The independent Migration Advisory Committee (MAC), which advises the government on migration issues, yesterday released a report on the work of the MAC during David Metcalf's 9 years as Chair.
You can access the report here.
Metcalf was writing in a personal capacity. He steps down as the MAC Chair this month.
The report provides a usefully concise overview of work migration to the UK. A fuller, 73-page presentation version of the report was released last month and can be read here.
Metcalf notes that the proportion of the UK working age population that were born abroad doubled between 1997 (8%) and 2015 (16%) to reach 8 million. Of those, 3.3 million were from the EEA and 4.6 million from the non-EEA.
With immigration a key concern of the UK population, Metcalf says that over the last decade non-EU migration has become much more selective for work, study and family routes.
The report concludes: "Immigration (630,000) is presently over double emigration (297,000). And half of the immigration inflow – 308,000 – is work-related, a record figure. Analysis of this work-related migration since 2008 by the MAC suggests three main conclusions: migration flows are heavily influenced by other polices; skilled migrants yield positive benefits; and enforcement of minimum standards is vital to ensure our flexible labour market boosts the welfare of British residents.
"First, immigration does not occur in a vacuum. Numbers are heavily influenced by other public and employer policies. Consider two examples. In the private sector employers have invested too little in the STEM and IT skills of UK residents. Hence the constant pleas for such jobs to be given priority in immigration. It is to be hoped that higher migrant pay thresholds and the immigration skills charge will encourage much greater investment in British workers' human capital.
"In the public sector there is a potential trade-off between spending levels and immigration. Constraints on public spending often generate greater immigration. Examples include nurses, paramedics, care sector and science and maths teachers. Next, as compared with less skilled workers, skilled migrants are much more likely to be complementary to British labour and capital. They contribute, net, to productivity, the public finances and the employment prospects of local labour.
"Finally, low skilled migration benefits labour intensive UK employers and most such migrants. But there is also evidence of downward pressure on the pay of low skilled workers and – in the worst examples – serious exploitation of migrant, and possibly UK, labour. Therefore it is crucial that minimum labour standards are enforced. Alas, evidence suggests that in pursuing our flexible labour market – which has mostly served us well – such enforcement is inadequate. Incomplete supervision holds for the national minimum wage, labour gangs (particularly in horticulture) and employment agencies for migrants. It is to be hoped that the new Director of Labour Market Enforcement – established by the 2016 Immigration Act – enhances fuller compliance via both its regulation effort and stronger penalties."