Examination of Witness (Questions 352-359)
PROFESSOR DAVID
METCALF
17 MARCH 2009
Chairman: This is the sixth session in
our inquiry into the points-based system. We are very pleased
to see Professor Metcalf, the Chairman of the Migration Advisory
Committee. May I first ask members to declare any interests? I
declare an interest. I am a non-practising barrister and my wife
is an immigration solicitor. I refer everyone present to the Register
of Members' Interests where the interests of members are noted.
Mr Winnick: I am a former
Chairman of the UKIS.
Q352 Chairman: Professor
Metcalf, thank you for coming to see us. How long is it since
you have been Chairman of this organisation?
Professor David Metcalf: I was
appointed in October '07, so a little bit over a year.
Q353 Chairman: Given the current
economic climate and the mantra of "British jobs for British
workers", which has been circulated by politicians, and indeed
in the media, do you feel that you can remain as independent as
you would have hoped?
Professor Metcalf: That is a very
reasonable first question. The answer unambiguously is "yes".
The Government sets our tasks for us but in coming to our conclusions
in the two major reports we have done so far, one on the Occupation
Shortage List and one on Romania and Bulgaria restrictions, I
can state unambiguously that nobody has put pressure on whatsoever.
For what it is worth, I would not stand for it. I have spent ten
years setting the minimum wage, as it were, and there was no political
interference on that either. Also, my strong-minded colleagues
on the Migration Advisory Committee would not. I would go further
than that and say that I have had a number of meetings with the
previous Minister, Liam Byrne, and the present Minister, Phil
Woolas, and also with the Home Secretary and on each of those
occasions what they have emphasised is that it is very important
for us to be independent because, in a sense, that raises the
level of the debate and it provides greater substance, if you
want, to the debate. They have emphasised the importance of the
independence. The one area which I would particularly point to
is that we are very keen that immigration is not seen as a substitute
for upskilling the British workforce, and that has been quite
a theme right throughout our work. It is a serendipitous situation
I suppose because that is also the position of the Government.
It is very much the position of the Migration Advisory Committee.
Q354 Chairman: You do not see yourself
under a pressure to tow a particular political line?
Professor Metcalf: No, I do not
feel under pressure to tow a political line. Both major parties
are in favour of some system of managed migration, managed immigration.
They have different policies. In a sense, one is doing it through
a points-based system and one is doing it through a quota. For
myself and I think speaking on behalf of the committee, we recognise
that Britain needs some system of managed immigration. Our task
is that whatever the Government asks us to do—although obviously
I have, as well as my secretariat, some discussions about the
workload and so on—we will do that, as it were in a transparent
and independent way.
Q355 Chairman: Do you have an optimum
number in your head about the number of people who should be allowed
into this country?
Professor Metcalf: No.
Q356 Chairman: We had discussions
at the end of November. The new Immigration Minister, who is obviously
coming to give evidence to us, talked about the 70 million mark.
Do you feel that there is a limit beyond which the population
of this country cannot go?
Professor Metcalf: With respect,
I do not think that this is a matter for me. This is a matter
for the politicians. If we were asked to do a report which was
dealing in some sense with optimal population policy/contribution
of immigration into that, then we would do that, but it is not
something I have put my mind to. I do not think in the first instance
it is a matter for the Migration Advisory Committee.
Q357 Chairman: You mentioned your
recommendations and your recommendation on Bulgaria and Romania,
which the Government of course accepted. What proportion of your
recommendations has the Government accepted and which of those
have they rejected? What kind of justification do they give when
they tell you they cannot accept your advice?
Professor Metcalf: On the two
major reports that we have done so far, the first on the Shortage
Occupation List, and the second on the restrictions on Romania
and Bulgaria, pretty much the Government accepted all of our recommendations
in full. It is slightly more complicated in the case of the Shortage
Occupation List because we did not put social workers on the list.
On the previous list when there was a work permit system, social
workers were on it. We did not put social workers on. There was
good reason for that, which is that we did not have any evidence
particularly from the Health Department and the Children's Department
and so we did not put them on. Not unreasonably, the Government
basically said that they are on presently and that they would
like to keep them on because some evidence has come in now late.
As a consequence of that, they kept them on, not unreasonably,
but then asked us to review social workers as part of our review,
which will be published at the end of this month of the Shortage
Occupation List. So we will have come to a conclusion about our
own view about including or excluding social workers on the list
by the end of this month.
Q358 Mr Winnick: Professor Metcalf,
at a time when there is so much concern about employment and unemployment
rising, as in other industrialised countries, do you feel that
your committee made up of five economists including yourself,
had the list been circulated, have sufficient understanding, if
I can put it this way, with respect to what is happening on the
ground? People may say that the five economists have highly professional
jobs, and all the rest of it: how can they know and understand
what it means to lose one's job and be faced with competition
from abroad?
Professor Metcalf: That is a reasonable
question, although I started my working life as a welder, so I
have done things other than being an academic economist. Let me
answer that in a number of different ways. It depends in a sense
on what one is trying to do. What we are tasked to do is to give
advice and in particular the running theme is whether there are
shortages in particular occupations. I think for that basically
you need pretty good economic skills and particular labour market
skills and that is what the committee bring in various forms,
some with statistics, some with good knowledge about the way the
economy will develop and the skill mix. We do not just do that.
We have made a point of consulting stakeholders very widely, the
sector skills councils, loads of visits to employers, trade unions
and so on. We have been to every region of the country. We have
been into lots of firms.
Q359 Mr Winnick: I am sorry to interrupt.
You do say in the memorandum that you do meet with employers and
the TUC but do you ever actually go into work places, factories
and so on, and speak to people on the shop floor?
Professor Metcalf: Oh, yes, lots—fish
filleting factories, for example. We went to Newmarket and we
went to see the work riders practice; I went with the Minister
to the Golden Dragon Restaurant in Chinatown to see the kitchens,
yes, we do.
Chairman: I do not think we need
the entire list.
| 
