Brexit UK ‘should abandon cap on skilled migrants’

BRITAIN should throw open the doors to thousands more skilled migrants wanting to work in the UK, a major report has recommended.

The independent Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) said a cap on the number of visas given to talented foreign workers, including doctors, engineers and bankers, should be axed.

The panel faced anger after concluding that the skills bar should be lowered – making it easier for fish and chip shop owners, gardeners, hairdressers and bar managers to get into the UK. However, it also said the Government should end low-skilled EU migration by scrapping freedom of movement rules.

In a boost to Theresa May, the MAC suggested there were no ‘compelling’ reasons why European citizens should have preferential access to the UK.

The Prime Minister has signalled she prefers a ‘global’ system, where citizens from across the world face the same immigration rules.

The study was commissioned by the Government to inform ministers as they devise a new immigration system for when the post-Brexit ‘transition’ period finishes at the end of 2020. Among findings and recommendations, the report:

Called for free movement to end because there is ‘no guarantee that migration is in the interests of UK residents’;

Said there should be a ‘less restrictive’ regime for higherskilled workers than low-skilled ones because they were more productive and innovative;

Advised ministers to maintain a £30,000 minimum salary limit for foreign citizens securing a work visa, so they pay more in tax than they would receive from welfare payments or public services;

Risked angering business by suggesting a block on lowerskilled workers – except in agriculture so crops do not rot;

Said there was no evidence that increased European migration, which is running at around three million people, had made it more difficult for UK citizens to get jobs;

Calculated that house prices increased 1 per cent for every 1 per cent rise in the migrant population;

Said EU migrants paid more in tax than they took in benefits, contributed more to the NHS workforce than the healthcare they accessed, and had no effect on crime rates.

Professor Alan Manning, chairman of the MAC, said the proposals were ‘designed to benefit the resident UK population’. Lord Green of Deddington, chairman of the MigrationWatch think-tank, said: ‘The overall outcome would be to weaken immigration control rather than strengthen it.’

The Home Office said it would carefully consider the recommendations.

FOR years the liberal Left has tried to stifle debate on the scandal of uncontrolled immigration by dismissing anyone in favour of stricter border controls as a knuckle-dragging racist. So while millions of migrants poured in, the ordinary families affected were given no voice to object.

Though it was by no means the sole reason for the referendum result, the fact that a new social order was being imposed on them without any consultation was a major factor in why so many voted Leave.

By putting an end to free movement, they hoped to stem the tide. But this doesn’t mean migration should end completely after Brexit. That would be a ludicrous act of selfharm. Brexit is not about pulling up the drawbridge. It’s about having the power to decide for ourselves who should and shouldn’t be allowed to live and work here – wherever in the world they come from.

So the recommendation by the Migration Advisory Committee yesterday that EU citizens should be given no special preference for work visas after Brexit is no more than simple logic.

If Britain needs more nurses, or IT technicians, or chemists, we should be attracting the best available in those fields. Whether they come from Bratislava, Brisbane or Bangalore is irrelevant.