June 11 2008 - A conducted by Sara Lemos of the University of Leicester and Jonathan Portes of the
Department for Work and Pensions concludes that migration from Eastern Europe has not had any statistically significant impact on:
- claimant unemployment
- the young
- the unskilled
- wages
Minister for Employment and Welfare Reform Stephen Timms said:
"Migrants from Eastern Europe have come to the UK to work and have been a benefit to our economy, allowing companies to grow and create more jobs. As this research shows these migrants have not taken jobs away from British workers and have not impacted on wages.
"The numbers of people claiming unemployment benefits are at levels as low as 30 years ago, while the number of vacancies in the economy continue to rise. What we need to do now is ensure we continue helping those young people with low skills to get the training and support they need to make the most of the opportunities which exist."
Migrants Boost Labour Market
May 19 2007 - A TUC study concludes that the massive inflow of migrants to the UK is a significant
benefit to the UK economy citing Treasury estimates that migrant workers are responsible for around 10% of economic growth.
The economics of migration concludes that far from being a drain on the welfare state,
migrant workers pay more in taxes than the value they receive from public services. According to the TUC, their research
shows that migrant workers have not depressed jobs or wages. There is some evidence of a local effect on the wages
and employment of low-skilled workers but these employees have not lost out because of the UK's vibrant economy.
The report argues that this good performance can be maintained if unscrupulous employers are stopped from
taking advantage of immigrants' lack of knowledge of their rights and poor English. The report's solution is to crack
down on bad employers through:
- enforcement of employment rights such as the minimum wage
- closing loopholes such as the poor protection enjoyed by agency workers
Brendan Barber, TUC General Secretary said:
"Migrant workers are making a substantial contribution to Britain's economy, and some sectors
would collapse if they were removed overnight. They haven't caused mass unemployment or held wages down as some
would have us believe.
"But we do not do enough to protect vulnerable workers, whether migrant or indigenous, from
exploitation. If migrant workers are treated fairly and paid a decent wage they can only add to the economy, and
pose no threat to the livelihoods of the rest of the workforce.
"The availability of migrant workers should not stop employers or government helping unemployed and
disadvantaged UK citizens into work, nor stop efforts to give the low skilled the new skills they need to improve
their job security and help them get better jobs."
The report accepts that unplanned population changes may put strains on a locality
if the social and housing infrastructure are unable to cope. The TUC contends that a proportion of the additional prosperity contributed by
migrant workers to the economy should be dedicated to local public services.
The full report is available on the TUC (Requires Adobe Acrobat Reader).
Previous articles
November 26 2006 - Recent Home Office figures show that the rate of migration
from central and eastern Europe is falling. John Philpott, Chief Economist at the CIPD, believes that this.
suggests that the major impact of the surge of immigration
triggered by EU Enlargement in 2004 has now been felt.
According to John Philpott:
"The number of Central and Eastern Europeans applying to register for work in the UK in the third quarter
of 2006 was 2.8% lower than in the equivalent quarter in 2005, following a fall of 1.7% in the year to the second
quarter and compared with a 12% increase in the year to the first quarter.
"This apparent change in trend might be explained by the fact that the most eager migrants from
countries that joined the EU in 2004 have by now probably tried their hand in the UK jobs market, a somewhat
improved economic and employment situation in other parts of Europe, and an easing of restrictions to entry to
migrants from these countries that were initially imposed by most other EU member states.
"Even though applications to the Worker Registration Scheme provide a far from precise measure of
how many central and eastern Europeans are at present working in the UK , the scheme is likely to act as a reasonable
barometer of the trend of migrants and the tide looks to have turned. A more subdued flow of central and eastern
European migrants could spell bad news for some employers but will be welcomed by hard pressed local authorities
coping with the impact of high immigration on social infrastructure. And it will make even trickier Government and
Bank of England estimates of how fast the economy can grow over the long-term without triggering higher inflation."
August 23 2006 - In the period from May 2004 to June 2006, 447 000 people from EU accession states applied to the Worker Registration Scheme and just over 427 000 were approved. Including freelance workers, such as builders, the total number from accession states is believed to be around 600 000. Few brought families with them, an estimated 36 000 dependents are believed to have accompanied migrant workers. McNulty said these new workers were filling a gap in the labour market that could not be met from those born in the UK.
A total of 137 000 work permit holders and their families were admitted to the UK in 2005, an increase of 10 per cent over the previous year. The number of foreign nationals settling in the UK increased by 29 per cent to 179 210. During the same period, 58 215 people were removed from the UK, a decrease of 5 per cent over 2004.
Home Office minister Tony McNulty stated that the government is committed to ensuring that those entering the UK will benefit the economy. He pointed out that the government's recently announced points-based immigration system will help control migration more effectively. "It will allow only those people with the skills the UK needs to come to this country, while preventing those without skills applying" he said.
John Philpott, chief economist at the CIPD, argued that today's Home Office figures reinforce the need for a clear restatement of government policy on mass economic migration, and a thorough independent cost/benefit analysis. He argued that this is the "only way to restore public confidence and bring a much needed sense of balance to a debate on immigration policy which tends to swing from one extreme ('the open door') to another ('the raised drawbridge')".
John Philpott continued:
"Since EU enlargement in 2004 the CIPD has been one of the few organizations to highlight that large scale migration from the new member states of central and eastern Europe imposes costs on the UK as well as bringing benefits. Employers, consumers and migrants are the main beneficiaries with less skilled workers, the core jobless and poorer communities - often themselves with high concentrations of disadvantaged ethnic minorities - bearing the brunt of the cost. This is because, contrary to common perception, the vast majority of migrants enter low skilled low paid employment. The CIPD has in turn drawn attention to the significant though limited role recent EU migration has played in the overall rise in UK unemployment since the end of 2004, contrary to the conclusion of government economists that there has been no identifiable impact."
John Philpott said the CIPD believed that on balance the benefits of mass economic migration from accession states have outweighed the cost. It has helped keep wage inflation under control and enabled a faster rate of economic growth than would otherwise have occurred. CIPD research shows that one-third of UK organizations employ workers from accession countries. Key reasons for hiring them are their willingness to work and skill levels. The CIPD remains concerned about mitigating the costs - for example, by improved education and welfare to work measures for unemployed UK nationals.
Tony McNulty confirmed that the government is 'yet to take a decision as to what access Bulgarian and Romanian nationals will have to our labour market when they join the EU'. Any decision on that issue will be based on objective factors, including an evaluation of the UK labour market and the position of other EU member states.
John Philpott said that should not be a forgone conclusion that restrictions should be placed on further migration from new EU countries. He continued:
"If restrictions on migrants are deemed necessary for labour market or other reasons these should be imposed on less skilled migrants from outside the EU, which would demonstrate that the UK remains at the forefront of promoting the wider economic objective of a single European labour market and increased labour mobility within the EU (matching that found in the United States).
"But in making any policy decision it is vital that the government conducts and publishes a - preferably fully independent - analysis of the total costs and benefits of overall migration to the UK. This would not only inform and instil a sense of balance in public debate but also improve the chances of achieving a much needed cross party political consensus on immigration policy in an increasingly global economy."
Labour Market
