Here is the report from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research on the potential impacts on the UK of future migration from Bulgaria and Romania.
I won’t attempt to summarise it, except to say this. Nigel Farage has said:
The opening of the doors to 29 million Romanians and Bulgarians is going to become a huge issue.
In contrast, Nigel Morris in the Independent summarises the report as follows:
(The report) played down predictions that huge numbers will opt for a new life in Britain, suggesting they are more likely to head for Spain, Italy or Germany….NIESR concluded that migration from the two countries was “unlikely to have a significant impact”. It said: “Economic migrants, in particular, are generally young and healthy and as such do not make major demands on health services.”
It also quoted studies which found people from eastern European countries such as Poland were “less likely to claim benefits than other migrant groups”.
The report said newcomers’ families could potentially add to pressure on primary school places, although it pointed out that evidence suggested the presence of migrant children did not affect the performance of schools.
It added: “A widespread public perception persists that migrants pose a disproportionate burden in the social housing market in particular, yet evidence to date does not substantiate this claim.”
One has to question why Nigel Farage chooses always to quote the full population of the two countries involved. Is there not sufficient scope for him to make a sensible point while not using such a scary figure?
Why does he bang the drum on this issue so loudly, when it is obvious that we are not warm enough and we have the wrong type of language to be attractive to Bulagrians and Romanians above Italy and Spain?