Migration Advisory Committee report on EEA migration

The Government’s advisory panel of experts this morning published a long-awaited report on migration from European nations. It recommended that EU workers should not be given preference for visas after Brexit, and that a cap on highly-skilled workers be scrapped.

Responding for the Labour Party, Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott called for an end to ‘discrimination’ against migrants from outside the EU:

“Ministers have said they will listen to the evidence on immigration. This would be a new departure for them, so they should not ignore the independent MAC report.

“Labour has said that our immigration policy needs to be based on our economic needs, while meeting our legal obligations and treating people fairly — which means ending the discrimination against non-EU migrants, especially from the Commonwealth. This is not what we get from the Tories, the party of bargaining chips, Go Home vans, and the hostile environment.”

Labour’s Mayor of London Sadiq Khan called the report a missed opportunity:

“This report is a missed opportunity to protect jobs and economic growth that are at grave risk from Theresa May’s appallingly mishandled approach to Brexit, and from a Government that is only motivated by its ideological and economically illiterate migration target — regardless of the cost to real people.

“London’s entrepreneurialism and economic growth is partly down to the flow of ideas and people from Europe and around the world. British businesses will pay a heavy price if the Government fails to protect their access to a European workforce at all skill levels in the future. Of course more must be done to give local workforces the skills needed for the jobs of the future — but responsibility for this lies squarely with this Government, who have consistently failed to invest enough in education, skills and training.

“Any decision by this Government to prioritise reducing immigration at the expense of economic growth will damage our country for years to come.”

The Scottish Government’s Minister for Migration Ben Macpherson suggested the report had failed to consider Scotland’s needs:

“With all of our population increase to come from migration over the next 25 years, migration is absolutely critical to Scotland’s future prosperity. However the Migration Advisory Committee’s (MAC) report does little to consider Scotland’s needs and instead suggests that increasing the pension age would be a preferential approach to managing demographic change — a completely unsustainable position and one which we and many across Scotland would reject.

“This report will also be deeply disappointing to businesses and employers across Scotland who asked for a simple, low cost approach to migration which took into account the requirements of their sectors.

“Instead the MAC proposes a system which completely ignores a significant number of employers in sectors integral to Scotland’s economy such as tourism, agriculture and forestry, and fails to address their major concerns about current and future access to workforce.

“This report confirms what the Scottish Government has been saying all along: EEA nationals contribute to public services far more than they take out. However, the report’s recommendations do nothing to address the distinct needs of Scotland’s economy, communities and public services.

“There is overwhelming and growing support for a differentiated solution for Scotland. We will build on this debate by listening to any concerns from businesses and public services, to make the case for the devolution of powers to the Scottish Parliament so we can ensure any future immigration system meets Scotland’s needs.”

While SNP Immigration spokesperson Stuart McDonald MP called for powers over immigration to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament:

“It is vital that immigration powers are now devolved to the Scottish Parliament to ensure we can build a system that meets Scotland’s specific needs and values.

“The UK government’s ‘Little Britain’ hostile approach to immigration is damaging Scotland’s economy and public services — by deterring the talent we need to attract to live, work and study here.

“Westminster has proven itself to be utterly incapable of standing up for Scotland’s needs and interests on immigration — and all the signs suggest that the Tories’ right-wing post-Brexit vision for immigration will cause even more self-inflicted harm, at the worst possible time for the country.

“The Tories and Labour have been consumed by a race to the bottom on immigration over the past decade — each trying to outdo UKIP with narrow-minded and xenophobic policies that are harming rather than benefiting the economy.

“Hostile Tory immigration policies, including the arbitrary net migration targets, the appalling treatment of EU nationals, and the senseless scrapping of important policies like the post study work visa, and seasonal agricultural workers scheme, have left the country poorer and worse off.

“The MAC report’s proposal to scrap the tier 2 visa cap on workers, which the SNP has long campaigned for, is welcome — but the report’s recommendations go nowhere near far enough to meet the challenges Scotland will continue to face in attracting people to live, work and study here, without control over immigration powers.

“When it comes to addressing Scotland’s needs, this report is not fit for purpose. It completely ignores Scotland’s rural population, and hugely important Scottish sectors including agriculture, hospitality and tourism, and health and social care.

“In addition, the suggestion that Scotland can deal with the demographic challenge in its workforce by simply raising the pension age is a frankly ridiculous proposition, and one which neither the SNP Government nor the people of Scotland would support.

“It’s no wonder that the overwhelming majority of people in Scotland have no confidence in the UK government on immigration, and want to see the powers devolved to Holyrood — it is time the Tories listened. Building a tailored Scottish system is the only way to meet Scotland’s needs, and ensure we can reap the huge benefits that immigration brings.”

Business groups welcomed the proposed removal of the cap on Tier 2 visas but noted concerns over skills shortages and salaries. Institute of Directors director general Stephen Martin said:

“Today’s report rightly punctures some of the more negative stories around the impact of overseas workers in the UK. The conclusion in particular that migration does not impact the training of the UK-born workforce bears out the evidence from business leaders. For employers, this isn’t an either-or choice, nine out of ten of our members who employ from abroad also invest in training domestically.

“Firms will cheer the proposal to remove the cap on skilled Tier 2 visas, and to look in detail at ways of lowering bureaucratic burden. However, given the report’s focus on the benefits of skilled migration, the MAC’s backing of the ‘Skills Charge’ as a means of lowering the influx of skilled migrants seems contradictory.

“Small- and medium-sized firms will also be concerned that it does not go far enough in addressing the issues faced by all but the largest businesses. As an example, salary thresholds, whilst they are clear benchmarks, do not necessarily take into account the interests of new and growing businesses — many of which offer wider incentives other than high salaries for skilled new staff.

“Finally, concerns around the quality of available data regularly feature throughout this report. Questions around haphazard data-keeping on the level and impact of migration have dogged UK policy makers for some time. We wholeheartedly endorse recommendations to improve monitoring, particularly in an arena of policy so often caught between political messaging and raw economic need.”

Jane Gratton, head of business environment and skills at the British Chambers of Commerce, said:

“From the perspective of businesses facing severe skills gaps, the MAC’s report gives with one hand and takes away with the other, and the recommendations are unlikely to meet the needs of all employers. Any sudden cut-off of EEA skills and labour would be concerning, if not disastrous, for firms across a wide range of regions and sectors.

“We support the recommendation to scrap the Tier 2 cap on skilled workers, having long called on the government to drop this non-sensical restriction on accessing the best talent from around the world. But businesses don’t just need the ‘best and brightest’ — industries such as agriculture, hospitality and social care rely on overseas labour to fill local shortages.

“Businesses will be frustrated by the Committee’s recommendation to extend the Immigration Skills Charge to EEA workers, further increasing costs at a time when three-quarters of firms are reporting skills shortages. Businesses are already questioning where this money goes and how funds are used to support vocational education here at home.

“Businesses’ experience over the years has been of an inflexible, bureaucratic and costly work permit and visa regime that has slowed or stopped them from getting the people they need to grow. The MAC is right to advise that the UK’s future system must reduce the delay, cost and bureaucracy of hiring the right people. While businesses will welcome the intention, they are less confident that the government will make this the reality. The onus is now on the government to demonstrate its willingness to deliver a streamlined, more open and flexible system that meets the needs of the UK economy

“If the MAC’s recommendations are to be put into practice without radically disadvantaging UK firms versus their global competitors, the Home Office and its agencies will require root-and-branch change. Businesses have waited long enough, the time for real action is now.”

Migration Watch UK, which has previously suggested that EU migrants be brought into the existing work permit system, suggested the report ignored the true impact of immigration on communities. Chairman Lord Green of Deddington said:

“This is a very technical report which seems blind to the impact of high levels of EU immigration on many communities in this country as a result of rapid population growth. With immigration adding one million to our population every three years this simply cannot go on. These proposals would permit continued high levels of immigration, including those with medium skills from all over the world. The overall outcome would be to weaken immigration control rather than strengthen it.”

However Professor Jonathan Portes, senior fellow at The UK in a Changing Europe, said that after Brexit the UK would need immigration ‘more than ever’:

“Today’s report is backed up by the most comprehensive evidence and research ever produced on the impact of immigration on the UK. Contrary to fears that immigration might reduce the incentive for businesses to boost productivity, my paper suggests the opposite: immigration has a substantial and positive impact on productivity. Areas that see inflows of immigrants see productivity rise. Other papers show that immigrants — especially those coming from the EU — who arrived during 2016 are expected to make a large contribution, more than £25 billion, to the public finances over their entire time in the country, taking account of the taxes they pay and the service they consume, and that immigration has a positive, albeit small, impact on subjective well-being — how happy people are — at a local level. In other words, much of the scaremongering we’ve heard over the past few years has little or no basis in fact.

“What does that mean for policy? The MAC are too polite to say so, but this report shows beyond doubt that the government’s economically illiterate net migration target should finally be put out of its misery. After Brexit, we will need immigration — for growth, productivity, and not least to help the public finances — more than ever. Since 2010, many aspects of UK immigration policy have been based not on analysis and evidence but on unpleasant and damaging nativism. This report provides an opportunity for our politicians to reverse that, if they have the courage to take it.”

The Royal College of Nursing’s acting chief executive Donna Kinnair warned of the potential impact on NHS staffing:

“This report puts paid to the damaging misbelief that migrant workers are a drain on health and care services. The independent experts found that the reliance of the NHS and social care on overseas professionals far outweighs the cost of their care.

“However, when we know that the training of healthcare staff in EU countries is very similar to our own, the call for there to be no preferential treatment for EU staff to work in the UK after Brexit represents a missed opportunity.

“Only last week, vacant jobs in the NHS in England hit a record high. With no long term strategy to alleviate shortages, the future UK immigration system must be equipped to recruit and keep the brightest and best professionals — patient safety depends on it.

“The Committee’s call to remove the limit on highly skilled workers from other countries is welcome. The UK has long depended on nursing professionals from around the world and any future cap on their numbers would leave health and social care services unable to recruit the nurses they need.

“Not only do they keep services going, their skills and experience add to the richness of our global profession. They are also valuable members of our communities, and we want them to stay in the UK after Brexit.

“Finally, we welcome the Committee’s recognition that the problems of providing social care in this country go beyond simple immigration measures, and require much broader intervention from the Government.”

Universities UK, which represents the UK’s higher education institutions, also highlighted the potential benefits of amending Tier 2 visas. Chief executive Alistair Jarvis said:

“It is good to see the MAC acknowledging many of the positive impacts that skilled European workers have on life in the UK. There are nearly 50,000 EU nationals working in UK universities and they make a vitally important contribution to our campuses and communities. There has been a lot of uncertainty for international staff following the Brexit vote and it’s important now that this is addressed as a final Brexit deal is reached.

“In particular, we welcome the recommendations which extend and increase the flexibility of the Tier 2 visa which would help with the recruitment of a broader range of workers and skills than the current system allows. The ability to recruit international staff at a broad range of skill levels, and with minimal barriers, is vital to the continued, global success of our universities.

“We hope the UK government now develops promptly a reshaped immigration system that encourages talented international university staff to choose the UK. If not, we risk losing them to other countries. This does not relate only to international academics and researchers, but also to highly trained international technical and support staff who play such an important role in our universities as well.”