The Government’s claim that their new Points Based system will result in lower levels of immigration is pure spin. The scheme has no limits and, in fact, will probably result in even higher levels of immigration.

It is so complex and bureaucratic, with potentially 26,000 job titles, that it is highly likely to lead to chaos and confusion, increasing the scope for abuse, says a report from think tank Migrationwatch which has analysed the system in detail.

‘Piece by piece the Government’s case for the highest levels of immigration in our history has been dismantled, most recently by the House of Lords Economic Committee.   Yet, once again, the government have ducked the issue of limits to the numbers admitted,’ said Sir Andrew Green, Migrationwatch chairman…….. 

‘The government are now promising to listen. They would do well to listen to the 75% of the public who wish to see a substantial reduction in immigration – certainly not an open ended conveyor belt adding still further to the numbers we already have from Eastern Europe.   The bottom line is that a Points Based System without a limit is worse than pointless’, he added.

See the full press release

In its edition of 6 April The Observer published an article that, in passing, strongly implied that Migrationwatch had been scaremongering over the health risks of immigration.
 
In accordance with the guidelines of the Press Complaints Commission, we sought a fair opportunity to reply to this misleading and inaccurate material. As a result, the following letter was published in their edition of 13 April:

No TB catastrophe

An Observer article last week by David Rose alleged that Migrationwatch had foretold a 'catastrophe' from TB among immigrants to Britain. We have said nothing of the kind. We have simply called for testing of medical staff recruited to Britain from countries that have a very high incidence of communicable diseases.

Commenting, the Chairman of Migrationwatch said, "To give the newspaper its due, a corrective letter was agreed as soon as the matter was drawn to the attention of the Editor." 

Sir Andrew Green – Yet Another Apology from Another Newspaper

April 2, 2008

Last month The Independent published an apology and have agreed to pay costs and damages in respect of potentially libellous allegations against the Chairman of Migrationwatch.

Commenting, Sir Andrew Green said "This is now the second such case in recent months. I hope that the press will learn the lesson and recognise the need for temperate language on all sides of the immigration debate."

The First Apology

The government has recently suffered a number of setbacks in asylum and immigration cases in the High Court and Court of Appeal.

Two cases are summarised in Briefing Paper 8.25: The Libyan case and the Abu Qatada case.

About the author
Dr Jeroen Doomernik is researcher and programme manager at the Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies (IMES) and lecturer in political science at the University of Amsterdam. He holds an MA in social anthropology and a PhD in human geography.

Introduction
1.  In contrast to the United Kingdom, Dutch migration control mechanisms are not limited to the nation’s borders. Instead, the country has a long history of administrative measures by which to regulate entry and residence of foreign nationals. Indeed, with progressive integration into the European Union the significance of borders and their controls has decreased to the extent that it is now Schengen partners who control their territory’s borders on behalf of the Dutch government. What is left in terms of old-fashioned border control is now concentrated in the seaports (notably Rotterdam) and the national airport (Amsterdam Schiphol) which are gates of entry to Dutch territory and, of course, the Schengen area at large. Administrative controls within the Dutch state meanwhile have been intensified………..

Conclusion

43.  The Netherlands has clearly lost some attraction to newcomers as we can read from the migration statistics, which currently show a negative net migration rate. It is difficult to assess this. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it is the better skilled who leave the country and the poorer skilled who still seek to settle in the Netherlands. Whether this is related to migration rules, hostility towards migration in general and Muslims in particular, the economic cycle, or rising cost of living, we do not know.

44.  Lastly, what has become evident from this short excursion through Dutch restrictive migration measures is that removal is the hardest element of control. Migrants who end up working in the country, and even more so those who have sought asylum, are difficult to expel if they fail to cooperate. Detention, a costly instrument, has some effect but a majority of detainees sooner or later return to the streets…….

read the full report