Thursday, November 28, 2013

EU immigration and the impact of the eurozone crisis

It has been a big news week for immigration. And today the ONS has published its latest migration figures, which shows that net migration to the UK has risen slightly year on year. The focus is understandably on the latest net migration figure, because it is David Cameron's policy to get this figure into the tens rather than hundreds of thousands by the time of the next election (you can present the numbers in different ways, but the net figure is the one that the Government has targeted).

However, it is interesting to look at the longer term trends and how the breakdown of net migration to the UK is changing (see the chart below, which excludes British citizens):


Since 2010 there has been a marked decline in non-EU net immigration. As a proportion of non-British immigration to the UK, it has dropped from 73% in June 2010 to 57% in June 2013. In the last year alone, it has fallen from 172,000 to 140,000.

Meanwhile, this year, net migration from the EU has gone up by 72,000 to 106,000.

But, as the chart above shows, the recent increase in net EU migration has come from the older, more established (and traditionally more wealthy) EU member states (the EU15), not the new member states from central and eastern Europe that joined in 2004 (the EU8).

One can speculate about the cause of this, but it would seem that the crisis in the peripheral eurozone countries has made the UK a popular destination for migrants from countries such as Spain, Italy, Portugal and Greece.
at

9 comments:

  1. Anonymous28/11/13 4:55 pm

    We all know that the government is cutting immigration from outside of the EU to try to hoodwink us into the thinking that it is bringing overall immigration down.

    The very people that we want or would prefer to have, that is skilled labour, entrepreneurs and those from the Commonwealth, are being penalised and are being prevented from coming to the UK in favour of unskilled labour from within the EU.

    This is yet another "unintended consequence" of the massive untruth that is EU membership.

    Give us our country, culture and our freedom back.

    SC

    ReplyDelete
  2. IDRIS FRANCIS29/11/13 3:04 pm

    "Free movement of labour between countries with disparities of income per head of five or ten to one is insane. And that's before allowing for difference of language, culture and honesty"

    Discuss (and soon, before doing so becomes a criminal offence under the EU Arrest Warrant,


    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous29/11/13 6:58 pm

    So, there is no disparity of income between the UK and any other migration countries outside the EU?
    what about income disparity within the UK? As for differences in...honesty, this generalisation is insulting and arrogant. And I speak as a naturalised British person. My difference in language and culture did benefit this country. To have my honesty questioned is unacceptable.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous29/11/13 8:46 pm

    The disaster of the eurozone has lead to the loss of jobs in that area, and the countries that people who have lost their jobs due to that are the ones outside of it other than for Germany which is the nation that holds all the power of the euro.

    The amount of foreigners coming from the eussr who are not qualified is far greater than those from the commonwealth who have had massive restrictions applied to their migration compared to the people from the eussr nations.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rik2/12/13 9:02 am

    The chart is a bit of rubbish to be frank.
    The EU has 27 now even 28 memberstates. While 15 plus 8 is since human memery 23.
    This chart completely ignores the EU groups that:
    a) likely will be causing the most trouble at the moment (Romania and Rumenia for instance);
    b) most of the discussion is about at the moment as well.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous2/12/13 9:33 am

    I would like to know why the EU hasn't looked at budgets/spending in those countries where mass migration has occured.

    I believe that a massive re-balancing of EU spending is due to compensate those countries that are receiving the most migrants from within the EU to help them offset the cost of providing services, benefits and other core infrastructure.

    For the UK, in pure cost terms, the cost of EU membership is considerably higher than the GB20Bn p.a. touted around.

    My estimate is double that.

    Given our current debt levels of c. GBP1.2Trn and the drop in living standards I just do not want to fund this out my taxes.

    The EU is a nasty, undemocratic and biased organisation.

    SC

    ReplyDelete
  7. immigration reform3/12/13 11:32 am

    Hi
    Hi, what a great web blog. I usually spend hours on the net reading blogs on various subjects. And, I really would like to praise you for writing such a fabulous article

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous3/12/13 10:04 pm

    Why is anyone surprised that total insanity has now replaced any logic regarding free movement. It was a certain outcome the day the Nice Treaty came into force 1st May 2004. No Prime Minister present or future disgracefully, is unable to give any assurance's to the people of this country about controlling immigration so long as UK is signed into EU free movement. Why is that simple fact not understood by the political elite?

    Colin Moran

    ReplyDelete
  9. Tobias L. Thaler10/12/13 4:02 pm

    http://blogs.ft.com/brusselsblog/2013/12/50072/ an interesting british position on this one...

    ReplyDelete