A reality check for migration debate
MYTHS about the impact of immigrants on our society come under attack in the Migration Advisory Committee’s long-awaited report which paves the way for a new system of determining who can come into the UK post-Brexit.
Migration is one of the most contentious issues in 21st-century Britain and the UK government has clung onto a goal of reducing the net number of people arriving to the “tens of thousands”. Concern about the scale of migration into the UK may also have contributed to the majority votes for Brexit in Wales and England.
With its in-depth research into migration from the European Economic Area, the independent committee aims a bazooka at populist perceptions of the issue.
With confidence it sets out the case that migrants have no or little impact on whether UK-born citizens get a job. It asserts that there is “no evidence that migration has reduced the quality of healthcare”; “no evidence that migration has reduced parental choice in schools or the educational attainment of UK-born children”; and “no evidence to suggest that migrants are linked to any increases in crime in England and Wales”.
Furthermore, it states migrants “contribute much more to the health service and the provision of social care in financial resources and through work than they consume in services” and that they contribute more to public finances than they take out.
This report will be regularly cited in the future by groups seeking to counter-prejudice against people who have come to work and live in this country. It is likely to be influential in shaping the future immigration system which will be needed once the UK leaves the EU and features a call for the cap on skilled workers coming in under the “tiertwo” visa system to be scrapped. Britain will be in trouble if the country is shunned by skilled individuals and entrepreneurs postBrexit. The authors advance the case for removing this obstacle to entry.
However, they also argue that no preference should be given to EU citizens – a recommendation which has alarmed the Welsh Government on the grounds Britain needs “fewer, not more, red lines from the UK Government if a disastrous no-deal Brexit is to be avoided”.
This report will not end debates about migration but will hopefully bring clarity and reason to a subject which demands both sensitivity and intelligence.