Migration Watch UK – Supplementary Written Evidence (BMP0006)

1. Opinion Polling on Immigration

The issue of an opinion poll published in the Guardian was raised by a member of the Committee, purporting to show that the public were not as concerned about reducing immigration as Lord Green had suggested.

The article to which we believe that the member was referring stated that ‘most people aren’t that fussed about freedom of movement’, that it was not true that people want to end free movement and that they prioritise the economy over reducing immigration. (The article can be found here).

This poll was based on a somewhat misleading question. Participants were asked: ‘Looking ahead it is more important to have access to the European Single Market than it is to limit immigration from the EU?’ This question suggests to respondents that it is not possible to have both, when clearly all non-EEA countries can negotiate access to the Single Market without having to offer free movement rights in return.  Thus it is the familiar confusion between access to and membership of the Single Market such as to invalidate the result.

Many polls following the referendum have found that the public believe that free movement should end, that EU migration should be reduced.  Indeed, the same is true even of those who voted Remain. Enclosed is a one page note on opinion polling following the EU referendum.

2. Outflow of EU10 Migrant Workers

During the session Lord Green highlighted that EU10 migrants tend to remain permanently in the UK and therefore that employers would not face a ‘cliff edge’ following Brexit such that the EU10 population in the UK would decline significantly as a result of the departure of those already here. The Labour Force Survey suggests very low rates of departure amongst those from the EU10 who have arrived in the last ten years suggesting that the population of EU10 in the UK will not diminish significantly in the short term. We will be publishing more on this and will send it to the Committee in due course.

3. Response of business to restrictions on EU immigration

Members of the Committee were interested in the possible responses available to businesses in the event that there might be a shortage of labour. The Migration Observatory summed up the available options neatly in evidence to the Committee’s inquiry into the European Commission’s Communication on a ‘Global Approach to Migration and Mobility’ (See here, published July 2012) It is worth quoting in full:

“The existence of a labour shortage does not automatically make a case for more labour immigration as there may be alternative policy responses. In theory, at an individual level, employers may respond to perceived staff shortages in different ways. These include: (i) increasing wages and/or improving working conditions to attract more citizens who are either inactive, unemployed, or employed in other sectors, and/or to increase the working hours of the existing workforce (this may require a change in recruitment processes and greater investment in training and up- skilling); (ii) changing the production process to make it less labour intensive by, for example, increasing the capital and/or technology intensity; (iii) relocating to countries where labour costs are lower; (iv) switching to production/ provision of less labour-intensive commodities and services; and (v) employing migrant workers.

Of course, not all of these options will be available to all employers at all times. For example, most construction, health, social care and hospitality work cannot be off-shored. An employer’s decision on how to respond to a perceived labour shortage will naturally depend in part on the relative cost of each of the feasible alternatives. If there is ready access to cheap migrant labour, employers may not consider the alternatives to immigration as a way of reducing staff shortages. This may be in the short term interest of employers but perhaps not in the best interest of the sector or the national economy. There is clearly the danger that the recruitment of migrants to fill perceived labour and skills needs in the short run exacerbates shortages and thus entrenches certain low-cost and migrant- intensive production systems in the long run.”

The Agricultural and Horticultura

-l Development Board have previously said that if the labour supply is restricted 'wages are likely to increase in an attempt to make jobs more attractive to UK nationals.’ (See here). Meanwhile the Resolution Foundation has found that 'all else being equal [restrictions on the ready supply of low-skilled EU migrants] will raise labour costs in migrant-reliant industries, thereby increasing employers’ incentives to invest in labour-replacing or augmenting technologies.’ (See here).

Opinion polling on immigration since the EU Referendum

1. Immigration is still regarded as an issue of primary importance. Most want Brexit to lead to an end of free movement including restrictions on lower-skilled migration.

2. YouGov Tracking Polls conducted each month from August to November have consistently found that voters consider ‘Immigration and Asylum’ to be the second most important issue facing the UK after ‘Britain leaving the EU’. This is also true of voters from London.[i] A poll conducted for the TUC just after the Referendum found that 62% of voters agreed that ‘reducing immigration is essential’. This poll also found that 44% of remain voters agreed with this statement.[ii] The Scottish Government confirmed in October 2016 that a majority of Scots also want a reduction in migration.[iii] An ICM poll commissioned by British Future revealed in August 2016 that 62% of those surveyed want lower-skilled immigration reduced.[iv] A September 2016 YouGov poll also found that 58% felt that the Labour Party should adopt a stricter policy on immigration, while this was also true of 49% of those who  had voted Labour in the 2015 general election.[v]

3. People care about protecting the economy but there seems to be a clear majority in favour of an end to free movement rules as they currently stand. A poll conducted by Lord Ashcroft in September 2016 revealed that 79% of those surveyed (including 71% of those who voted to remain) said that any deal giving new foreign nationals the automatic right to live and work in the UK would not respect the Referendum result or be compatible with Brexit.[vi] A Survation Poll from October 2016 found that 56% cared more about controlling immigration than maintaining access to the European single market.[vii]  Conversely a July 2016 poll conducted by ORB found the opposite.[viii] However, this question poses a false choice. Around 30 non-EEA countries have substantial access to the Single Market without having had to accept free movement. It is membership of the Single Market that requires free movement, not negotiated access to it.

4. John Curtice of NatCen Social Research reported in November 2016 that seven in ten voters believe the UK should be able to impose limits on immigration from the EU (this was also true of 55% of those who had voted to remain in the EU).[ix]

19th December 2016

3