4 Regular migration flows
Recent experiences of enlargement
89. EU membership entails the "four freedoms"
of the single market: the free movement of goods, services, capital
and people. However, in the case of enlargements since 2004, Member
States have been given the option of imposing temporary restrictions
on the free movement of workers from the acceding countries for
up to seven years. Most EU countries applied transitional arrangements
for the so-called A8 countries[151]
from 2004, with the exception of Ireland, Sweden and the UK, although
all three restricted the access that East European workers would
have to their social security. The UK also required them to register
with the Worker Registration Scheme until they could demonstrate
that had completed 12 months of employment with no more than 30
days' break.
90. Following the accession of the A8 countries to
the EU in 2004, a significantly higher number of A8 nationals
migrated to the UK than was expected by the UK Government. In
2003, the Home Office had estimated that net inflows of A8 nationals
would range between 5,000 and 13,000 annually until 2010. It assumed
that large numbers would head for Germany as per traditional migration
patterns, and argued that even if Germany placed restrictions
on entry, any diversion to the UK would be small.[152]
91. In fact, there were around 200,000 annual registrations
on the UK's Worker Registration Scheme between 2004 and 2007,
excluding the self-employed and those who required to register
but did not (estimated to stand at between a quarter and a third
of A8 migrants). The number of successful applicants to the Worker
Registration Scheme declined after 2007 to 108,920 in 2009, and
the think tank the Institute for Public Policy Reform (IPPR) suggested
that around half of A8 migrants who had arrived since May 2004
had left the UK by the end of 2007.[153]
However, immigration control statistics from the Home Office published
earlier this year show a small increase again in 2010 to 116,760.[154]
As of May 2011, EU Member States may no longer apply transitional
arrangements for the A8 under the terms of the Treaty of Accession.
92. Analysis by the Institute for Public Policy Reform
identified the following reasons why so many more A8 nationals
came to the UK than predicted:
- The widespread restrictions
imposed by other EU Member States;
- The predictions were based on permanent migration
flows, whereas in fact much of the A8 migration has been temporary;
- Around 30-40% of those who registered to work
in the UK after accession were already working in the UK (often
illegally); and
- The strength of the UK economy at the time.[155]
93. Earlier experiences of enlargement tell a different
story, however. Similar concerns were expressed in relation to
expected labour migration from Spain and Portugal (which acceded
in 1986) owing to factors such as the high income differentials
and the high unemployment and propensity to migrate in these Southern
European countries, together with the geographical proximity and
the long tradition of emigration towards North-western Europe;
transitional arrangements were imposed as a result. In 1991, the
last year of its transition period, the number of Spanish citizens
living in the rest of the European Community was around 474,000,
an actual reduction from the figure of 495,000 at the time of
Spanish accession. By 1997, the stock had decreased slightly further
to around 470,000. The stock of Portuguese citizens in the rest
of the European Community at the time of its accession was around
825,000. In 1991, the last year of the transition period, it was
around 855,000, and in 1997 it was around 910,000, equivalent
to an annual average of around 7,700 immigrants over a period
of 11 years. These numbers suggest that emigration from the Southern
accession countries was negligible, even after the end of their
transition periods.[156]
It may be that a history of regimes which restricted emigration
in the A8 countries may have been a key factor in encouraging
subsequent high emigration rates.
94. In response to the high levels of immigration
from the A8 countries, the UK Government imposed restrictive transitional
arrangements on nationals from Romania and Bulgaria after these
states acceded to the EU in 2007. Access for low-skilled workers
is quota-limited and currently restricted to schemes for the agricultural
sector. Once Romanian and Bulgarian nationals have been working
legally in the UK for 12 months without a break, however, they
have full rights of movement. In total:
- 8,060 Seasonal Agricultural
Workers work cards were issued to Romanian and Bulgarian nationals
in 2007, 16,460 in 2008, 20,180 in 2009 and 17,150 in 2010;
- 3,795 accession worker cards (applicable for
those undertaking a limited number of professions, or those who
have obtained a work permit via their employer) were approved
in 2007, 2,775 in 2008, 2,095 in 2009 and 2,250 in 2010; and
- 29,745 applications for registration certificates
(for self-employed workers, family members, highly skilled workers)
were approved in 2007, 19,565 in 2008, 21,480 in 2009 and 19,295
in 2010.[157]
A8 and Romanian and Bulgarian migrants have access
to child benefits and tax credits as soon as they start working
(although they lose this entitlement if they become unemployed
within the first 12 months) and can claim income-related benefits
after having been in employment for one year.[158]
Current levels of migration from
Turkey to the EU
95. There are 2.481 million Turkish passport holders
in the EU, 146,000 of whom are refugees.[159]
In terms of their destination, Dr Düvell told us that:
The overwhelming majority of all the Turks in the
EU live in Germany; significant numbers in Switzerland, Austria
and the Netherlands, also in France. The UK is one of the least
popular destinations among Turkish migrants. Half of the Turkish
migrants in the UK originate from Cyprus, so there is a colonial
Cypriot link. Some of them have mixed marriages, Greek-Turkish,
so it is very difficult. Half of the people in the UK you talk
about are actually the Cypriots.[160]
96. According to the Home Office, there are approximately
150,000 Turkish nationals in the UK at present, of a total of
about 500,000 people of Turkish origin in the UK.[161]
Of the 178,000 Turkish nationals given leave to enter the UK in
2009, some 66,300 were returnees after temporary absence abroad,
64,700 were visitors, 28,300 were business visitors, 9,755 were
tier 4 students plus dependents, 1,145 came for employment and
945 for family purposes.[162]
Turkish asylum applications dropped from 3,990 in 2000 to 185
in 2009. In 2009, 985 enforcement actions (removals and voluntary
returns) were initiated, 40% of which related to asylum cases.[163]
Dr Düvell said:
If we look at the current level of migration in particular
from Turkey to the UK, student migration, family reunification,
it is very, very low. I just can't see much of a network effect,
which seems plausible to assume; but it doesn't seem to happen
so far.[164]
97. According to Dr Düvell, long-term emigration
from Turkey to the European Union has dropped "significantly"
to "probably below 50,000 every year".[165]
Furthermore, there has been negative migration from Germany to
Turkey over the past four years in the region of 7,000 or 8,000
per year. This is probably linked to the economic downturn in
Europe, but Dr Düvell was "confident" that the
trend was set to continue, given the opportunities in the Turkish
labour market for both regular and irregular migrants, in particular
for the highly skilled.[166]
Transitional arrangements for
Turkey?
98. The European Commission's Recommendation on
Turkey's progress towards accession, published in October
2004, as well as the Negotiating Framework of 2005, mentioned
the possibility of applying "long transition periods"
and "permanent safeguard clauses" to Turkish nationals
to avoid disturbance in the EU labour market.[167]
The UK Government supports such measures in principle; the Home
Office told us:
Although Turkey's negotiations have not yet reached
this stage, Her Majesty's Government has made a commitment to
apply effective transitional controls as a matter of course for
all new Member States.
As accession negotiations with Turkey progress, it
will be necessary to assess the potential for migration between
Turkey and EU Member States to inform the consideration of what
type of transitional controls will be appropriate. However, it
would be premature to attempt to assess the impact of opening
EU labour markets before negotiations on the subject have started,
especially as the economic conditions in the EU and Turkey may
change in the future.[168]
99. When asked about the lessons that had been learnt
from previous enlargements, the Minister for Immigration told
us:
The key lesson is that we should impose the transitional
controls that are allowed in the accession treaties. That was
the huge mistake in 2004 when the A8 countries came in and it
was a mistake that was compounded by the fact that very few other
countries made that mistake ... we have made it clear that under
any future accession treaty we will apply the transitional controls
that will be allowed.[169]
He considered that the transitional controls applied
to Romania and Bulgaria have been "by and large pretty effective"
and therefore the Government would want "at least [to] replicate
that" for future accessions.[170]
100. It is very difficult to estimate the likely
scale of migration from Turkey, should it accede, particularly
given that accession is unlikely to happen for many years. According
to Dr Düvell:
It is not enough to look at statistics and figures.
We have to go to the sending country, conduct large-scale surveys
about people's aspirations, wishes, perceptions, and look at it
from the sending country perspective as well and that would take,
research-wise, two to three years in order to generate meaningful
results. I am not aware that we have done that with the accession
countries.[171]
An impact study carried out by the European Commission
in 2004 reported that forecasts of long-term immigration from
Turkey to the then-15 countries of the EU by 2025-30 (based largely
on expected income differences) ranged between 0.5 and 4.4 million.[172]
The Centre for European Policy Studies published a study later
in 2004, which investigated these various forecasts and placed
the figure for net migration at between 1 and 2.1 million between
2004 and 2030, "foreseeing a successful accession period
with high growth and free labour mobility starting 2015."[173]
101. When asked for his assessment on the likely
numbers of Turkish nationals who would take advantage of free
movement following accession to the EU, the UK Minister for Immigration
stated that:
It would be impossible to make any kind of realistic
assessment at the moment because we don't know any of the basic
facts. We don't know what the accession treaty would allow in
terms of a transitional period. We don't know where, if it happened,
Turks would prefer to gothey have obviously got a greater
historic relationship with Germany than with this countryand
perhaps most counter-intuitively for a British audience, if you
like, you have to look at the way the Turkish economy is going
... I have seen suggestions that the Turkish economy will be growing
faster than the Indian economy ... Given all the uncertainties,
particularly about the length of time it might take before a single
Turk came into Europe under free movement, it really is impossible
to put any sensible number on it at the moment.[174]
102. Dr Düvell was hesitant about giving a figure,
for similar reasons, but eventually estimated an annual figure
for out migration of 60,000-70,000. This estimate was made on
the basis that:
- Emigration from Turkey to Europe,
including clandestine migration, has dropped "significantly"
to below 50,000 every year;
- Despite an underperforming labour market, there
is significant internal migration from the east of Turkey where
population is growing to the western part where the population
is ageing and most of these migrants are absorbed by the labour
market, making it unlikely they would need to seek work elsewhere;
and
- There would be a likely increase in the number
of young people and students travelling to the EU, which would
therefore increase the current figure of 50,000.
He emphasised that this figure only accounted for
out migration, not taking into account return migration and predicted
that people of the following nationalities would be likely to
leave the European Union to go to Turkey: Moldovans, Bulgarians,
Romanians, Syrians, Iranians, nationals from all the northern
Mediterranean coastal countries, Morocco and Algeria.[175]
103. In Dr Düvell's opinion, the Turkish situation
was not comparable with that of the A8 countries:
I always found these Polish earlier estimates ridiculously
low, to be honest, because there was the migration industry, there
was the migration culture, there was the urge of the young generation
of Poles to leave the country and go somewhere else, and terribly
underestimated was the fact that only three countries opened up
for A8 migration: UK, Sweden and Ireland.
He considered that the number of migrants coming
to the UK would significantly depend on the policies and decisions
made by the other Member States, as has previously been the case.[176]
104. Migration Watch, on the other hand, queried
Dr Düvell's estimates on the basis of:
- The "large gap in living
standards" between Turkey and the UK, which would make the
UK an attractive destination (as in the case of Poland, the UK
is roughly 2.5 times as wealthy as Turkey);
- The size and youth of the Turkish population,
currently 76 million and projected to increase to 97.4 million
in 2050, some 12 million of whom will be in the age group 15-24;
- The existing Turkish community present in the
UK; and
- The "pull factor" of benefits.
Migration Watch cautioned that the UK Government
cannot:
assume that economic growth in Turkey, even it is
occurs, will be such as to keep Turkish workers at home. We could
well find a situation in which young Turks migrated to Europe
for wages several times higher than are available in Turkey, while
workers from neighbouring countries replace them in their previous
occupations. Again, we are seeing this with Ukrainians moving
into Poland to replace some of those who have gone to Western
Europe.[177]
105. It
is very difficult to estimate the number of Turkish nationals
who would be likely to take advantage of free movement within
the EU, particularly given that the date of Turkish accession
is unclear; we heard very different views accordingly. Available
forecasts have put the figure at anywhere between 0.5 and 4.4
million arrivals between the date of accession and 2030. The scale
of migration will depend upon a combination of complex factors,
including the relative economic conditions in EU Member States
and in Turkey at the time of accession, and the terms of the accession
treaty and how these are applied throughout the Union. The picture
is complicated by conflicting precedents from previous comparable
enlargements: increased migration from Spain and Portugal was
negligible following their accession in 1986, but at least 200,000
migrants arrived each year in the UK alone following the accession
of the A8 countries between 2004 and 2007, despite official predictions
of an annual flow of between 5,000 and 13,000.
106. We accept
that both legal and clandestine migration from Turkey to the EU
have declined in recent years to a combined annual figure of below
50,000, and that there is also evidence of negative migration
from the EU to Turkey, particularly from Germany. However, it
is also the case that population trends and the gap in living
standards could make easier migration to the EU an attractive
option for Turkish nationals. In terms of destinations within
the EU, it is perhaps likely that Turks would favour Germany,
Austria, the Netherlands and France, who have the largest Turkish
communities in the Union, but previous experience has shown that
such assumptions may prove ill-founded.
107. All of
which leads us to be cautious about the prospect of allowing Turkish
citizens full freedom of movement. We note the success of transitional
arrangements in controlling levels of migration to many EU countries,
in the case of the A8 Member States; and to the UK, in the case
of Bulgarian and Romanian nationals following their accession
in 2007. We therefore welcome and fully support the Government's
commitment to applying "effective transitional controls as
a matter of course" for all new Member States. While we appreciate
that a number of unknown factors make this analysis difficult,
and that the Home Office is no doubt wary of attracting criticism
for inaccurate estimates in the future, we are concerned that
no impact analysis of Turkish accession for future migration trends
has yet been carried out. Accordingly, we recommend that the Home
Office undertakes this piece of work now and updates it as circumstances
change.
151 The Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania,
Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. Back
152
Home Office, The Impact of EU Enlargement on Migration Flows,
Online Report 25/03, 2003 Back
153
IPPR, Floodgates or Turnstiles? Post-EU enlargement migration
flows to (and from) the UK, April 2008, p 18; Home Office,
Control of Immigration: Quarterly Statistical Summary, February
2011, p 29 Back
154
Home Office, Control over Immigration: Quarterly Statistics
Summary, United Kingdom, October-December 2010,February
2011, p 33 Back
155
IPPR, Floodgates or Turnstiles? Post-EU enlargement migration
flows to (and from) the UK, April 2008, p 16 Back
156
Home Office, The impact of EU enlargement on migration flows,
Online Report 25/03, 2003 Back
157
Home Office, Control over Immigration: Quarterly Statistical
Summary, February 2011, p 34. Initially, Romanian and Bulgarian
workers could also work in the food processing sector. Back
158
IPPR, Floodgates or Turnstiles? Post-EU enlargement migration
flows to (and from) the UK, April 2008 Back
159
Ev 43 [Dr Düvell] Back
160
Q 55 Back
161
Ev 34 Back
162
Home Office data, cited in Ev 43 [Dr Düvell] Back
163
Ibid Back
164
Q 54 Back
165
Q 40 Back
166
Qq 45-6, 75 Back
167
European Commission, Negotiating Framework, October 2005;
Recommendation of the European Commission on Turkey's progress
towards accession, October 2004 Back
168
Ev 34-5 Back
169
Q 117 Back
170
Q 120 Back
171
Q 74 Back
172
European Commission, Issues Arising from Turkey's Membership
Perspective, 2004 Back
173
Centre for European Policy Studies, Growth and Immigration
Scenarios for Turkey and the EU, December 2004 Back
174
Q 119 Back
175
Qq 40-43; 76 Back
176
Q 73 Back
177
Ev 36-7 Back
|