Dreschsler insists government stops ‘pointing the gun’ at businesses over migration; IoD calls for review into immigration’s impact on UK economy
Prime minister Theresa May’s plan to limit the number of EU nationals in the UK labour market has come under fire from two high-profile industry bodies, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) and the Institute of Directors (IoD).
CBI director Paul Drechsler likened home secretary Amber Rudd’s proposals for employers to publish the number of foreign workers in their workforce to “putting armbands” on migrant employees to emphasise that they are different.
The government needs to “stop pointing the gun” at businesses over high levels of immigration, he said: “Of the 300,000-plus immigrants [who came to the UK this year], what percentage work directly or indirectly for the government? Forty, fifty per cent?” he said.
“A drastic reduction in immigration would hurt the UK economy. We need an honest debate in this country about the contribution of immigration to our growth; we need people to come here from outside [the UK]. We could [be forced to] accept a decline in the UK economy over the next 10 years. We cannot meet our growth ambition without immigration,” added Drechsler.
Meanwhile, the IoD has proposed that the government seeks to provide immediate certainty of the future rights of EU immigrants currently in the UK. It is also demanding better training for British workers to meet employers’ requirements, as well as more rigorous collection of migration data and stronger enforcement against abuse of the immigration system.
Seamus Nevin, head of employment and skills at the IoD, said the leave decision reflected a “vote of no confidence” in the government’s ability to manage immigration. He said: “Dissatisfaction with policymakers was exacerbated by the government under-delivering on a promise to bring the number of migrants down to ‘tens of thousands’. The persistence with this [100,000] target is hard to understand, and we beg the home secretary to think again.”
May has been clear that immigration reform would be a critical part of the government's response to the Brexit vote. The 100,000 target was missed during the last parliament, as net migration levels exceeded 330,000 last year – up 20,000 on 2014.
Rachel Suff, employment adviser at CIPD, said the government's proposals have left many questions and issues unanswered: “How are we defining ‘foreign’ when it comes to reporting the data? Who would be compiling that information in organisations? How would they collect it, and how would it be used?
“With diversity and equality monitoring, individuals are not legally required to supply details of their personal characteristics such as nationality and most employers don't currently know how many European Economic Area nationals they employ, for example, because they don’t ask at the point of recruitment for fear of discrimination – instead just asking if candidates have a legal right to work in the UK. If the government is determined to pursue this agenda, then they need to outline how these plans would practically work.”
Meanwhile, migrant workers and their supporters are planning a day of action to highlight their contribution to the UK economy. One Day Without Us will include a labour boycott, and its organiser, Matt Carr, said the trigger for the event on 20 February 2017 was profound concern about worsening attitudes to migrants in the UK since the referendum vote.