Previous Press Releases
2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001December November October September August July June May April March February January
News Articles for August 2006
August 29, 2006
An optimum level for immigration
August 14, 2006
Numbers Matter
It is time for mainstream politics to debate the scale of British immigration
August 4, 2006
Home Affairs Select Committee (HAC) Report on Immigration Control
August 3, 2006
The Need for Immigration
by David Frost, Commentary, Finance Times, July 23, 2006
August 3, 2006
The Multi-Identity Society England and Immigration
By Hazhir Teimourian
Harvard International Review, July 2006
Full Text of Press Release : August 2006
An optimum level for immigration
The Home Secretary has recently suggested that an optimum level for immigration might be established. A Migrationwatch research paper (Read) suggests some criteria.
Immigration is of long term benefit to the economy only if it raises the overall level of productivity; otherwise, it simply adds to the pressure on infrastructure and public services. Migrationwatch therefore calls for long term economic migration to be confined to the very highly skilled. Less skilled workers can make a valuable contribution by filling gaps while British workers are trained but they should not be allowed to settle permanently.
Migrationwatch research, based on data from the Government's own Labour Force Survey, shows that a worker must earn £27,000 a year to make a positive lifetime contribution, whether measured by the tax paid or by the addition to GDP. This, in fact, is the average salary for full time employment. Only about 20% of migrants reach this salary level.
"The Government and its supporters repeatedly trot out favourable looking statistics which seek to give the impression that immigration in general has a very positive effect on the UK economy", said Sir Andrew Green, Chairman Migrationwatch. "The reality is that immigrants are extremely varied. A minority are highly skilled and highly paid but a large majority will end up as a cost to the taxpayer if they settle here permanently. The same applies to the British population since higher earners pay most of the tax bill. The crucial difference is that we can, and should, choose which work related migrants are to be allowed to settle in the UK".
Migrationwatch therefore propose that, apart from those granted asylum and those coming to Britain for family formation and reunion, only the highly skilled who are filling a vacancy which cannot be filled by EEA citizens and with a salary of more than the average of £27,000 a year, should be allowed to settle in the UK. Other skilled migrants from outside the EU, who earn a salary lower than this threshold should only be allowed into the UK on a temporary basis to provide a short term solution to labour market gaps while a British worker is trained. The present chaos over finding jobs for British trained nurses illustrates the problems of using long term immigration to meet short term staffing problems.
As for unskilled migrants, the Government now acknowledges that there is no reason to bring them to Britain, given the large number of East European workers now available to fill these positions.
"To most people the measures we are suggesting are simple common sense. This research demonstrates once more that there is no economic case for massive immigration into the UK. The Home Secretary is right to say that we need to balance economic gain against social costs. The social costs of the present massive levels of immigration, including their impact on infrastructure and public services, far outweigh any possible benefit," said Sir Andrew.Back to top
Numbers Matter
It is time for mainstream politics to debate the scale of British immigration
Writing in the latest edition of Prospect magazine Bob Rowthorn, Professor of Economics at Cambridge University, highlights the impact of migration on the composition of our society if it were to continue at the 2004 level of 223,000 net immigration. The UK’s population would reach 74 million by 2051 and would continue rising strongly thereafter. Our population would be 16 million people more than if there had been no migration in either direction There would also be a huge change in the make up of our population with 15.8 million foreign-born people settling in the UK and 5.8 million UK-born people leaving in the period 2006-2051.
Back to top
Home Affairs Select Committee (HAC) Report on Immigration Control
On the 24 July, 2006 HAC issued a detailed report on immigration control. The press notice which summarises the report's findings is available at here.
This was followed by the Home Secretary's proposals for reforming the systems and processes for managing immigration to the UK. A summary of the proposed changes and the implementation timescale is available on the Home Office website here.
Migration Watch is studying both sets of proposals and will respond in due course.
Back to top
The Need for Immigration by David Frost, Commentary, Finance Times, July 23, 2006
A defence of businesses employing migrant workers from the director-general of the British Chambers of Commerce. Click here to read this article.
Back to top
The Multi-Identity Society England and Immigration By Hazhir Teimourian Harvard International Review, July 2006
Mr Teimourian is a member of the Advisory Council of Migration Watch UK. He is a writer on Middle Eastern history and politics. Born in 1940 in the Kurdish region of western Iran Mr Teimourian came to the UK in 1959 for his higher education. He stayed on and has spent the last 35 years in journalism, mainly with the BBC World Service and The Times newspaper. He believes strongly that if societies are to remain functional, they must stay culturally and emotionally cohesive. Large-scale immigration is likely to disrupt that and lead to political upheaval.
Click here to read his article. For more information on Mr Teimourian go to www.LimehouseGroup.net
Back to top