New figures released by the Office for National Statistics have revealed that UK net migration has hit a record high, with 330,000 migrants in the year to March – an increase of 28 per cent.
The news has prompted alarm in some quarters, with the Immigration Minister James Brokenshire calling the figures “disappointing”.
But British society relies heavily on migrant workers – and it is wrong to vilify them. A one-day migrant strike – something proposed to me recently by a migrant – would reveal just how dependent we are.
Edith, a 32-year-old Polish woman, worked first in care homes on the south coast. She also picked up other cleaning jobs to help make ends meet.
Edith took English reading and writing classes in her own time. She became active in the local Catholic church, helping in the community. Throughout this time, she was paying taxes, while getting little back in return.
“We are here, we contribute, we pay our taxes. I do not understand why there are these constant attacks on migrants,” said Edith, who has become so exasperated that she believes there should be a migrant strike. “Then people would know exactly what we do.”
Migrants have always played a key role in keeping the wheels of the British economy turning. Some 26 per cent of doctors in the NHS come from other countries. Britain’s schools and colleges are packed with teachers from across the world. The transport system has been a ready employer of migrants, since London Transport went out in the 1950s to the West Indies looking for workers. The care sector would come to a halt if it weren’t for migrant workers.
Migration is good for the economy. The Government's own figures show that net migration of 250,000 per year boosts the annual GDP by 0.5 per cent, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility. This growth means more jobs, higher tax revenues, more funding for schools and hospitals and a lower deficit.
In the case of the Catholic Church, the arrival of Polish nationals and others from EU countries has boosted mass attendances across the country and added to the diversity of parish life.
Despite all the positive effects of migration public discourse is dominated by the voices of politicians promising to cut the numbers. The way migration to this country has been managed over the past couple of decades has built on many of the present resentments. Migrant workers have often been brought in to undercut the wages of indigenous workforces. The construction industry provides a particularly clear example of these practices. We should insist on minimum standards of pay and conditions for all.
If migrants were to withdrew their labour then many of the services that we take for granted would grind to a halt. A migrant one-day strike would really bring home to all of us just how much those coming from other countries contribute to our lives and well-being.
Paul Donovan is a freelance journalist
Loading ...
What do you think?
You can post as a subscriber user ...
User comments (4)
While accepting that there is poverty to be found among all age groups, our current pensioners are the wealthiest generation in British history. They are also politically active and so are the most pandered to generation of retirees. Sadly, they are also the most hostile to immigration.
How many realize that without the last thirty years’ immigration the current pension and benefits system would be at breaking point and that the comfortable retirement that most enjoy would be unsustainable?
Paul
Be careful what you wish for. If there is such a strike, and public services grind to halt like you say, all it will do is prove your opponents right. The economy has now become so dependent on migrant labour they can hold the country to ransom. It will be like a tube strike on steroids. The next thing that will happen is that people really will be pushing for stricter immigration controls - big time. It will end up becoming a strategic interest argument rather like agriculture.
As for the government's claim that net migration has added 0.5% to GDP in each of the past two years, it's based on some simplistic assumptions and leaves out one crucial point. The government is talking about total GDP not GDP per head. If you do the calculation like that the net benefit is nominal. For the full story and background to the 0.5% figure see link below.
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/1.5
"If migrants were to withdrew their labour then many of the services that we take for granted would grind to a halt. A migrant one-day strike would really bring home to all of us just how much those coming from other countries contribute to our lives and well-being."
Or, more likely, it would either mean that, at best, those looking for a takeaway would be slightly inconvenienced or, in the event of real disruption, it would make people think that we have too many migrants in this country taking jobs that only a few years ago were easily filled by Britons.
Either way it would not help the migrants' cause in the slightest.
"Migration is good for the economy. The Government's own figures show that net migration of 250,000 per year boosts the annual GDP by 0.5 per cent, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility."
I have no doubt that some migration is of benefit to this country, but if a net 250,000 people enter the country, boosting GDP by 0.5%, it presumably also boosts the population by about 0.3%, offsetting some of the supposed gain? I'd prefer to see the the per capita figure quoted rather than the GDP one.
There are, of course, many hard-working migrants, but, equally, there are those who contribute little or nothing, especially once the costs of in-work benefits are calculated. For example, Somali-born migrants have the lowest employment rate among all immigrants in the UK.
Additionally, and more importantly in my view, there is considerable concern that the carrying capacity of this country has been overloaded; our infrastructure and services cannot cope with the numbers being admitted, and there is also the damage done to social cohesion.
However, whatever the advantages or disadvantages of the uncontrolled mass immigration that the indigenous people of these islands have faced in the past twenty or so years, the reality is that we were not consulted about it and we certainly didn't give our consent to the dramatic demographic changes which have occurred.