We are likely to see more migration from Bulgaria, Romania and Poland, but not the large numbers we saw in 2004 and certainly not the millions predicted by UKIP.
We are likely to see more migration from Bulgaria, Romania and Poland, but not the large numbers we saw in 2004 and certainly not the millions predicted by UKIP
Last night on Channel Four news, David Cameron repeated his party’s manifesto commitment that this government will reduce net migration to the ‘tens of thousands’ by the next election. While net migration is fairly steady, today’s immigration statistics show how far the government is from achieving its target.
When mainstream politicians make unachievable promises, then fail to deliver, this tends to reduce political trust, particularly on high profile issues such as immigration. This risks pushing the electorate into the arms of UKIP populists. But today’s statistics also discredit Nigel Farage, in that the anticipated flood of Bulgarians and Romanians has failed to materialise.
The net migration statistics are drawn from the International Passenger Survey, which has quite large boundaries of error. It shows that long-term net migration (immigration minus emigration) was 212,000 in 2013, up from 177,000 in the previous year, although this is not a statistically significant increase.
The government has a long way to go if it is to reach its target. In 2013 an estimated 526,000 people immigrated into the UK, of whom nearly half (201,000) were from the European Union.
Also released today were statistics on new National Insurance number registrations. Put alongside last week’s labour market statistics, they provide a more complete picture of EU migration.
In the year to March 2014 new National Insurance number registrations from nationals of EU member states are up by 14 per cent compared with the previous year. There were 46,890 new registrations from Romania in the year to March 2014 and 17,750 from Bulgarian nationals. Both National Insurance numbers and the labour market statistics show that the arrival of Romanians and Bulgarians has been steady over the last year. The predicted January 2014 flood has not materialised.
There has been a small drop in family migration from outside the EU, as well as in the numbers applying for permanent settlement. Work visa migration is up by 10 per cent, mostly as a consequence of a small increase in the numbers of entrepreneurs and investors and in Tier 2 migrants coming to vacant jobs that cannot be filled by UK residents.
Asylum applications are up very slightly, but this is mostly accounted by an increased number of Syrian and Eritrean arrivals. But numbers are small and there were just 23,731 asylum applications in the year to March 2014, far lower than in the early years of this century.
Today’s statistics highlight the inadequacies of both the Conservatives and UKIP on immigration. In the absence of any other social policy, UKIP only message has been about EU migration – leave the EU if you want control of your borders. The Conservatives have reiterated their unachievable net migration target and made policy proposals that are largely symbolic.
On Channel Four News Cameron talked about the need clamp down on EU benefit tourism. Over the last six months there have announcements about restricting job-seekers allowance to EU migrants, with no EU migrant able to claim this benefit for more than a six months unless they can prove that they have a genuine prospect of employment.
Yet few migrants from the new member states of the EU claim benefits – most come here to work. Additionally both EU Treaty regulations and existing Department for Work and Pension regulations already make it difficult for EU migrants to benefits in the UK. The 2004 Treaty on freedom of movement means that new migrants forfeit their European Economic Area (EEA) worker status – which gives them freedom of movement – if they lose their job.
Essentially, a new migrant must be in employment in the UK to secure EEA worker status. Already any protracted period of unemployment of an EEA national who does not have settlement rights in the UK is likely to disqualify that person from benefits and rights of residency in the UK. The rash of announcements on benefits is pure dog whistling: symbolic statements to deal with non-existent problems.
In the short and medium-term EU migration is likely to remain at present levels. We are likely to see more migration from Bulgaria, Romania and Poland, but not the large numbers we saw in 2004 and certainly not the millions predicted by UKIP. Mainstream political parties need to acknowledge this and not make false promises about things they cannot control. The emphasis of policy should be on making migration work for all communities and for everyone who lives in the UK.
Jill Rutter is a contributing editor to Left Foot Forward. Her book on integration and social cohesion will be published by Policy Press in 2015
87 Responses to “It’s now clear: UKIP and the Tories were wrong about Romanian and Bulgarian immigration”
Lawrence Newman
Where does it mention any specific nationality? You do realise that the EU has a total population of about 508 million and an unemployment rate of about 12%?
I would imagine this is referring to the amount of people UKIP estimate to be potential economic migrants within the EU.
Why does it always have to be about race with you lefties?
Lawrence Newman
Oh, I’m educated, missy. I’m educated enough to know that lefties like you will try to rationalise any bad decision you make, and bad policy you hold and twist any statistic in order to attempt to direct attention away from your erroneous claims.
There HAS been an increase in Bulgarian and Romanian immigration in Q1 of 2014 compared to Q1 of 2013. This is a statistical fact.
Kryten2k35
I’m absolutely in favour of stricter rules on immigration, just not UKIP’s xenophobic solution. I think the fact that people vote for UKIP out fo protest for “the establishment” is a dangerous thing to be happening, since UKIP’s actual home policies are insane and ridiculous.
Outside of playing peoples harp strings about them foreigners taking their jobs (The South Park episode “Goobacks” comes to mind here), they want to privatise the NHS, lower taxes for the rich, enable people to pay to jump NHS waiting lists, remove workers rights more than the Tories, ban education on climate change and remove maternity rights for women. I’m sure there’s a load more being cracked together in Fruit Loop Towers over at UKIP Headquarters of villany.
But the fact of the matter is that immigrants live in our country and they work. They work jobs Britons are too proud to work. ANY employer is going to prefer a British, English speaking, employee. They are. But when you’re running a cleaning company, or a dog meat factory, and British people aren’t willing to work the conditions, then they can only turn to the immigrants more than willing to be waist high in fish guts for their money.
Immigrants aren’t a problem.
Lawrence Newman
In one breath you say that you’re in favour of controlled immigration, then in another breath you say UKIP are xenophobic for wanting controlled immigration. How can you reconcile these two stances?
“they want to privatise the NHS”
Firstly, I want proof this is the case. I have seen no evidence of this. But even if that were true, what’s wrong with that? It’s a perfectly legitimate position. As someone who’s suffered at the hands of the NHS and who favours personal responsibility, I would be in favour of privatised healthcare and a health insurance system. But UKIP don’t want to do this.
“lower taxes for the rich”
UKIP’s ambition is to raise the personal allowance to £15,000 and have a flat tax, which is the only truly fair taxation system. Your problem is you subscribe to the politics of envy. You’d rather have less take home pay, just as long as the rich were getting highly taxed. UKIP also want to scrap green taxes, which will put more money in your pocket.
“enable people to pay to jump NHS waiting lists”
This is fiction.
” ban education on climate change”
Ban propaganda on the THEORY of man-made climate change. Contrary to what you seem to think, it has NOT been conclusively proven. IT has no more conclusively been proven than the claim by the WHO that circumcision reduces HIV transmission rates. Be very wary about the scientific community where politics gets involved. The science is not settled at all and is based on computer models which are prone to serious error due to bias and speculation. I always say … follow the money. As soon as people start getting taxed ‘for their own good’, research into the validity of their claims.
“remove maternity rights for women”
This is also a complete invention. I can’t see UKIP ever having this as a policy, as it would be a vote loser. Once you give people something, it becomes impossible to take it away, which is why Labour do so well with their benefits culture. It’s a shame, because I think maternity leave is a scam. Why should the law force businesses to pay people for not working because of their own personal choices? If women want to have babies, they should take responsibility and look after them. We are a species of animal and this is the mother’s job. Nobody owes anyone free pay or childcare for decisions they make.
“But the fact of the matter is that immigrants live in our country and they work. They work jobs Britons are too proud to work. ANY employer is going to prefer a British, English speaking, employee. They are. But when you’re running a cleaning company, or a dog meat factory, and British people aren’t willing to work the conditions, then they can only turn to the immigrants more than willing to be waist high in fish guts for their money.”
For someone who moans about racism and xenophobia, that was a very insulting comment, generalising indigenous Brits. Where is your evidence Brits won’t do these jobs? The cabbages and cauliflowers were still getting picked before mass immigration. UKIP have never denied many immigrants work hard and that’s why they aren’t against immigration. But with over 2 million unemployed, it makes no sense to have mass immigration of unskilled workers. If you are right and there is a problem with Brits not taking these jobs, unless you’re suggesting there’s something genetically wrong with them (a racist statement), it must be a problem with incentive–which would be ties to the welfare state and the consequent welfare traps due to Labour. If it’s more financially lucrative to stay on benefits than take a low wage job, most people will opt to stay on benefits. Welfare was initially meant to be a safety net, but it’s now a lifestyle choice for some people.
Mass immigration of unskilled workers is not necessary in order to run UK plc efficiently. In fact, it has terrible consequences, e.g. a housing crisis, depressed wages, disenfranchised and unemployed working class youth, ghettoisation, distrust, fear, increased crime, etc.
It makes no sense for the UK to embrace feminist ideology and stigmatise motherhood for indigenous women, then say that we need to import more people to look after an ageing demographic. This is the elephant in the room whenever immigration is discussed in the media. Family and having children need to be encouraged, not importing hundreds of thousands of economic migrants, causing segregation and lack of cohesion.
You need to come out of that leftist bubble and enter the real world, laddie.
Kryten2k35
TL;DR
UKIP are xenophobic, I’m not.
I would rather have stricter controls on immigration – for instance, criminal records check for applicants. Ensuring that visitors have work to come into. It would alleviate most peoples concerns about immigration. My ideas are not about keeping people out. It’s about reassuring people in the UK. Immigration isn’t an issue. I wonder what the Spanish think to all the British immigrants going over there and buying up their property? They’re not a fan of it.
For the rest, those are comments from UKIP members. They want to privatise the NHS, reduce taxes for the rich, build more prisons, increase defense spending and reduce education to a quivering mess. You can find the information on the internet if you just Google UKIP ________” where the blank can be “maternity rights” or “education”. It’s up to you.
As for being a leftie stuck in a bubble? Such a fantastic quip. What else you got? My opinions happen to be left, I don’t formulate them based on the left, or the opinions of the left. I read this website daily, and I often attack the authors opinions when I feel they’re full of shit – like every time this site starts banging the drums of war.