Most people’s views on immigration are ‘gut feeling’. They wouldn’t apply that logic to cancer treatment
Yes, the government has to step in to minimise any negative side effects from immigration – but they do the same for every other area of economic activity too
It’s easy to stir up hostility to outsiders; it appeals to the tribal part of human nature. But – and forgive the lofty tone – we wouldn’t have reached the heights of scientific and artistic achievement that distinguish us as a species if we were always at the mercy of our darker impulses. Reason and compassion have defined human history as much as tribalism and selfishness.
In discussions on a subject as emotionally charged and politically divisive as immigration, it can be hard for reason to get a look-in. But an overview of research on the economic impacts of EU migration, published on Monday, provides a good starting point for a rational debate about our post-Brexit immigration policy.
The briefing from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) looks at the way EU immigrants affect employment levels, wages, productivity, public finances, public services and access to social housing, as well as house and other consumer prices in Britain. And it concludes the following: “Overall, the evidence shows no or little labour market impacts and positive impacts on public finances, growth and productivity. But economic impacts of migration cannot be seen in isolation from government policies, particularly on public services and housing.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies