No ranting article from me this time, just something I feel that people should be aware of. Here is a political tid-bit to make of what you will. I raise this without comment:
The Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) has published its March 2016 report on ‘Economic and fiscal outlook’. An interesting part of this report noted that hitting the governments targets for cutting immigration would mean higher taxes or deeper spending cuts. This was presented in a hypothetical ‘low immigration scenario’. According to the OBR report cutting inward migration would create additional fiscal pressures that would blow George Osborne’s deficit reduction drive off course:
…under the ‘low migration’ scenario, the effects described in the ‘high migration’ scenario would operate in reverse, with the tax-to-GDP ratio slightly lower and spending-to-GDP ratio slightly higher. The fiscal mandate would be met by a margin £4½ billion smaller in 2019-20 and £6 billion smaller in 2020-21. Debt interest spending would be around 0.8 per cent higher by 2020-21 (1.6 per cent higher in per capita terms) – Office of Budget Responsibility, Economic And Fiscal Outlook, March 2016, Cm 9212 p.207
This would support the economic theory that migration has a positive effect on the UKs economy; as detailed in a report from November 2015 by UCL Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration (CReAM).
European immigrants who arrived in the UK since 2000 have contributed more than £20bn to UK public finances between 2001 and 2011. Moreover, they have endowed the country with productive human capital that would have cost the UK £6.8bn in spending on education. Over the period from 2001 to 2011, European immigrants from the EU-15 countries contributed 64% more in taxes than they received in benefits. Immigrants from the Central and East European ‘accession’ countries (the ‘A10’) contributed 12% more than they received. – Professor Christian Dustmann and Dr Tommaso Frattini
The OBR report asserts the contribution of migrants to the economy is such that if the target was somehow hit, taxes would have to go up to compensate and deficit targets could be missed.
The OBR is simply pointing out the obvious: since immigrants more than pay for themselves over time, a substantial reduction in immigration will mean either higher taxes or worse public services for the rest of us … Reduced immigration would come at a significant economic and fiscal cost – Jonathan Portes, senior fellow at the National Institute for Economic and Social Research (NIESR)
So, whether you are pro or anti Brexit (and in the case of UKIP types against that oh so sensitive topic of immigration) look at the report, and form your own conclusions. Just a tid-bit I wanted to make people aware of, given the up-coming referendum of Britain’s membership of the European Union.
By Frederick Antonio Gallucci | International Law LLM | @gibblegbble