8.1 A number of clear messages emerge from this study. Firstly, host countries
gain from migration. It is possible to debate the size of these gains, but the
important point for British debates is that immigration does not have a
negative impact: overall levels of employment and wages are slightly higher as
a result of immigration, and migrant workers pay more in taxes than the value
of the public services they receive. When studied at the level of the country as a
whole, the old accusations of the extreme right, that immigrants take native
workers jobs or are a drain on the welfare state, are as false as they have ever
been.
8.3 Thirdly, the impact on migrant workers themselves is generally positive,
but individuals can face significant risks of exploitation and social exclusion,
even though they may have higher incomes than they would have had if they
had not migrated.
8.4 This does not mean that it is impossible for immigration to be associated
with problems, and a positive policy on immigration will only win support if
these problems are addressed too. Firstly, we have good reason to believe that
local problems in delivering public services can arise when authorities fails to
anticipate the arrival of significant numbers of migrant workers and their
families. This problem is caused by poor planning, not immigration, but failure
here is very likely to lead to a reaction against immigration, rather than calls
for better public services. Unions would encourage the Government to work
towards more accurate local-level predictions of the numbers of migrant
workers and dependents and the capacity to respond rapidly to changes.
8.9 Native workers and their families can gain a great deal from the increased
output and net fiscal contribution migrants bring to the table. But there are
potential losers as well as winners, and the first beneficiary of Britains
migration dividend should be an improved social wage.