Press Releases
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 January 2007
January 30, 2007
Public 'Don't believe' Government on Immigration
January 3, 2007
Immigration Benefit 'Equivalent to a Mars bar a Month'
Full Text of Press Release : January 2007
January 30, 2007
Public 'Don't believe' Government on Immigration
The public overwhelmingly believe the Government has lost control of immigration and that they are not honest and open about its scale according to a new survey out today.
In the YouGov survey, for think tank Migrationwatch, only 4% of those polled thought the Government was in control of immigration while a massive 82% disagreed (57% strongly). (see full results)
Similarly, when asked if the Government was ‘open and honest’ about the scale of immigration into Britain, 80% disagreed (53% strongly).
‘The latest Home Office plan was entitled “Restoring Confidence.” These figures show that they have a mountain to climb – all the steeper because the public simply don’t believe what they are being told,’ said Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch. ‘After a decade of efforts to stifle debate, there is now a fundamental lack of trust between the Government and the public on this issue.’
Other responses in the survey show just how deep and broad are the public's concerns.
Some 68% agreed or strongly agreed that there are too many immigrants coming into the country and 63% either disagreed or strongly disagreed that ‘we need more immigrants to do the jobs that the British don’t want to do.’
The survey also shows that people are not convinced by the Government’s economic arguments as less than a third of those polled agreed (24%) or strongly agreed (7%) that immigrants are ‘of economic benefit to Britain.’
There was also a huge margin in favour of an annual limit to the numbers allowed to come to Britain each year. 83% agreed (63% strongly) with this proposal. Only 7% disagreed (2% strongly).
Some 78% questioned thought that anyone admitted for settlement should have to pass an English test.
There is also a strong belief that Britain is already overcrowded with 76% agreeing (49% strongly).
‘These figures illustrate that there is very strong support for a way forward involving a strict limit on numbers and an English language test before anyone is admitted for settlement.
‘They also reflect a deep underlying resentment among the public that they have not had any opportunity to express their views – still less to be consulted - on a matter of major importance to them and to the future of our country,’ said Sir Andrew.
Back to top
January 3, 2007
Immigration Benefit 'Equivalent to a Mars bar a Month'
New figures out today reveal that, on the Government's own figures, the benefit to each member of the native population of the UK from immigration is worth about 4p a week - or less than the equivalent of a small Mars bar a month.
In an analysis of a series of reports on the economic impact of immigration on the UK think-tank Migrationwatch has found that overall the much vaunted contribution of immigrants to the economy is very slight indeed - a finding that coincides with the results of major studies around the world. (see report)
'The Government seek to present the record immigration levels as being nothing but good news for the host community as a means of deflecting attention from some of the many problems it is causing and to neutralise the deep public disquiet they know is out there,' said Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch. 'Of course many immigrants make a useful contribution to the economy but taken in total the economic benefit is at best marginal.
'The main beneficiaries are the immigrants themselves who are able to send home about £10 million a day, not the host nation,' he said.
Sir Andrew said that while the supporters of mass immigration were adept at publicising the 'benefits,' they studiously avoided the many downsides that result, such as the pressure on an already overburdened infrastructure, housing, health and schools as well as an increasing impact on employment and added strains on community cohesion.
The analysis shows that in the short term any benefit to the host population will depend on the distribution of income (and therefore Tax). For example, if immigrants pay more in tax than they receive in benefits, the host population will be better off.
A number of attempts have been made to measure this fiscal effect. The government's first effort which showed a net benefit of £2.5bn was based on a year in which the budget was in surplus so everybody was making a positive fiscal contribution. This study was superseded by an IPPR study which also showed a positive contribution. However the result was distorted by the inclusion of all children of mixed households (one parent an immigrant, the other not) in the host community. Correcting for this by splitting the cost of these children 50/50 produced a small negative outcome
Migrationwatch also reviewed the National Institute Economic Review No 198, the government's own calculations, an ITEM club report plus major studies in America, Canada and Holland.
'Although they used different methodologies they all point in the same direction - namely, that the benefit of large scale immigration in terms of GDP per head is minimal. Indeed, all major studies of large-scale immigration involving mixed levels of skills, such as we have in the U. K., find that its net effect is very small in comparison to GDP. If we are to have the mature and thorough debate that Ministers have been calling for let us start off with an honest and realistic assessment of the costs and benefits of the highest levels of immigration in our history,' said Sir Andrew.
Back to top