Politicians who recognise that Cameron is wrong on immigration must have the conviction to say so

On Tuesday, David Cameron said Britain would be a “better, stronger country” with fewer migrants. So, if you’re a migrant, sorry about that. I guess it’s off to the ferry terminal for you (that includes you too, Dad).

I’m actually a little confused as to the acceptable discourse around migration. Apparently it’s totally ok, even welcome, for the Prime Minister to blithely observe that fewer migrants would be good for the country. But when Mark Reckless says UKIP would ask EU migrants to live elsewhere, outrage is the result. How exactly are we supposed to have fewer migrants without asking anyone to leave?

Inconsistencies like these happen when politicians confect a crisis that doesn’t really exist. David Cameron can whip people up into a frenzy over immigration levels, but won’t take any responsibility for the ugly consequences of doing so – like his former MP feeling totally at liberty to suggest people who have every right to be here should be deported.

In any event, it is economically illiterate to suggest, as the Prime Minister has, that reducing migration from the “hundreds of thousands to the tens of thousands” would be beneficial. According to research collated by Class, GDP would actually be 11% lower by 2060 as a result of such a reduction. Income tax would have to increase by 2.2% to compensate for the shortfall. That’s partly because migrants are, on average, younger than the total population (pensioners don’t tend to migrate), so they ease the problem of our ageing population. By paying taxes, migrants help to fund pensions for the rest of us. In fact, migrants made a net contribution of £25 billion to public finances between 2001-2011.

Cameron also likes to tout the idea that migrants are only here to claim benefits. On Tuesday he said, “First of all they won’t be able to claim unemployment benefit. Second of all if they are still here after six months without a job they have to go home.” Leaving aside the somewhat racist connotations of the phrase “they have to go home,” the Prime Minister is wrong about to imply there is a problem with migrants coming to Britain to claim benefits.  The UK is the only EU country to have a lower unemployment rate for migrants (7.5%) than nationals (7.9%). Moreover, amongst those migrants who are unemployed, an even lower proportion (1%) actually claim unemployment benefits compared to UK nationals (4%).

But then, the outrage over immigration is – as I said – confected. Ministers stoke tensions with myths that are then fashioned into histrionic news stories. Perhaps this is the best example of “the political class and their friends in the media” (to coin a Farage-ism) working together to dupe the electorate. Politicians can’t pretend that portraying migrants as workshy con artists doesn’t have any knock-on effects; from people of colour getting heckled in the street, to innocent people being locked up like criminals in detention centres, or being left to drown in the ocean.

Politicians, of all stripes, who recognise that Cameron’s assertions over immigration are wrong must have the conviction to say so. The ultimate effect of portraying migrants as untrustworthy is to dehumanise them – and once that happens, any behaviour towards them becomes permissible. And, judging by some of the recent stories that have emerged from Serco-run detention centres, perhaps we are already some way down that road.

Ellie O’Hagan is the Media and Communications Officer at Class