Migrants are a god-send

If there ever was a contest to write the most cliché-packed article, Julia Hartley-Brewer’s recent text  (What europhiles miss about Britain’s job miracles, 12th November) on employment statistics and immigration would surely be among the front runners. Commenting on the good news that unemployment is down to 5.3% and employment is at record high, the author tries to dampen the mood by pointing out that among those who recently took up employment in Britain were some Eastern Europeans.

In a way, it is understandable. As an emerging community the Eastern Europeans still have very few representatives in the establishment institutions like the media, the think tanks, government and non-government organisations who would be willing to point out the fact that the statistics used by Hartley-Brewer were highly selective. Also, as a group which is predominantly white and Christian, the Eastern Europeans seem to be a God-send for the anti-immigration camp. It is as if finally there was a group which could be criticised without the fear of being accused of racism or xenophobia.

Julia Hartley Brewer focuses on the fact that out of 325,000 Europeans who found employment in Britain in the last year, half were from Eastern Europe, apparently blocking the 430,000 young Britons from taking on jobs. What the author doesn’t mention was that in the year ending in March 2015, Eastern Europeans, or EU8 nationals, as is the phrase used in the official statistics, were only the fourth biggest group (81,000) arriving at these shores (fifth if we include returning British nationals) after “Others” (156,000), “old” European Union (128,000) and new Commonwealth (90,000). The question is, do these other groups not “take jobs” from young Britons? Or, if they do, is there a reason why they were not worthy of a mention in the article?

Another, and probably even more important, issue is the simplistic assumption that a job taken by one person inevitably means that there is one fewer job to take for everybody else. Readers of CapX are probably well acquainted with the lump of labour fallacy, but putting the economic theory aside, there are many practical reasons why employers would choose one person over another. And, trust me, speaking English as a foreign language doesn’t usually make you a favourite. The characteristics that employers often cite among the most desirable are flexibility, time management, teamwork, verbal and written communication, initiative and numeracy. It is only in the imagined world of the anti-immigration camp that the rate of pay is the main factor of employability.

Surely by making decisions on hiring, regardless of someone’s country of birth, employers are making a choice that is best for their company and their customers. Trying to artificially limit the pool of workers would seriously affect productivity and the ability of companies to deliver for the rest of us, i.e. the customers.
Should more be done to increase the chances of employment for the 1.75m Britons who are reported to be out of work? Of course. Fortunately, the Government is delivering the changes in education, welfare system and taxation that create jobs, apprenticeships, increase the skills of young people and ensure that work always pays more than the life on welfare. And with the proposed changes to the EU migrants’ access to in-work benefits, it will ensure that nobody is subsidised by the taxpayer to move here from abroad in search of employment.

But, as with all long-term changes, they take time to bring lasting and visible effects. Whining about the Eastern Europeans will do little to speed them up.

Patryk Malinski, Vice-Chairman of Conservative Friends of Poland, Poland     |    @pmalinski83

On Throwing money at Africa won’t solve the migrant crisis, 16th November. J H-B for President of the EU – at a stroke she’d increase the vim, vigour, intellect and darned common sense of all the European Institutions manyfold. They live in a secluded cosseted world of their own without a tad of nous.

John Andrews, London, UK

Size isn't everything

Sir, Nile Gardener’s article on the collapse of German power (The end of German power in Europe – 18th November), if it ever really existed, is predicated on population extrapolations. Britain and France’s populations may be soaring above Germany’s in the future but if these increases are from immigration with lower productivity per head and the Balkanisation of our society, then we could well be smaller economically and politically than today. It should be remembered that the economy of Africa, with a population of 1.1 billion is still smaller than that of all but the smallest European states. And that historically the usual outcome of an explosive growth in population without concomitant improvements in economic output is a war. That applies to Europe just as much as to Africa and the Middle East. War, according to the French President, has already returned to France. If it continues to escalate, nobody will be interested in how big Germany is compared with Britain

George Bathurst, Windsor, UK

Cuckoo Corbyn

The purpose of a political party is to win power. There is a balance to be struck between principle – the individual’s personal beliefs – and the views of the voters and the demands of events. Jeremy Corbyn has spent his political career as a cuckoo in Labour’s nest. Suddenly, he is the leader. Is it possible that faced with the choice of ditching principles, or changing his stance, in a probably doomed attempt, to become electable he has decided that he would rather not change, even if it means taking his party down with him? Or is it possible that his election has totally deluded him into thinking that he represents the views of the people and will win; after all, despite all the evidence, Michael Foot thought that he would win an election

Alan Hawkes, Saffron Walden, UK

Mourning the loss of life in Paris

Some commentators describe this latest act of terror in the city of Paris as a “tragedy”. That description represents a mis-use of a word which is either related to a natural catastrophe or has an insinuation that it was somehow the outcome of an event between two parties. It is nothing of the sort, and should be described for what it is- pure evil

John G Bullard, London, UK