaggerated if those migrants “excluded” had lower productivity than the average migrant. That indeed is what has happened.

7. His blog continues that the UK being “open for business” should also mean being open to labour mobility. He suggests that “simply reversing the new regulations introduced by this government, let alone further deregulation, could yield large gains.  Sounds good but does he really advocate unlimited immigration of skilled workers from, for example, India?  If so he should say so. That, however, would be a recipe for massive levels of immigration which are simply not acceptable to the public and it would surely be better to recognise that.

8. Indeed, since the year 2000, the British labour market has expanded by just over 2 million, nearly all of whom were foreign born. (See here) Whatever the technical arguments, it is clear that, over the boom period up to 2008, British workers were not drawn into the active labour market as would have been desirable. Obviously, immigration is not the only factor. There are issues of motivation and welfare provision as well as education and training but it does seem clear that, if employers are entirely free to bring in cheap, flexible and non-unionised labour, they are likely to do so – especially if they are tied to them by the work permit system. For wider social reasons it is important that there should be some countervailing pressure on employers to train and employ British workers.

9. It would be helpful if Mr. Portes were to be clear about the kind of immigration policy that he advocates. If he advocates an open door policy he should say so. If he advocates a selective immigration policy, than he needs to be clear about where the lines should be drawn. It is important that we also contextualise immigration policy against the backdrop of a rapidly increasing population (two thirds due to immigration), and two and a half million people unemployed.

10. Nobody has yet produced any hard evidence of significant economic benefit to the resident population from recent mass immigration. The House of Lords report in April 2008 was quite clear that they had “found no evidence…… that net migration generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population.” (See abstract here) Indeed the MAC pointed out recently that much of any benefit goes to the immigrants themselves. (See Paragraphs 3.6-3.13 here) Nor should we overlook the results of the study by the NIESR, a body which Mr. Portes now heads, which found that the contribution of East European migrants to GDP per head was expected to be “negligible” (See Exec Summary here), indeed negative in the long run (p 26). Quotes from the US cut very little ice. Their society is very different. Their labour markets are much more flexible and their welfare much more limited. Nor are they exactly a small island.

A “barmy” article in “The Economist"

The cover story of this week’s Economist claimed that immigration was the governments “barmiest” policy which was “crippling business and the economy”. 

Analysis: These claims are wildly exaggerated.  In the last available year (to Q2 2012) the facts are that[1]:

Intra-company transfers were slightly up to nearly 30,000.

• Work permits were up 15% to nearly 9,000 but still less than half the cap.
• Student visas to mid-2012 were at a similar level to those in 2008 before the new system generated extensive abuse.
• Overall, visas fell by 15% in the year to mid-2012 compared to the previous two years – mainly due to a reduction in students.

The article makes the familiar claim that 80% of students return home at the end of their course. In fact, they are “no longer in the immigration system” but this is certainly not proof that they have left the UK[2]. 

On Polish immigration the leader claims that they have contributed “far more to the public purse” and that they “claim fewer benefits” but this cannot be known as nationality data is not recorded.  Most Poles work in jobs that pay close to the minimum wage but only workers who earn more than £25,700 per year pay net tax[3].

Comment:   The report is riddled with errors but it is the case that Labour’s Points Based System replaced common sense with a box ticking bureaucracy in a failed attempt at “objective” decision making.  This needs correcting.

 

---

[1] Home Office, Before entry tables Immigration Statistics April-June 2012 vol 2, table be.04q. URL:  http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/immigration-asylum-research/immigration-tabs-q2-2012/?view=Standard&pubID=1060020 

[2] Home Office Research Report 43, The Migrant Journey, September 2010. URL: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/immigration-asylum-research/horr43/horr43-summary?view=Binary

[3] Migration Advisory Committee, Paragraph 5.6, November 2011. URL: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/aboutus/workingwithus/mac/family-migration-route/family-migration-route.pdf?view=Binary