Blog

Debating Europe - reviewing the benefits of EU free movement

Yesterday's vote over a European Union referendum saw return to concerns from some MPs about the impacts of EU migration in the UK – but let's turn debate on Europe into an opportunity to restate the benefits of EU free movement

Yesterday's vote on a proposed referendum about the UK relationship with the European Union (EU) sparked a five hour debate among MPs. Although the movement of European nationals to the UK was not a key focus of yesterday's discussion, some comments picked up familiar threads on this issue which we can expect to resurface as debate about the UK's position in the EU intensify over coming months.

The key issue raised yesterday was the impact of EU migrant workers on local labour markets in the UK, expressed by Conservative MP Phillip Hollobone as one consequence of "the EU ... getting its hands on more and more aspects of the British way of life". Hollobone remarked that

"Nine out of every 10 jobs in this country go to foreign migrants, most of whom come from the European Union. These issues are not of concern only to right-wing people; they are of concern to every person in this land."

This issue was later picked up by Ian Davidson, Labour MP for Glasgow South West, who asked

"In my constituency, how can we ensure that local people get local jobs without the EU telling us that they must be advertised Europe-wide?"

The impact of migrant workers, including EU nationals, on local labour markets has been a hot political topic over recent months, with Iain Duncan Smith controversially arguing back in July that employers should avoid recruiting from overseas if they could recruit from local labour markets. This approach was criticised by employers and analysts as potentially both discriminatory and unworkable - and statistics used to sustain Duncan Smith's proposal, demonstrating that 90% new jobs are taken by migrants as opposed to Brits, were also criticised as potentially misleading.

The temperature is likely to rise further on debate about the UK's position within Europe over coming months, including about the impact of EU workers here. But we should view this as an opportunity to revisit the benefits brought by EU migration to the UK. With UK unemployment standing currently at just over 8%, it would be serious if EU migration were directly demonstrated to have seriously contributed to numbers of people out of work. But, as remarked by commentators on all sides of the argument, it is far more likely that  EU migrant workers have generated growth and jobs in an economy in sore need of a boost.

Available evidence indicates that, by and large, the recent influxes of people from across the EU to the UK have brought marked benefits to regional and national economies up and down the country. A8 migration is estimated by the National Institute on Social and Economic Research to have contributed up to 0.5% gain in UK output since 2004. Research by Christian Dustmann at University College London, released in 2009, analysed available data to conclude that A8 migrants who have arrived in the UK since 2004 have made a positive net fiscal contribution in the UK, are 60% less likely than Brits to claim state benefits or tax credits, and are 58% less likely to live in social housing.

All this is not to say that EU freedom of movement has not placed new pressures on some local communities. There is plenty of scope for debate about how movements of people from across the European Union are anticipated and responded to by local authorities, and the role for business in ensuring that EU workers are given fair wages and working conditions alongside British workers. But in the coming months the real challenge will be to ensure that debate about EU freedom of movement is properly framed in terms of the broad benefits that it has brought to the UK.

Other users went on to read:


Comments

The UK has far more to lose if they decide to back out of the EU. Immigration aside there is general trade, currency, and business relationships which would completely have to be renegotiated. We are an island nation who depends on the common support of the countries around us if not the world. Unlike what the media may say, or people foolish enough to think that we aren't connected in some way, shape, or form, we are. We are very much connected! Rejecting the people who trade with us, who work with us (here or abroad), and invest in us would plunge the UK so far back we risk losing any real world power.

It is also simple to point out that if we were to abandon the EU cause what of the British nationals abroad? What would happen to them?

 

Completely agree, Anonymous. And good point about Brits living elsewhere in the EU. The Institute for Public Policy Research has published a couple of reports into the British diaspora - the latest estimated last year that 5.6 million Brits live permanently abroad - with France and Spain among the top 5 countries of choice...  
http://www.ippr.org/publications/55/1783/global-brit-making-the-most-of-the-british-diaspora

What is the alternative to Europe? Either total isolation which would serve no benefit to anyone or to try to regain the 'special relationship' with America. Firstly, America does not view us as being particularly special as some of us would like to believe. Secondly, it is a declining power with India and China on the rise. The European Community is in a much stronger position to negotiate and trade with them than if we were alone. Finally, do we really want to aspire to be like America where 5 million of its citizens have no health insurance? Even with some mad laws, we are still better off in than out!

A note on commenting

Due to recent increased commenting activity we have taken the decision to disable commenting on old blogs. As we are a small office it is simply impossible to fight spam and keep removing comments that don’t comply with our house rules on what is now an archive of over 800 pieces.

We have also decided to take a more proactive role in enforcing our blog house rules on the blogs where comments are open. The rules are there for a good reason and we want to make sure we are consistent and apply them across the board. 

This is not in any shape or form meant to stifle debate, but to make sure that it remains civil and on topic.

Thanks and best regards,

--MRN Team

http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/about/blog-rules

MRN blogging and comments – Policy and House Rules

Your comments

1. Please be civil– we will remove anything that:

  • Is considered likely to provoke, attack or offend others
  • Is racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable
  • Contains swear words or other language likely to offend
  • Breaks the law, condones or encourage unlawful activity or which could endanger the safety or well-being of others
  • Impersonates someone else
  • advertises products or services

2. Comments that could damage the reputation of a person or organisation, that risk prejudicing on-going or forthcoming court proceedings or that could place MRN in contravention of its legal and/or regulatory obligations will be removed.

3. Please make comments relevant to the subject of the article. We may remove comments that we consider to be spam or which are unrelated to the article content against which they are posted.

4. Please keep the number of comments you make on a topic reasonable. Too many posts from an individual or small group can discourage other readers from joining the conversation.

5. In exceptional cases we may get a high volume of similar comments on a post. In these cases we may close comments for that post, adding a note letting you know that further comments will not be published.

6. By submitting comments to this site, you warrant that such comments are not defamatory nor infringe any law. You agree to indemnify MRN against all legal fees, damages and other expenses that may be incurred by MRN as a result of your breach of the above warranty.