Examination of Witnesses (Questions 80-83)
MR PHIL
WOOLAS MP, MS
EMMA CHURCHILL,
MR NIGEL
FARMINER AND
MR RAGNAR
CLIFFORD
11 MARCH 2009
Q80 Kelvin Hopkins: We have been
through an era of an extremely liberal view about these matters
when we got rid of border controls and now we are reinstating
border controls, which I strongly support and I hope that many
others would too. Is that likely to happen elsewhere, especially
given those countries with land borders where it might be more
difficult?
Mr Woolas: Schengen changes the
colour of the spectacle through which most EMS states look at
the situation. I think the reaction to a number of court judgments
and to the reality of global movement and in other related areas,
such as Customs and smuggling, is that there is a general move
across the European Union towards that policy of more border controls.
The most important development has been the European Union Africa
migrancy pact which essentially recognises that, if you look at
EC policy on migration, the primary purpose of EC policy is the
development of the economies of the countries of origin. Ultimately,
to paraphrase one of my colleagues, you can put as much barbed
wire up as you like but you have to solve the problem at cause.
Q81 Mr Laxton: Sticking with the
Posting of Workers Directive, about two or three months ago the
Commission established a committee of experts to have a look at
the Posting of Workers Directive. We are required to take up two
seats on that committee. Have you any views on the work of that
committee or what the view of government should be? A personal
view maybe, if it is not directly within your brief?
Mr Woolas: We do not have a view
within the Home Office. I do not have a developed view personally
on the issue. The way in which this is going is that the expansion
of the European Union is bringing out the differences. Crudely
put, Jacques Delors' speech in 1988 was for a European Union that
was much smaller. Moving together with 27 is a different kettle
of fish to moving together with what were then 12.
Q82 Chairman: Thank you very much
for coming along. Can I just ask you to sum up? You seem to be
saying that you fully support the analysis of the paper on the
impact of free movement of workers in the context of EU enlargement;
that it has had only a marginal impact on employment prospects
for those in the countries to which people have migrated. You
seem to also say that it was a beneficial process in the UK. Do
you think that will continue in the present economic climate?
Mr Woolas: I think that the overall
impact is beneficial. One would have to look at regional and local
impacts. You could not in all cases say that there was value added
with certainty. I am not suggesting that there is evidence to
the contrary but I think one would have to look at the immigration
impact, social as well as economic. Overall, we support the analysis
that shows that it is beneficial. We believe that there is, other
things being equal, a diminishing return on that. We believe that
the current economic situation will present us with unknown quantities
of people and activity in the future, which is why we are cautious
and why we believe that the migration controls that I was mentioning
before, in answer to Mr Steen, are increasingly important. We
were doing them anyway but we think they are increasingly important.
We are keen to put into the debate the other side of the coin
which I characterise as the Auf Wiedersehn Pet point, which is
that many of my constituents work within other European Union
Member States. All of these policies can be reciprocal. I urge
caution in looking at that. This is a report about the 27, not
about the one, that the European Commission has presented us with.
Overall, we support the analysis that it has been beneficial.
We proceed with the benefit of hindsight for future potential
accession.
Chairman: Thank you very much. We intend
issuing this report for a debate in the European Committee which
of course, as you know, can be attended by every Member of the
House of Commons to question the appropriate minister and also
to speak on the issue. We will have a second chance if it is you
who goes along to speak on this policy to a larger audience than
this.
Q83 Mr Heathcoat-Amory: My question
arises out of the controls that you do have on non-EEA immigration.
You will be aware that a number of work permits are not being
renewed, are being withheld or withdrawn for existing workers
from outside the EEA, presumably to make way for higher immigration
from the EEA area. The group I have in mind are Filipino nurses
who integrate extremely well. They speak English. They are very
suited to the jobs in hospitals and care homes. Is it in line
with your policy for community harmony and economic integration
to deny immigration to a very suitable group of workers from outside
to be replaced by people from within the EEA who do not speak
the same language and may be less suitable? Is this not a distortion
in our policy which is forced on you?
Mr Woolas: That is not our policy.
A2 allows those nurses to remain.
Chairman: You have some support with
you. Can I thank Emma Churchill, Nigel Farminer and Ragnar Clifford
for attending with you at this meeting.
| 
