Registered user login:

Why Brits need not apply

Richard Reeves

Published 08 November 2007

Richard Reeves examines the economic impact of immigration

Just weeks after Gordon Brown pledged "British jobs for British workers", figures were released showing that half of the 2.2 million jobs created since 1997 - and all of the half-million generated in the past two years - had gone to immigrants.

Although the figures on immigration are generally treated as "bad news" for the government, the data on migrant employment is in many ways cause for celebration. A standard case against immigration is that foreigners come to the UK to luxuriate on benefits, use the NHS and snag a council flat. But, on the contrary, it seems immigrants come to do an honest day's work.

Certainly, a significant inflow of people puts pressure on public services, especially when the level of immigration is much higher than expected. And some of the indigenous population may see their chances reduced of gaining cer tain goods such as social housing. These are real, political issues. Nonetheless, most economic analy ses show that immigration has a positive economic effect - the latest has estimated a £6bn boost to GDP and it seems certain that recent waves of immigration, dominated by eastern Europeans, especially Poles and Lithuanians, have been even more beneficial.

These arrivals are young: 83 per cent are aged between 18 and 34. They are mobile, demonstrating a much greater willingness to travel the UK in search of work than previous immigrants, who tended to cluster in ethnic conclaves in the large cities. Some of the most popular destinations are the north and west of England, Scotland and East Anglia. Boston in Lincolnshire now boasts 40 languages.

The vast majority of the new immigrants - 94 per cent - have no dependents. They are also white, which improves their chances of landing a job (a fact about the British labour market that should cause no pride). And they work hard. Major employers praise the "superior work ethic" of eastern Europeans.

The new immigrants believe, with good reason, that if they come to the UK and work hard, they will make good money - or, at least, money that looks good once it is converted back into zlotys or litas. Given that their countries of origin are much closer than those of earlier immigrants (from the Caribbean or Asia, for example), it seems likely that many of the eastern Europeans will work here for a few years and then make the reverse migratory journey.

A harder question is why so few of the jobs that have been created are being taken by any of the five million native Brits currently out of work. They do, after all, have a linguistic edge over the newcomers. It is not as if any of the jobs are advertised with signs saying "Brits Need Not Apply". One explanation is that much of the work, especially in agriculture and construction, is not appealing to the indigenous population. Another is that the new immigrants are making more use of effective "informal" job-search methods - personal contacts and the grapevine - than unemployed Brits, many of whom are cut off entirely from the world of work.

Out-of-work Brits are also, after a decade of economic expansion, increasingly in what policy wonks dub "hard to help" groups: the long-term unemployed; those with caring responsibilities, such as lone parents; and those on incapacity benefits. A single Lithuanian lad can easily pop up to Liverpool to take a job: it is a different matter for a single mother of four.

There are some harder truths. The British benefits system makes relatively few demands on recipients in terms of job search, certainly by comparison to the new "tough love" US welfare system - a gap that David Cameron looks set to exploit. You do not need to be on the far right to see that there is little incentive for indigenous welfare recipients to swap the stability of benefits for the uncertainty of the labour market.

But the link between immigration, welfare and employment cannot be ignored much longer, for there is certainly something tragic in the sight of a British economy creating jobs alongside a British welfare system discouraging British citizens from taking them.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • NowPublic
  • Reddit

4 comments from readers

ExplodingBadger
09 November 2007 at 08:20

The British welfare system needs protecting at all costs from people like this writer and big business. Our society needs to be inclusive and caring. Blaming the welfare system on unemployment is actually an excuse. The real reason for articles like this is the goverment would be very happy to have a tough love system like the USA. What this means is health care and other welcare systems are run for profit not for the people. Just watch Sicko if you want to see what this guy is REALLY selling.

ExplodingBadger
09 November 2007 at 08:56

Sorry I of course I meant "unemployment on the welfare system "

Red Shift
10 November 2007 at 01:29

And what does this writer know about life on benefits in Britain~? If Reeves tried living on them for a year he would have to endure a considerably reduced and unstable existence, compared to those on average earnings.

How does a middle aged person in South Wales on income support, compete with a starry eyed migrant youngster for an Intensive MANUAL JOB in a field or on a building site for a wage that would not meet 'decent' housing and living costs.

Migrant labour is unorganised labour, which pushes down wages. THese low wages might appear relatively generous to migrants from less developed EU economies, but once they settle here, bring families, access NHS, council/school and other services, start paying council, housing, road tax, and all the rest, then the Migrant honeymoon will be well and truly over. Reeves analysis punches out the same old dreary generalisations, British benefits causing unemployment, etc, when life for many on benefits is grim to say the least, and especially for those who would never be offered a job, due to being too old to do MANUAL physical work in the fields, not female enough to work in an office, not male enough to qualify as a plumber.

Migration has allowed the government off the hook, of these problems.

Red Shift
10 November 2007 at 01:46

By the way most council accommodation, that is available is NOT DECENT ACCOMMODATION, and if there is competition between the very poor and migrants over the houisng scraps available then that is sick, and will make people sick.

Some have forgotten too that when you sell your labour, for a wage ;you enter into a contractual relationship, which doesn't require deference, bright starry smiles, or the antique manners of a slave.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

Read More

Vote!

Are your savings now safe?