Migration Watch UK: News

Lib Dems Talk Tough on Immigration – But Their Actual Policies Would be "Disastrous"

The Liberal Democrats immigration policy sounds tough but, in reality, is no better than the government’s "open door immigration policy" that has seen the biggest wave of immigration in our history, says a new report out today.

The policy was the first of the major parties to be scrutinised in detail by think-tank Migrationwatch as the parties set out their stalls for the upcoming general election.

‘The Lib Dems realise that this is an issue of deep public concern which could well affect the way people vote,’ said Sir Andrew Green, Migrationwatch chairman. ‘They therefore want to give the impression of proposing firm and decisive action - but, sadly this is entirely hollow. For all their tough talk, their policies will make little or no difference to the numbers coming to the UK.

The paper summarised Liberal Democrat policies as having three main strands - an emphasis on "control", a scheme for directing immigration to certain regions and support for illegal immigrants to be allowed to "earn regularisation".

See the Full Press Release.

Sham Marriages – March 2010

Introduction

1 There has been a great deal of confusion recently about the government’s powers to deal with sham marriages. Even the Minister of Immigration seems to have got it wrong in a television interview. Briefing Paper 8.38 sets out the full position.....

The BBC Report

5 On 7 January this year the BBC television 10 o'clock news included film of a covert investigation into a thriving business in which prospective "brides" were women from Eastern Europe taking advantage of their rights as EU citizens and the "bridegrooms" were illegal immigrants from outside the EU. The same report included an interview with Mr Phil Woolas MP, Minister for Immigration, who said that, as a result of a court decision, nothing could be done to prevent such a marriage taking place, no matter what suspicions there might be about its genuineness.

6 This was clearly a mistaken account of the legal position but, despite continuing press reports of sham marriages, the Minister has still not responded to an invitation from our Honorary Legal Adviser to correct the position. A fuller account of the relevant law can be found in Briefing Paper 8.13.

The Immigration Appeals System Revised - 2010 Version

This Briefing Paper 8.30 substantially amends and brings up to date the previous version dated March 2005 (now deleted), taking account of recent changes in the law

Introduction

1 The immigration appeals system has undergone major changes twice in recent years. Until April 2005 there was a two tier system, the first tier consisting of adjudicators sitting alone and the upper tier being the Immigration Appeal Tribunal. The Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004 [Referred to hereafter as “the 2004 Act”] created the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, which was in essence a single tier tribunal and began operation on 4 April 2005. This Tribunal has itself now been abolished and superseded by further reforms which took effect from 15 February 2010. The hearing and disposal of asylum and immigration appeals has been taken over by the unified tribunal service created by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. Please refer to Briefing Paper 8.35 for details of the new tribunal.

Migration: An Economic and Social Analysis

TITLE PAGE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY of a joint research study by the Home Office Economics and Resources Analysis Unit and the Cabinet Office Performance and Innovation Unit.

This document was given restricted circulation in October 2000 and was obtained by Migration Watch in January 2010 under a Freedom of Information Act request to the Cabinet Office.

(The full text which runs to 81 pages could presumably be obtained from the Cabinet Office).

See Migration Watch's full Press Release.

Paying the price for a decade of deception

By Sir Andrew Green
Chairman of Migration Watch UK
The Daily Mail, London, 10 February 2010

So there was indeed a Labour conspiracy to change the nature of our society by mass immigration.

New evidence confirms claims made by a Labour political adviser last October which he subsequently tried to recant.

In an article for the Evening Standard, Andrew Neather revealed that ‘it didn’t just happen: the deliberate policy of ministers from late 2000 until at least February last year ...was to open up the UK to mass migration’.

He went on to describe a Government policy document which he had helped to write in 2000.

He said that ‘drafts were handed out in summer 2000 only with extreme reluctance: there was paranoia about it reaching the media’.

The paper eventually surfaced as a purely technical product of the research department of the Home Office but earlier drafts that he saw ‘included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural’.

We in Migrationwatch have now obtained an earlier draft of that policy paper, circulated in October 2000.

The full article is on the Press Articles page on Migrationwatch web site.

The Key: Ethnic Communities Vote Heavily for Labour

By Sir Andrew Green,
Chairman, Migration Watch UK
The Daily Telegraph, 10 February, 2010

I rubbed my eyes with disbelief when I saw an article by Andrew Neather, a former speech writer for Blair, Blunkett and Straw, saying that mass immigration “didn’t just happen: the deliberate policy of Ministers from late 2000 … was to open up the UK to mass immigration”.

At last the truth was out. The public have known for years that we were building problems for ourselves but somehow it wasn’t quite respectable to mention it in polite company.

All that is changing fast as people wake up to the fact that we are now on course for a population of 70 million in 20 years’ time.

The Labour years have already seen an extra three million immigrants in Britain. If you add subsequent children, you are looking at the equivalent of half the population of London. These are just the official figures. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants range up to another one million.

How could this have happened in the face of growing public opposition? Was it a cock-up or a conspiracy?

The full article is on the Press Articles page of Migrationwatch web site.

Only Severe Cuts to Immigration will Stop Population Hitting 70 million well within 25 Years

Even if the birth rate were to drop to levels not seen for 100 years the UK population is almost bound to hit 70m within 25 years unless there is a dramatic cut in immigration levels, says a new report out yesterday.

An analysis of the Government’s own figures – issued on the eve of a speech by the Home Secretary on immigration and population - clearly shows that, even on such an unlikely birth rate, currently projected levels of immigration will cause the population of the UK to reach 70 million shortly after 2031 and then go on growing.

'The Government is trying to suggest that a fall in the birth rate might keep our population below 70 million. They are desperate not to admit that their policies will mean a population increase to this unprecedented figure because they know it is of enormous concern to a great many people. Yet once again their own figures trip them up and no amount of obfuscation will disguise the facts,’ said Sir Andrew Green, chairman of think-tank Migrationwatch which carried out the research into the official figures.

The report points out that the latest (2008-based) Office for National Statistics (ONS) population projections clearly show the population of the UK reaching 70 million in 2029. The government suggests that such projections are unreliable partly because changes in the birth rate are unpredictable.

However, apart from the “baby boom” of the 1960s when the fertility rate for the UK peaked at 2.95, it has fluctuated between quite narrow limits since the mid 1970s. Since 2001 it has been increasing, partly because of immigration.

Having lost all the other arguments the Government are now cynically suggesting that the ONS population projections cannot be relied upon as an indication of future trends. Our paper nails this last gasp strategy and demonstrates yet again why a severe cut in immigration is urgently required,’ said Sir Andrew

Immigration 'No Answer' to Pension Time Bomb

The ‘myth’ that continued mass immigration is the answer to Britain’s pensions time bomb has been described as ‘totally dishonest’ by a new report out today.

The report from think tank Migrationwatch, finds that the present ratio of workers to pensioners could only be sustained by immigration at a level that would bring the population of the UK to 119 million by 2051 and 303 million by the end of the century -obviously absurd propositions.

'The pensions myth is just one in a long series of excuses that are trotted out in support of justifying the highest levels of immigration in our history, and each time they are examined in detail they fall apart as this study demonstrates,’ said Migrationwatch chairman, Sir Andrew Green.

>The report reviews the prospects for this ratio - known as the Potential Support Ratio (PSR)in the light of the most recent population projections from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). It finds that, with no migration at all the ratio would fall from today’s level of 4.15 to 1.9 in 2051. If net migration continues at 180,000 a year, as the ONS predicts, the PSR would drop to 2.4 in that year. However, this improvement in the support ratio would require a continuing conveyor belt of new immigrants resulting in an extra 13.6 million people with all that that implies in what is already one of the most crowded countries in Europe.

The report quotes four major studies which have dismissed this approach. Most recently, the House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs concluded that "arguments in favour of high immigration to defuse the "pensions time bomb" do not stand up to scrutiny…"

'The Government have been running this dishonest argument for years. They have recently shaded it to talk about "helping" with the pensions problem but the reality is that any significant impact requires a huge and continuing increase in our population. They know it is no answer to the pensions problem and it is time they levelled with the British public and dropped this absurd argument,’said Sir Andrew.

Immigration curbs could have a decisive impact on the election result. Second only to the economy in key marginals

The extent to which immigration is likely to play a decisive role in the forthcoming election is spelled out in a new poll published today.

The poll, conducted by YouGov for Migrationwatch, was held in the vital 57 “marginal” seats which the Conservatives must win to gain a reasonable working majority; 43 are Labour held and 14 are held by the Liberal Democrats. The description below refers only to Labour held seats. The figures for Lib Dem held seats were very similar as shown in the tables.

The poll found that only the economy is more important to voters in these seats. When asked which issue was most likely to influence their vote, 36% of all voters in Labour held seats named the economy while 13% named immigration. Taxation and the NHS were next at 8% and 6 % respectively. Among those intending to vote Labour at the next election, 42% named the economy. Immigration and the NHS came equal second with 9%.

‘The polling numbers tell us yet again that immigration is a matter of deep concern to a large majority of the population and that they are likely to respond very positively to parties that seriously address them,’ said Migrationwatch chairman, Sir Andrew Green.

The poll found that 85% of people in Labour held marginal seats, were worried (with 49% very worried) about the population reaching 70 million by 2029 as official figures suggest. 75% of voters in these seats believe that the right level of net immigration to Britain was 50,000 a year or less (compared to 160,000 last year); indeed 49% wanted "one in, one out" or no immigration at all.

The poll also found that 44% in Labour held marginals would be more likely (23% much more likely) to vote Conservative if David Cameron were to say that a Conservative government would reduce immigration to 50,000 or below in order to keep the UK population below 70 million. Only 5% in these seats were less likely (2% much less likely) to vote Conservative in these circumstances. In Lib Dem held seats the response was almost the same.

In response to a similar question about Gordon Brown, 30% of voters in Labour marginals were more likely (13% much more likely) to vote Labour while 7% were less likely (2% much less likely) to vote for that party.

Other questions revealed a generally negative view of immigration. Asked whether they agreed that the current level of immigration has an adverse effect on local public services such as schools and hospitals, 72% in Labour held seats agreed (38% strongly) while 19% disagreed.

54% of voters in Labour held seats thought that recent immigration had been bad for the economy while only 19% thought it had been good (20% had no view). 59% in labour held seats thought that recent immigration had been bad for British society as a whole while 18% thought that it had been good (with 19% saying neither).

Said Sir Andrew: ‘These are very significant figures which show that the public are implacably opposed to a continuation of the mass immigration encouraged by this Government and are tired of having their concerns ignored. What they want are clear manifesto commitments to a dramatic reduction in the numbers.’

‘If the Tories are serious about immigration it will be in the manifesto’

Commentary

By Sir Andrew Green
Chairman of Migration Watch UK

The Times, London, 11 January, 2010

It was good to see an Archbishop give the political system a hefty kick last week. Lord Carey’s courageous intervention in support of the cross-party group called Balanced Migration certainly caught the attention of the public and gave a huge boost to their campaign to get immigration down close to the level of emigration.

He has moved the debate forwards. Instead of the usual accusations of racism there is now a more reasoned acceptance by the political class that current rates of immigration into Britain are unsustainable.

They are stressing our public services and straining our social cohesion. Now we have David Cameron saying that he does not support the idea of a 70 million population. He wants to see immigration kept within the tens of thousands. This is a significant development. He does not make stray remarks on this subject.

Indeed, he has hardly mentioned it since a major speech on population two years ago.

Nobody, least of all Mr Cameron, challenges the reality that immigrants have made a major contribution to our society. It is the recent scale of immigration that is the problem.

The latest population projections from the Office for National Statistics show that the UK’s population will reach 70 million in 20 years’ time and that just over two thirds of this increase will be because of immigration.

The Government claims that it will never happen but ONS forecasts are much better than the Met Office. Over the past 50 years their 20-year projections have been accurate to 2.5 per cent. Ministers also claim that immigration is coming down, partly due to their Points Based System. But the fall is almost entirely due to more East Europeans going home while three quarters of the PBS are student applications, which are riddled with fraud. The only means open to the Government to limit population is to limit immigration. If the Tory leader is serious he will put it into his party's election manifesto – and it will be hugely popular.