FactCheck Q&A: raining on the rumour of a Romanian influx
As anxious MPs consider bad-mouthing Britain to put off low-skilled Romanian and Bulgarian workers from moving to the UK, FactCheck examines the truth behind the scaremongering.
Keith Vaz, the chairman of the House of Commons home affairs committee, said it was “farcical” that the government was thinking about running adverts depicting life in the UK as one of rain-ridden misery. But is the government overreacting – or should we really expect a flood of migrants?
Why the sudden panic?
The problem is that no one seems to know quite how many Romanian and Bulgarian workers will come to the UK when the two newest EU member states are granted access to our labour market (see FactCheck: Eric Pickles and the mystery number).
Wild estimates are being flung around, ranging from 50,000 to 70,000 a year – with the home secretary, communities secretary and the prime minister himself all dodging the job of making an official forecast.
This is perhaps because, as the PM pointed out, the estimated arrival of around 14,000 Poles in 2004 turned out to be “ridiculously low”.
What happened with the ‘Polish influx’?
The Labour government vastly underestimated the high level of migration from Poland in 2004 and beyond.
According to Oxford University Research, the main problem was the lack of historical data for the migration of A8 countries (Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovak Republic and Slovenia). Plus, there were “no significant migration movements” prompted by the previous EU accessions of Spain and Portugal.
In short, the UK was taken by surprise. Before 2004, the inflows of EU migrants between 1991 and 2003 were pretty flat, averaging close to 61,000 a year.
That figure however jumped to an average of 170,000 per annum between 2004 and 2010. Two-thirds of all A8 citizens since 2004 have been Polish citizens – with the peak of Polish migration hitting 96,000 migrants in a single year during 2007.
After a tenfold increase in the number of Poles migrating since 2004, there are more Polish nationals living in the UK than from any other nation. Some 687,000 Poles currently live in the UK, almost double the number of the next largest national group – the Republic of Ireland – which has 351,000 nationals living in the UK.
Romania is further down the list at number 13, with 93,000 citizens living in the UK at the last count in September, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
Meanwhile, Bulgaria is way back at number 29 with 42,000 citizens living in Britain.
Why does it matter?
An official spokesman for the prime minister said today: “The issue here is around dealing with potential damage to the UK labour market and potential scope for curbing immigration to that end.”
Looking at the Labour market however, it is not clear that opening the doors to A8 workers has done much “damage”. According to Dr Scott Blinder, senior researcher at Oxford’s Centre on Migration, Policy and Society, there is no clear evidence that immigration hits average earnings.
There are two studies that find modest effects, with one estimating that each 1 per cent increase in the share of migrants in the UK workforce leads to a 0.6 per cent drop in the wages of the 5 per cent lowest paid workers. That would mean a pay cut of around 3p an hour for someone earning just over the minimum wage.
Non-UK nationals in employment account for 9 per cent of the UK labour market, according to the ONS. The number of non-UK workers increased by 75,000 to 2.62m in the year to September 2012.
Yet, that’s an overall rate rise of just 0.3 per cent for foreign workers – against a rise of 1.1 per cent for UK nationals.
What’s more, the rate of employment for A8 workers actually dropped back by 2.7 per cent, to a total number of 658,000. By comparison, the employment rate for the EU 14 (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Sweden) climbed 3.2 per cent – up by 68,000 to 612,000 on the previous year.
The rate that we are employing migrants from Australia, New Zealand, India and South Africa has dropped across the board, while meanwhile the employment rate for those from the US has jumped by 7 per cent.
But what about those claiming benefits?
A year ago, the government put together the first study of foreign workers claiming benefits. It hasn’t updated the statistics since, but it showed that just 8 per cent of foreign workers registering for benefits in February 2011 were from the A8 countries.
EU workers overall made up 25 per cent of benefits claimants but by far the largest chunk of claimants came from Asia and the Middle East, at 34 per cent, and Africa at 27 per cent.
The Department for Work and Pensions said the claims varied significantly. For example, Africans form nearly half of all non-UK nationals lone parents claimants, EU nationals form 31 per cent of non-UK jobseeker claimants and Asia and the Middle East form 56 per cent of all carer’s claimants.
The top 3 ‘claimants’ by nationalities are Pakistan, Somalia and India. Poland does appear at number seven; however it is the only A8 country to appear in the top 20.
Will there be a Bulgarian and Romanian ‘influx’?
The scaremongering is overdone. For a start newspaper headlines, followed up with claims from the likes of MEP Nick Griffin, that Britain is opening its doors to 29 million migrants are misleading.
The 29m figure comes from adding the population of Romania, 21.4m, to the 7.5m Bulgarians – coming in at just under 29m. There is no way the entire population of the two countries will migrate to Britain.
Plus, that’s less than half the total population of the A8 countries – which is around 70m – meaning there is far less supply.
And as for demand, the UK is not the only option on the table for Romanians and Bulgarians. In 2004, it was just the UK, Sweden and Ireland that let in A8 workers without restrictions. The new lift on the ban will see the whole of the EU open its labour markets to the two countries, so they may prefer to go elsewhere.
Certainly, as Dr Blinder points out, the majority of Romanian-born emigrants in Europe are concentrated in Spain and Italy.
By Emma Thelwell
Related posts: FactCheck – Eric Pickles and the Mystery number
There are 11 comments on this post
Why only select the year to September 2012 as your timeline when the impact has been since 2004? Best to look at what proportion of the additional employment (total) created since 2004 has gone to non-UK nationals.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
These facts are important to know in the face of an increasingly vile approach to migrants in the west.
Still, like with the issue of unpaid billions of taxes owing from certain businesses in the UK, many are not interested in awkward things like facts. When it comes down to it, prejudice against Bulgarians/Romanians/Poles/this year’s scapegoat of choice isn’t about facts, it’s about a philosophy, a philosophy that simply finds foreigners to be suspicious, or at the very best, a threat to resources that, strangely enough, are considered to be “ours”.
That western nations owe their present wealth due to avoiding suspicion about the resources belonings to others (sugar and cotton, for example) we are talking about hypocrisy.
I’m all for getting rid of borders, myself.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Why are there no figures on the number of seasonal workers from the A8 countries or the of those who came and then left. It is easy to say how many came but less easy to say who have stayed and settled down and who left at the end of summer.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is worth noting as well the linguistic similarity of Romanian to the other Romance languages, such as Italian, French, and Spanish. It is far easier for someone from Romania to move there and pick up the local language in the matter of a few months than it would be moving to Britain.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Cathy/Emma,
Nice, easy term is “market” isn’t it? Brings to mind striped awnings, barrows piled high with fruit and veg, and street criers shouting for their sale.
But somehow “labour market” doesn’t have the same ring does it? After all, it basically means buying and selling human beings. As anyone unemployed will tell you, all that guff about buying and selling their labour only is fraudulent claptrap. You may find that out yourselves if one day you are made redundant and out of work for a long period. You likely will find it is the biggest lie ever manufactured even by neocon spivs.
Fertile research territory this. Ask the 2,500,000 unemployed and the 15,000,000 living in poverty. And those are OFFICIAL figures, not mine – which almost certainly means they are a (deliberately) bad underestimate.
I do my best ti help, as you know.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I am sorry to point this out, but you have not checked your facts, dear editor. Romania’s population is 18.4m now. It USED TO BE 21.4m before they joined the EU, but in the past four years 3m Romanians migrated to western and southern Europe. So yes, there is a chance that another three million will leave the country, and goodness knows, maybe all the working age people with all the gypsies will flock to western Europe. Is there enough space for all of them?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I wonder if a change is possible please, with articles like this the text with figures would be easier to comprehend if replaced by clear graphs… I stopped reading a short way in
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Interesting that she glosses over the negative impact on the wages of the lowest paid. After all, that’s where racial tensions are the highest and where the state should be the most protective of its citizenry and not happily let those from countries where they pay a pittance undercut wages and conditions. Like all middle class commentators, she has this rosy view of mass immigration that doesn’t therefore accord with the experience of the poor in these communities, with knock-on political effects. Someone save us from the liberal elite of the country, who she represents and who don’t have to bear the cost of mass immigration.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The numbers are far to high for Romanians ( and probably bulgarians).There are only 19 millions left in the country according to the 2011 census, of which only 5.5 million are of working age. In Bulgaria there are 2 million work age people. The total A2 entire population of working age is just around 7.5 million so the idea that 350k people will settle here is just ridiculous. MigrationWatch did not bother to do real research. I am wondering how much the tax payer has paid for their drivel. Nice job if you can get.
NB for Andrew Green: a reseach should be done taking account of the work age population, not the entire population of a country.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
She doesn’t “gloss over” the effect on the lowest paid, it’s carefully examined – worst case impact of 3p/hour.
Simple fact is, free migration is good for all of us. It’s good for employment, good for customers, good for human dignity. Down with borders!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0