Migration myths

Like Nigel Farage the Late Patrick Moore Was Not Very ‘Scientific’ When Considering The Objective Facts On Immigration And He Was Very Wrong

From time to time I have found myself cornered or chided into a debate about immigration with the fruitloops and (occasionally closeted) racists in the increasingly pernicious UKIP or the Tea Party wing of the Conservative’s. It can be frustrating to hear the same three myths put forward each time as reasons for restricting immigration and to then not be able to recall the relevant details that would sink these lies (why beat around the bush with euphemisms?).

Now you can arm yourself with three clear unequivocal objective facts. You need only remember these key pieces of information and you can exude the quiet confidence of the knowledgeable as you destroy the foundations of any ‘fruitloopery’ that might present itself on social networks, at the local pub or on the message boards of the Mail and Express.

So what are the myths and the counterfactual data?

Migration is a net economic burden The government’s own figures show, current levels of net migration of 250,000 per year boost annual GDP by 0.5% (source: Office for Budget Responsibility). This growth means more jobs, higher tax revenues, more funding for schools and hospitals and a lower deficit.
The UK is being swamped by migrants Today’s levels of population growth are no greater than they were from the early 1900’s to 1970. Currently migrants make up just 1 in 10 of the UK population, lower than Australia, the US or Germany (source: Office for National Statistics)
Migrants are taking all the new jobs created in the UK The truth is that just over 1 in 10 new jobs are taken by migrants while almost 9 in 10 go to British nationals (source: Office for National Statistics).

The above list has been copied from The Migration Matters Trust website.

What can we conclude from debunking these myths?

Without immigrants:

our recession would be deeper and last longer;
our taxes would be higher; and
the austerity cuts would have needed to be even more draconian.

Oddly, not one of our main party leaders has been interested in placing these facts before the British public preferring to play up the Daily Express, Daily Mail and other (mostly) right wing media sources anti-immigrant mythologies.

Why Does The Express See A Factor Of 25% As Causal For Birth 'Explosion Rather Than 75%? Illogical & Crafted To Play On The Fear Of Foreigners That It Has Played A Part In Creating

Why Does The Express See A Factor Of 25% As The Primary Driver Of The UKs Birth ‘Explosion’ Rather Than The 75%? It Is Illogical And Designed To Heighten A Fear Of Foreigners That The Express Has Played A Significant Role In Creating

My thoughts on the subject are very simple. Due to a ‘successful’ anti-immigrant media campaign waged over decades, a large minority of the British electorate now believe viscerally that UK inward migration has had a negative impact.

Thus there are few votes in pro-immigration rhetoric even when immigrants are verifiably and incontrovertibly an economic and cultural benefit to the UK. Additionally, maintaining fever pitch levels of fear and hate of Johnny Foreigner is a useful tool for keeping our anger and attention focussed on a fake problem whilst the government enact and obfuscate all manner of questionable policies that address ideological goals and not the real and fundamental issues that face the UK.

I would say that David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband should be ashamed that they have pandered to UKIP supporters in this way but that would mean that I believe that they care about placing objective and verifiable evidence above ideology and their quest for power when formulating policy. I don’t.