The economic case for mass migration has never looked so weak

Earlier this month, Professor David Miles from Imperial College Business School intervened in the UK’s most contentious issue – immigration. In an essay published by the Common Good Foundation, Miles argued that ‘there are serious problems with the idea that [immigration-driven] faster population growth can consistently alleviate fiscal problems’. He urged the government to prioritise getting British people into work, rather than relying on migrants to solve the nation’s economic problems. 

For a long time, the conventional economic wisdom was the opposite – that immigration benefitted the economy. This argument would be routinely trotted out to justify denouncing anyone who questioned immigration levels as, at least, idiotic, probably ‘far right’ and certainly not worth debating.

Miles’s essay shows that the establishment is changing its views on immigration, thanks in large part to popular pressure. For far too long, successive governments have reduced what should be publicly debated political decisions – on the public finances, on infrastructure projects, on immigration and so much more – to technical economic questions. An honest public debate on immigration that breaks away from simplistic economic pros and cons is certainly long overdue. 

Read the full article here.

Labour has no answers to Britain’s economic slump

The government’s long-awaited industrial strategy is a weak rehash of familiar, failed ideas.

After Labour’s first year of chaos and U-turns, the prime minister Keir Starmer managed to keep a straight face when claiming this 10-year industrial strategy provided ‘stability’ and ‘certainty’ for business. Though if any business leaders thought the document offered ‘certainty’ even about taxation levels just four months’ hence in the autumn Budget, they would have been disappointed.

This stereotypical industrial policy announcement prompts three questions. Why did it take them so long to draw up something so standard? Second, why is there such a gap between the widely-perceived scale of our economic problems and this hackneyed set of policies? And, third, more perplexing, why is there still so much support across the political spectrum for the idea of an ‘industrial strategy’, when all these blueprints for change have been so ineffective in shaking Britain out of its economic stupor? 

For answers to these questions, read the full article here.