mrn migrant capital june 2010
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
1/52
MIGRANT CAPITAL
A PERSPECTIVE ON CONTEMPORARYMIGRATION IN LONDON
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
2/52
AUTHOR: Juan Camilo Cock, MRN
JUNE 2010
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:This report was produced as part of a project funded by
City Parochial Foundation.
THE MIGRANTS RIGHTS NETWORK MRNis working for a rights-based
approach to migration, with migrants as full partners in developing the policies and
procedures which affect life in the UK.
MRN aims to aims to strengthen the voice of migrants in discussion and debates,
both civil society and with regional and national authorities. Bearing this in mind,
MRN conducts research and projects to enable migrant community organisations to
engage with key legislative and policy issues.
Migrants Rights Network
Royal London House
22-25 Finsbury Square
London EC2A 1DX
www.migrantsrights.org.uk
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
3/52
Contents
Foreword 02
Executive summary 03
1. Introduction: migration, mobility and a changing London 04
2. Londons migrants today 10
3. Policy issues arising from immigration in a global city 21
4. Migration and governance 30
5. Migrants in London and civil society organisations 34
6. Migrants and public opinion in London 38
7. Putting ideas into action making changes for London 43
Bibliography 46
Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
4/52
The role that migration has played in changing
many aspects of life in Britain has been discussed in
a more open fashion in recent years. The question
why are the countries of Europe undergoing a
new phase of large-scale migration? is being asked
by just about everyone, from top politicians and
policy makers, through to concerned and interested
citizens.
This report is a big part of the answer to that
question. Immigration is re-emerging as a mass
phenomenon because the prosperity of countries
with open, liberal capitalist economies have built
the movement of goods, services, capital and
people into the very fabric of its system.
Over the past 30 years Britain has emerged as
the exemplar of this type of country. Its capital
city, London, reigns at the royal court of those
civic entities, alongside New York, Hong Kong,
Paris, Singapore, Tokyo, Sydney, Milan, Shanghai,
Beijing and a growing list of others, whose role and
function is to bring the global economy down from
the heights of abstraction and into the real lives of
millions of ordinary women and men.
On the streets, in the factories and offices, the public
services and even in our homes and family lives,
immigration has been implicated into the largest
and the smallest aspects of prosperity, welfare, our
culture and the conviviality of existences as friends,
neighbours, citizens and even as strangers. Thisreport provides a detailed and accurate description
of what this looks like in London.
Public discussion about migration is often
polarising. People concerned about the pace and
the extent of change want to know why no one
asked them when it came to decisions which
concerned the arrival of foreigners as migrants. The
answer is that these decisions themselves came at
the end of a long-chain of adjustments to the terms
of world trade, adaptations to the competitiveness
Foreword from the MRN director
02 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
of international businesses, cost pressures affecting
the way public and welfare services are organised,
as well as the exercise of individual liberties
concerning our own desires to move and who we
choose as our partners in life.
This report points to the unmistakable conclusion
that migration is a phenomenon which cannot now
be reversed without placing immense strains on thewelfare and well-being of our society. But it is far
from being complacent about the character of the
policy agenda which emerges from the business
of living in an immigration society. Challenges
exist at every level if the collective live of citizens
and migrants is to produce anything resembling
a good society. The report surveys the state of the
social fabric of London and argues that a mutual
acknowledgement of interests and rights, of both
citizens and migrants, will be needed if we are to
make progress.
This focus on London is not intended to displace the
importance of migration in other parts of the UK,
where its recent impact has often been greater in
short time than it has been in the capital city. But
its does suggest that the richness of the experience
of migration in this global city has generated ideas
and resources that will make it possible to tackle the
issue of living together much better in towns and
communities which appear to be very different.
The report is also one of the first pieces of work to
emerge from MRNs Strengthening Migrants Rightsproject. We hope it will provide impetus to other
contributions and perspectives from all the people
who have a stake in this great public conversation.
Don Flynn, MRN Director
June 2010
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
5/52
London has a long history of receiving migrants
from around the world. In the past few decades
the fortunes of the city have been transformed by
this movement of people. Immigration has been
an essential part of the tremendous economic and
demographic transformation of London. The citys
post war reconstruction and, more recently, its post-
industrial resurgence have relied heavily on migrant
labour.
In recent years immigration has made the city more
competitive by providing a pool of talented labour
from which to recruit for top positions and a flexible
workforce willing to take up low paid jobs. Thanks
to migration London has also become one of the
most cosmopolitan and diverse cities in the world.
However, immigration legislation has increasingly
differentiated between migrants, opening up
possibilities to some while restricting rights and
entitlements to others.
Today, a third of Londons residents were born
abroad and over 40 percent of the UKs migrants
live there. The areas of the city where migrants
concentrate and the countries of origin of migrants
have greatly diversified. Migrants in London live
throughout the city, come from a multiplicity
of countries, have varying immigration statuses
and are distributed in all sectors of the economy.
However, some sectors of Londons economy,
especially low paid jobs, have become almost
completely dependent on foreign-born labour.
Even though overall migrants are estimated to
make higher proportional fiscal contributions than
non-migrants, there is still wide concern about
service provision and other policy implications of
immigration. In general the impact of immigration
03 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
on services is mixed with clear future implications
in areas such as housing, health and labour
market. However, due to problems with population
estimates which are used for allocating local
funding, London local authorities are not being
properly funded to respond to the challenges.
Official responses to immigration and migrants
in terms of strategic planning, coordination ofservices and enforcement have increasingly
become regionalised. In the capital, the London
Strategic Migration Partnership has assumed these
responsibilities. On the other hand, civil society
organisations such as trade unions, charities,
migrant community organisations and broad
based alliances have undertaken service delivery,
support and advocacy activities on issues that affect
migrants.
London is a city where public opinion expresses its
appreciation and pride of diversity. Even though
there clearly is division on the amount of concern
about the recent levels of immigration, there is less
support in London for restrictive policies than in the
rest of the UK.
In this context there is an opportunity for migrants
and those working on migrants issues in London
to play an increased role in the decisions that
affect their lives. Through networking and effective
communication migrant community organisations
and support groups have the possibility to engageon strategic and coordination issues through the
regional structures being set up at the London level
in order to achieve more progressive approaches
towards migrants and immigration.
Executive summary
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
6/52
04 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
1. Introduction: migration, mobility and a changing London
Key points:
y Global migration patterns are shaped largely by economic and political processes.
y In the past few decades industrial production has declined in developed countries
while global finance has expanded, especially in key cities. In London it has been
replaced by a rapidly expanding financial services sector.
y Partly for this reason London has received a larger proportion of migrants than
the UK as a whole.
y Londons economic success and global role is inextricably linked to immigration.
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
7/52
London has a very long history of migration, having
throughout the centuries received inflows ofinvaders, refugees, businessmen, students, artists
and labourers. In the period from the 1950s onward
immigration has been an essential component of
the citys development, first in slowing down and
eventually reversing the population decline of
the city and, second, to rebuild its infrastructure
and economy following the destruction brought
about by the Second World War. More recently,
having been transformed into a global city at
the heart of major transformations in the world
economy, London has become a magnet for avariety of mobile populations including students,
businesspeople and workers, and has continued to
be a refuge for persecuted people.
Recent years have also seen, however, growing
unease in the UK at contemporary levels of
immigration. Since the 1960s successive legislation
has been introduced and measures have been taken
to restrict, control and manage the number and
the characteristics of those entering the country.
Despite these efforts, migration has continued
to grow, shifting its contours but, if anything,
increasing in size and diversity. The result in London
is a city whose present composition is the outcome
of previous migrations and that continues to be
transformed, a city where today one out of three
residents was born abroad.
Recently, the government has found itself
trapped between conflicting interests in the
immigration debate: on the one hand there
is an acknowledgement that immigration can
bring, and has brought, considerable economicbenefits to the British economy. Similarly, the
UK has to uphold its commitment to a common
labour market in the European Union and to the
protection of persecuted people. On the other
hand, sectors of the media and public opinion
have become sceptical about the benefits of
immigration, expressing a wish for the inflows and
net immigration figures to be significantly curbed.
The government has responded to these conflicting
trends by introducing successive legislation
aimed at increasing control over the numbers and
05 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
characteristics of migrants in order to allow entry
only to those individuals that will most benefitthe economy. At the same time it introduced new
measures to keep out migrants who do not comply
with the desired qualities.
These efforts to manage who enters the UK have left
a legacy of individuals with multiple legal statuses
and varying rights and entitlements. Furthermore,
restrictions have not stemmed the flow of people
but have led to a significant number of persons
living in the UK without a legal status or in breach
of their visa conditions. The picture is therefore oneof continuing high levels of immigration but also
an increasing fragmentation of migrants according
to the conditions on which they enter and stay
in the country. The types of status that migrants
hold vary significantly, including earlier waves of
migrants and their family members who are now
(or always were) British citizens, European passport
holders exercising freedom of movement and work
within the EU, students with limited rights to work,
people with work visas (high skilled and for specific
sectors), asylum seekers with restricted rights and
irregular migrants.
The economic base of the whole of the UK,
including London, has been transformed since
the 1970s through the decline of manufacturing,
but London has been especially successful in
reinventing itself as a centre of finance, business,
tourism, the arts and other advanced services.
There is evidence that immigration has made
Londons economy more competitive at the top and
bottom ends of the labour market: at the top end
by recruiting a talented workforce and bringing inworkers with skills for which there is a shortage; at
the bottom end of the labour market by providing
a flexible labour supply that keeps wages low for
employers.
There is no escaping the fact that Londons
economy relies on migrants as part of its workforce
more than other UK regions. Immigration has also
brought benefits beyond the economic impact.
A lot of people appreciate the diversity and
cosmopolitanism that comes as a result of people
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
8/52
from many backgrounds living in the same city and
London actively prides itself of being a city wherethe whole world is represented.
The major concern with immigration seems to
originate in the perceived effects it has had on the
livelihoods of settled Londoners. These include the
effect of immigration on labour markets, housing
markets and pressures on service provision.
Immigration is often used as an easy explanation
for some of the problems affecting the capital.
The evidence of the impact of immigration on
some of these areas, however, seems to be mixed.When looked at more closely, there are a number
of factors affecting labour and housing markets
and service provision, and immigration is often not
the main influencing factor. The negative effects
of immigration policies aimed at controlling and
managing immigration are also most acutely felt in
London. In a city full of contradictions it is perhaps
not surprising that London seems to get some of
the largest benefits from immigration, but at the
same time has a disproportionate share of the
problems arising from policies aimed at controlling it.
Mobility in the contemporary world:freedom for capital, restrictions forworkers
Since 1960 the number of migrants worldwide
has increased by more than one and half times
from an estimated 75 million persons to 214
million persons in 2009. This figure, however, still
means that only around 3 per cent of the worlds
population live in countries different to the onethey were born in. However, international migration
is not evenly spread throughout the world. Sixty
percent of migrants are estimated to live in more
developed regions where migrants also constitute
a much larger proportion of the total population.1
Furthermore, within reception countries migrants
tend to be more concentrated in some areas than
others. Global flows of migrants tend to be linked,
on one hand, to economic processes, moving from
poor areas of the world to rich or economically
growing areas, and, on the other hand, to political
turmoil and conflict, with large populationmovements taking place as a consequence of war
and persecution.
As economies have become progressively
integrated and deregulated and capital has become
increasingly mobile, inequality has also increased
both between and within countries. Individuals
challenge this trend towards inequality by moving
to work in areas with better wages and stronger
labour demand. At the same time, economically
developed countries have tried to defend theinterests of their own populations and their
redistributive policies by closing down their borders
and having a strict control over who comes in and
who does not. The stark reality of global economic
inequality and the demand for cheap labour in
advanced economies means that individuals
continue to migrate for work despite restrictions. As
a consequence of these contradictions migration
has become polarised. It is facilitated for highly
qualified workers and those with specific skills and
at the same time restricted for low-skilled workers
and people seeking asylum. As a consequence
of this, the effectiveness of immigration controls
and breaches of the rules have become major
contemporary issues for states, migrants and
public opinion in developed countries. Put simply,
more mobility plus more restrictions equals more
breaches of migration law.2
London lies at heart of these contradictions. It is
a city with a long history of migration, a global
financial centre offering services to clients across
the world and a leading developer of many of theinstruments that have helped bring down barriers
and integrate the worlds economies. London is
by far the main recipient of migrants in the UK,
including highly paid skilled workers and unskilled
labour. But it is also the area that concentrates the
largest number of those who have fallen foul of
immigration legislation.
1United Nations Department
of Economic and Social Affairs,
Population Division, 2009,
International Migration.
2Jordan, Bill and Franck
Duvell, 2002, Irregular
Migration: The dilemmas
of transnational mobility,
Cheltenmham: Edward Elgar.
06 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
9/52
From imperial capital to global city
and centre of finance
London has for a long time been an important
centre of reception of immigrants, ranging from
groups of Eastern European Jewish refugees and
Irish labourers in the late nineteenth and early
twentieth century to the large scale post-war
migration of workers from the Caribbean islands,
South Asia and Cyprus. The fact that London has
tended to receive more migrants than other areas
of the UK can be partly explained in that it is the
largest city in the country with a long imperiallegacy. However, the concentration in London
of international migrants and ethnic minority
populations descending from migrants increased
significantly in the last two decades of the twentieth
and into the twenty-first century largely as a
consequence of the transformation in the British
and global economies.
The large-scale migration of people from the
Commonwealth countries between the 1950s and
early 1970s occurred in a period when many of the
traditional British industrial centres still demanded
labour for manufacturing. The demand for labour
for the post-war reconstruction effort and to staff an
expanding national public sector also drove these
migrations. Even though London received a larger
share of migrants than other areas of the UK, post-
war migrants also settled in large numbers in many
of the industrial centres of the Midlands and the
North of England.
However, since the 1980s many of these industrial
centres have been in decline and the demand forlabour in manufacturing dwindled. The decline
of the economic base of some of the northern
manufacturing cities was mirrored by a shrinking of
the manufacturing sector in London. However, at
the same time the financial and specialised services
sectors in London grew significantly, giving a new
dynamism to its economy.3
From the 1980s onward there has been a global
transition towards deregulation and globalisation
through the partial dismantling of trade barriers,
tariffs and regulations and an increase in world
trade arising from lower costs in communicationand transport. Production plants in the developed
economies have shut down as corporations, in
their search for increased profitability, relocated
or outsourced their production to areas of the
world that offered lower costs. The traditional
industrial centres of Europe thus entered a period of
economic decline.
At the same time, the dispersal of operations across
multiple locations and the increased importance of
finance in the world economy meant that a handfulof cities emerged as command and control centres
for global production, specialising in the production
of innovations and services to support and
coordinate the global operations of corporations.
London has established itself as one of the most
important of these global cities that are key nodes
in the globalised economy.4The deregulation
of finance and the scaling back of state welfare
also increased the national demand for financial
services as individuals were required to take greater
responsibility for their own housing, pensions,
health care and education.5
Thus, while the manufacturing base of most
British cities was declining, Londons financial and
services sectors, often linked to global production
and finance, expanded to become an essential
part of the economy of the city. The changes have
been dramatic. Until the 1960s about one third of
Londons workforce was employed in manufacturing
and one in ten worked in finance and business
services. Between 1961 and 1981 the number
of manufacturing jobs in London fell by over 50percent and by a further 50 per cent in the next
decade.
On the other hand, financial and business services
jobs grew by almost 30 per cent in the 1980s. By
1999 finance and business services accounted for
one in three jobs while manufacturing accounted
for less than one in ten.6In 2009 less than four
percent of jobs in London are in manufacturing
while the proportion of employees working in
financial and insurance activities is more than
3Hamnett, Chris, 2003,
Unequal City: London in
the Global Arena, London:Routledge.
4Sassen, Saskia, 2001, The
Global City: New York, London,
Tokyo, Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
5Massey, Doreen, 2007, World
City, Cambridge: Polity Press,
41.
6Hamnett, Chris, 2003,
Unequal City: London in
the Global Arena, London:
Routledge.
07 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
10/52
Today, London has a preeminent role in the
British economy. In the ten years leading up to2007 London had the largest regional economic
growth in the UK and its average yearly economic
performance increased by a fifth more than the
national rate. In 2007 London accounted for 21
per cent of the countrys economic output.10While
the convenience of this degree of centralisation
is debatable, there is no doubt that London
concentrates a disproportionate share of the UKs
economy.
The turnaround in Londons economic fortuneshas been facilitated by the inward movement of
people from abroad and this dynamism has in
turn attracted further movement of people into
London. Until the late 1980s Londons population
was declining as people left to live in other areas of
the UK. From a peak of 8.6 million residents in 1939,
Londons population fell to 6.73 million in 1988.11
Since then significant numbers of people have
continued to relocate to other regions or abroad,
but international migration and an increasing birth
rate have reversed this trend.12
7LSE, 2009, Londons Place
in the UK Economy, 2009-10,
London: LSE.
8Hamnett, 2003, Unequal
City: London in the Global
Arena, London.
9May, Jon, Jane Wills, Kavita
Datta, Yara Evans, Joanna
Herbert and Cathy McIlwaine,
2007, Keeping London
working: global cities, the
British state and Londons new
migrant division of labour,
Transactions of the Institute
of British Geographers 32:151-167.
10Calculated in terms of Gross
Value Added (GVA). Londons
annual average GVA increase
1997-2007 was 6. 3 per cent
compared with the national
average of 5.3 percent.
11Piggott, Gareth (ed.) Focus
on London 2009, London: GLA.
12LSE, 2009, Londons Place
in the UK Economy, 2009-10,
London: LSE.
08 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
twice as large as that of the rest of the country.
The proportion of the workforce employedin professional, technical, information and
communication activities is also larger in London
than in other areas.7
The transformation in Londons economy has
therefore been accompanied by a concurrent
shift in its occupational structure, which has
been marked by a decline of manual labour and a
growth in professional, managerial and technical
occupations. In general there has been a trend in
London for a larger proportion of people to beemployed in well-paid jobs. At the same time wages
have increased much faster amongst top earners
than in low paid occupations, increasing the levels
of inequality in the city.8While some studies have
argued that the trend has been for the proportion
of workers in low-paid jobs to remain stable, recent
research indicates that alongside a growth in the
proportion of workers in top paying jobs there has
been an important increase in the proportion of
workers in the lowest paid jobs in London.9This
growth in jobs at both the top and lower end of
the pay scale has come at the expense of tens of
thousands of moderately well paid jobs that were
lost in the manufacturing industries.
1200000
900000
600000
300000
1
973
1
977
1
981
1
985
1
989
1
993
1
997
2
001
2
005
FIG. 1. NUMBER OF PEOPLE EMPLOYED IN MANUFACTURING AND BUSINESS SERVICES
IN LONDON 19712007
Source: GLA and Experian Business Strategies data
Business services
Manufacturing
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
11/52
13Ibid.
14Kyambi, Sarah, 2005,
Beyond Black and White:
Mapping new immigrant
communities, London: IPPR.
15A8 is used to refer to the
group of eight countries that
joined the EU in 200 4 and
for which most countries in
the EU adopted movement
restrictions for a transitional
period: Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Poland, CzechRepublic, Slovakia, Hungary
and Slovenia. The UK allowed
the movement of migrant
workers from these countries
under condition that they
signed up to a Worker
Registration Scheme.
16Wilson, Alan and Mike
Phillips, 2009, Regional
Economic Performance:
A migration perspective,
Economics Paper 4, London:
Communities and Local
Government.
09 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
The main feature of Londons changing population,
however, is its turnover. As well as large numbersmoving into London, many people move
out. Between 2001 and 2007 London had net
international immigration rates of between 50,000
and 94,000 persons per year. However, since 2001,
except for one year, the net movement of people
out of London to other areas of the UK has been
larger than the net numbers of people moving
in from abroad. London therefore loses more
people to other areas of the UK than it gains from
international migration.13
In the inter-census period of 1991-2001, the number
and proportion of immigrants in London grew
faster than in other areas of the country. London
accounted for nearly half of the total UK increase of
1.1 million foreign born people during that period.14
Since 2001, the concentration of recent arrivals
in London has decreased due to two factors. The
first was that the 1999 Immigration and Asylum
Act limited the choice of where to live for asylum
seekers that received public support, dispersing
them to specific locations across the UK. The second
factor was that a significant proportion of Eastern
European migrants coming into the UK following
the accession of the A815countries to the EU filled in
gaps in labour in the service and agricultural sector
throughout the country. In the case of these, it has
been estimated that London received 15 per cent
of A8 workers since 2004, which is still the highest
proportion for any region but much lower than
the historic concentration of migrants in London.16
Despite this, London continues to receive a
disproportionate amount of migrants. Furthermore,
since the onset of the credit crunch figures suggestthat the importance of London as a destination for
A8 workers has increased significantly.
Historically, London has had a larger share of
migrants than the rest of the UK not only due to itscondition as the largest city, its cosmopolitanism
or because it had previous settlement of many
communities. These have surely been important
factors, but since the 1970s the global economic
restructuring has played an important role in
Londons and the UKs migrant flows. On one hand,
the traditional manufacturing centres that had
received a lot of the migrant workforce declined. On
the other hand, London emerged as a key player in
the UKs and the worlds financial system. Therefore,
up to a point, Londons fate diverged from thatof other areas and became much more tied to an
international network of financial and corporate
centres. The labour market that characterises global
cities subsequently allowed the city to receive,
and in some sectors become dependent, on large
numbers of migrants.
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
12/52
10 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
2. Londons migrants today
Key points:
y The countries of origin of migrants to London have diversified in the past two
decades, but Europe and Commonwealth countries continue to be the most
important sources.
y Migrants in the UK are concentrated in London. One third of Londons population
was born abroad and 40 percent of the UKs migrants live in London.
y There is great diversity between and within Londons migrant groups.
y An estimated 43 percent of migrants in London have British citizenship and
therefore have no restrictions on movement, rights and entitlements.
y The proportion of Londoners who are not British or EU nationals is 13 percent.
y Migrants are unevenly distributed in London, with some areas of inner London
having high proportions and some areas, especially in outer London, with very
low proportions.
y London has become a very diverse city but there is little evidence of ethnic
ghettos.
y Migrants are an important part of Londons workforce in all sectors but recently
arrived migrants have become essential in Londons low paid jobs such as
cleaning, care work and hospitality.
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
13/52
Who are Londons migrants?
As a result of the processes described in the
previous section, London has ended up harbouring
a disproportionate number of migrants within the
UK, with levels of migration similar to those of other
immigrant cities such as New York. An estimated
two and a half million migrants lived in London in
2008. While London accounts for 12 per cent of the
total British population, it is home to 38 per cent of
all foreign born residents in the UK.17That means
that four out of every ten migrants in the UK live in
London. Similarly London is the area of the country
11 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
The presence in London of large numbers of
migrants from specific countries can be attributedto a number of factors. These include historical
factors, economic disparities, cultural and linguistic
affinity, the existence of social networks and border
controls. None of these on their own explain the
general patterns of migration but they all play an
important role.
The historical links of the UK with its former
imperial territories, for example, has been a major
factor in shaping the places of origin of migrants,
especially in the post-war years. Thus, New and Old
TABLE 1. POPULATION BY COUNTRY OF BIRTH
2004 200708 2004 200708 2004 200708 2004 200708
United Kingdom 53,807 53,869 5,147 5,040 91.1 89.3 70.4 67.0
Non-United Kingdom 5,233 6,486 2,168 2,487 8.9 10.7 29.6 33.0
Republic of Ireland 452 416 124 111 0.8 0.7 1.7 1.5
EU 13 768 842 254 281 1.3 1.4 3.5 3.7
EU A8 167 650 85 73 0.3 1.1 1.2 2.3
EU 26 1,492 2,052 516 640 2.5 3.4 7.1 8.5
Rest of the World 3,741 4,434 1,652 1,848 6.3 7.3 22.6 24.3
Source: Focus on London 2009
THOU SAND S PERC ENTAGE S
UNITED KINGDOM LONDON UNITED KINGDOM LONDON
17Piggott, Garreth (ed.),
2009, Focus on London 2009,
London: GLA, p30.
18 Ibid.
19Spence, Lorna, 2003, Third
country nationals living in
London 2000/01: A profile of
Londoners who have non-EU
nationality based on analysis
of Labour Force Survey data,
DMAG briefing 2003/06,
London: GLA.
with the highest proportion of migrants. Thus,while in the UK as a whole migrants make up 11
per cent of the population, 33 out of every 100
Londoners are migrants.18In London, therefore,
migrants have a much more significant presence
than in the rest of the country. Non-EU migrants
are even more concentrated in the capital,
with over half of them living in London, and
migrants from certain nationalities are even more
concentrated.19
Commonwealth countries have been the majorsources of migrants to the UK. Even as immigration
reform has attempted to restrict the movement of
people from the former imperial territories to the
UK, the existence of settled communities from those
countries and affinities in the education system
have continued to attract migrants from those areas.
Therefore, with the exception of Poland, in 2006 the
top ten largest migrant groups in London were from
either Commonwealth countries or Ireland.
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
14/52
Caribbean. However, even though London receives
people from across the globe, coming from rich andpoor countries, more people come from developing
countries than from high income countries (70 and
30 per cent respectively at the time of the 2001
census).23
These changes point to the globalisation and
diversification of immigration, with newcomers
arriving from across the globe. The migrant
population of London is therefore very diverse with
lots of variations between and within groups. For
example, even though overall the gender balance
20Piggott, Garreth, 2006,
National Insurance Number
Registrations of Overseas
Nationals in London, DMAG
Briefing 2006/24, London: GLA.
21 LSE, 2007, The Impact of
Recent Immigration on theLondon Economy, London:
City of London.
22Mackintosh, Marian, 2005,
London the world in a
city, DMAG Briefing 2005/6,
London: GLA.
23Spence, Lorna, 2005,
Country of Birth and Labour
Market Outcomes in London:
An analysis of Labour Force
Survey and Census Data,
DMAG Briefing 2005/1,
London: GLA.
12 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
Another major source of migrants is the EU
countries, where freedom of movement betweenmember states has facilitated the crossing of
borders. France, Italy, and Germany are all amongst
the top twenty countries of origin of migrants in
London. The Irish, who occupy a special position
because their right to live and work in the UK had
been secured by the provisions of the Special Travel
Area agreement prior to Irelands accession into the
EU, remain the largest group of European migrants
in London. Similarly, since the enlargement of
the EU in 2004, and the subsequent freedom of
movement and work for citizens of eight newcountries, Poland has been the largest source of
migrants to London. In 2005/2006 around 16 per
cent of all national insurance number registrations
of foreign born people in London came from Polish
migrants, doubling the number of registrations from
the second largest country of origin, India.20
Therefore, Commonwealth and European countries
continue to have the largest migrant populations
in London. However, in the past couple of decades
migration flows have diversified considerably.
Significant numbers of migrants have arrived
from other areas of the Global South attracted
by the wage differentials between Europe and
their countries of origin, expelled by conflicts and
political upheaval or, often, by a combination of
these factors. This diversification is evident in the
decline of the relative weight of the main countries
of origin since the 1980s. In the mid 1980s over half
of Londons foreign born population came from just
six countries. By 2006 the weight of these countries
had decreased and fifteen countries of origin
were needed to account for half of the migrantpopulation. The share of migrants from former
colonies also decreased from 76 to 59 per cent.21The
fact that in 2001 there were 42 countries which had
migrant communities of over ten thousand living
in London attests to the great diversity of places of
origin of migrants.22
In terms of regions, Europe is the area with the
largest number of migrants with 30 per cent,
followed by Africa (23 per cent), the Indian
subcontinent (17 per cent) and the Americas and
TABLE 2. LONDONS LARGEST MIGRANT
GROUPS AND THEIR POPULATIONS
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN 2006 2001
India 204000 172661
Bangladesh 133000 84565
Ireland 122000 157285
Jamaica 87000 80319
Nigeria 82000 68907
Poland 76000 22224
Kenya 68000 66311
Sri Lanka 67000 49932
South Africa 66000 45603
Ghana 62000 46513
Somalia 59000 33831
USA 51000 44622
Pakistan 49000 66658
France 49000 38206
Australia 47000 41488
Turkey 45000 39128
Germany 43000 39818
Italy 41000 38694
Cyprus No data 45888
New Zealand No data 27494
Sources: For 2006, Spence, 2008, based on Annual Population Survey
estimates; for 2001, Spence, 2005, based on census
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
15/52
24Ibid., Spence, Lorna, 2008,A Profile of Londoners by
Country of Birth: Estimates
from the 2006 Annual
Population Survey, DMAG
Briefing 2008-05, London:
DMAG.
25Ibid.
26However, this will probably
change with legislation that
is currently going through
parliament which will limit
most welfare and benefit
rights to British citizens.
13 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
of the migrant population is similar to that of
London as a whole (with 52 per cent of migrants
being women compared to 50 per cent for London
as a whole ), there are some nationalities that
have a strong gender imbalance. The proportion
of women ranges from a low of 29 per cent for
Algerians to a high of 80 per cent from Slovakia.24
This profile partly depends on the patterns of
migration and employment that different groups
have followed. Similarly, there are great disparities
between groups in terms of levels of employment
and unemployment and in the sectors of the
economy that they work in. The migrant population
of London does, however, tend to be much more
skewed towards working age than the overall
population.
Londons migrants can also be grouped according
to their citizenship and immigration status, a factor
that influences their rights and entitlements. From
the one third of Londoners who were born abroad,a substantial proportion have acquired (or arrived
with) British citizenship and thus, in terms of status,
are not migrants any longer. According to 2006
figures, 43 per cent of migrants in London are UK
nationals.25In terms of nationality, therefore the
proportion of non-British people living in London
in 2007 was estimated to be 20 per cent, which is
a third lower than the proportion of those born
abroad. Similarly, migrants who have acquired
permanent residency will be entitled to much the
same rights and access to services and support that
citizens have.26
People from the EU also have most of the same
rights and entitlements as British citizens. In the
case of persons from the eight countries that joined
the EU in 2004, there are some requirements to
register to work and to be employed for a period of
time, but after that they too have access to welfare
and most rights. People with EU nationality make up
more than a third of non-British London residents.
That means that the proportion of people living
in London who are neither British nor European,
and therefore are more likely to be subject to
immigration controls and/or have restrictions on
rights and entitlements is estimated to be about 13
per cent.
Amongst those migrants who are neither British
or European nationals, nor permanent residents,
there are also a variety of immigration categories
with varying conditions attached to them. There
are people who are on work visas which may have
restrictions attached to them, especially on the typeof employment they can carry out. There are also
people on student visas, which is a temporary status
and who can work a limited amount of hours and
have restrictions on access to welfare.
There are people who have applied for asylum and
whose cases have not been resolved or are in the
process of appealing. The rights of asylum seekers
have been progressively eroded in an attempt to
reduce the number of applications which peaked
in 2002. One of these restrictions, introduced by
1986 2006
Foreign born population 1.17 mil 2.23 mil
Proportion of total 17.6% 30.5%
Share coming from former British territories 76% 59%
Dominant origins: number of countries accounting 6 countries: Ireland, India, Kenya, 15 countries: previous six and
for half of migration population Jamaica, Cyprus and Bangladesh Nigeria, Poland, Sri Lanka, USA
Ghana, Pakistan, Somalia, Turkey
and South Africa
Source: LSE 2007
TABLE 3. MA IN SOURCES O F MIGRANTS IN 1986 AND 2006
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
16/52
support nationally. That means that 15 per cent of
asylum seekers in receipt of public support live inLondon.28It is not clear, however, what proportion
of individuals move into London once their cases
have been decided favourably or refused.
Finally, there is an indeterminate number of people
who do not have a valid immigration status to
reside and work in the UK or who are in breach of
their conditions of stay. A recent report estimates
the number of irregular migrants in the UK to be
between 417 thousand and 863 thousand, with a
central estimate of 618 thousand. It estimates that72 per cent of these are in London, which would
have between 281 thousand and 630 thousand
irregular migrants, with a central estimate of 442
thousand. If the central estimate is correct, that
would mean that around 44 percent of the non-EU
migrant population of London could be made up of
irregular migrants.29
Furthermore, this study undercounts the irregular
population as it includes all those who do not have
permission to be in the UK but excludes those
who do have a visa but are in breach of their visa
conditions. Therefore, even if the policy of dispersal
has reduced the concentration of asylum seekers
in London, it is suggested that the bulk of irregular
migrants live in the capital.
Migration in London has therefore increased
significantly in the past decades, concentrating
a disproportionate number of the UKs migrant
population. It has also grown increasingly diverse,
not just in terms of the origins of migrants, but in
terms of their immigration status and, therefore,their rights and entitlements.
Where do migrants live?
Different areas of the city have had very different
experiences of immigration. Some areas have
had few migrants until recently while others have
had large numbers of migrants for many years.
Similarly, some migrant communities have become
especially visible in particular areas, either because
27Carey-Wood, Jenny, Karen
Duke, Valerie Kam and Tony
Marshal. 1995, The Settlement
of Refugees in Britain, Home
Office Research Study 141,
London: HMSO.
28Home Office, 2009, Control
of Immigrations: StatisticsUnited Kingdom 2008, Home
Office 2009.
29Gordon, Ian, Kathleen
Scanlon, Tony Travers and
Christine Whitehead, 2009,
Economic impact on the
London and UK economy of
an earned regularisation of
irregular migrants to the UK,
London: GLA.
14 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
the 1999 Act, was designed with the specific aim
of reducing the concentration of asylum seekers inLondon. This policy meant that for asylum seekers
to receive public funded housing they would be
dispersed to areas outside of London. The numbers
of asylum seeker in London were significantly
reduced, but those who stayed in London had to
find their own accommodation. However, there is
some evidence of a proportion of dispersed asylum
seekers moving to London after their cases have
been resolved.
Absolute numbers of asylum seekers have declinedfrom a peak of over 100 thousand in 2002 to just
over 31 thousand in 2008 (including dependants).
Before dispersal policies were introduced, London
housed the majority of asylum seekers in the UK.
One estimate in the mid 1990s reported that 85% of
asylum seekers and refugees lived in London.27The
NATIONALITY PERCENTAGE
British 79.2
Non- British 20.8
EU 14 5.1
EU A8 2.3
EU 26 7.9
Rest of the World 12.9
Source: Focus on London 2009
TABLE 4. NATIONALIT Y OF LONDON RESIDEN TS,
2007
proportion of these in London has also decreased
significantly since the introduction of dispersal in
2001. Furthermore, most asylum seekers in London
are in receipt of subsistence only support. At the
end of 2008 there were a reported 4,138 asylum
seekers in receipt of subsistence support only and
a further 805 in receipt of housing and subsistence
support in London out of a total of 32,580 people in
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
17/52
in receiving new migrants for many decades and
centuries.
Since the 1950s, some parts of London have housed
large numbers of migrants from a similar origin
and their descendants. These areas have developed
ethnic economies and have had social and religious
facilities built making them important centres for
certain communities. It has not always been an easy
process and in some cases it has been accompanied
by racial tensions and unrest, leading to fights and
rioting, as in the battle of Cable Street in 1936, the
Notting Hill riots of 1958 and 1976, and the Brixtonriots of 1981. Thus, Southall has been an important
place for Sikh migrants from East Africa and the
Indian subcontinent, Brick Lane for Bangladeshi
migrants in the East End, the Green Lanes area of
Haringey for Turkish, Cypriot and Kurdish migrants,
and Brixton for Jamaicans. The influence of many
of Londons migrant communities can be mapped
onto certain areas of the city where they have left
an important imprint.31This emergence of ethnic
economies and areas has added to the diversity of
London.
However, even those areas where migrants and
ethnic minority groups cluster are generally, on
closer inspection, mixed areas. This is the case as
well for most British cities. Where London does
seem to make a difference is in the exposure of
white British people to ethnic minorities and
migrants. In a study on residential segregation in 18
cities based on the 2001 census, London and Slough
were the only cities where less than 70 per cent
of white people lived in areas where white people
formed at least 80 per cent of the population.32
Thatmeans that white people in London are much more
likely to live alongside people from other ethnic
backgrounds than white people in other British
cities.
As a result of the intensity of migration over the
past seventy years London now has some of the
most ethnically diverse areas of the UK. At the
time of the 2001 census 59 per cent of Londoners
were identified as White British while 41 per cent
belonged to an ethnic minority or mixed group
30Finella, Giorgio, 2006,
London borough residents by
country of birth: An analysis
of 2001 Census data, DMAG
briefing 2006/4, London:
DMAG.
31See for example, the
Guardians special report,
London: The World in a City,2005 31 See for example, the
Guardians special report,
London: The World in a City,
2005.
32Johnston, Ron, James
Forrest and Michael Poulsen,
2002, Are there Ethnic
Enclaves/Ghettos in English
Cities? Urban Studies 39(4):
591-618.
15 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
of residential concentration in the area or because
they have set up a large number of commercial,religious and social facilities in close proximity.
While in some areas one migrant community has
some prevalence over others, in other areas of the
city there is extreme diversity with many different
groups living together without the clear dominance
of any one group. Overall, and despite the concerns
in some sectors of society, there is little evidence
of ghettoisation of migrants in London if a ghetto
is understood as an area in which the inhabitants
are overwhelmingly from the same group and
where the majority of the people of that origin havesettled in that specific area.
In general, migrants are much more concentrated in
Inner London than in the Outer London boroughs.
In 2001 census, the proportion of migrants in a
number of Outer London boroughs was less than
15 per cent of their inhabitants. These include
the boroughs of Bromley, Bexley, Barking and
Dagenham, Sutton and Havering. On the other
hand, in some of the Inner London boroughs, more
than a third of the population was foreign born. This
included affluent boroughs such as Westminster
(46 per cent) and Kensington and Chelsea (44 per
cent) but also less affluent boroughs such as Tower
Hamlets (35 per cent), Newham (38 per cent), and
Haringey (37 per cent).30
Specific areas of London have a long history of
receiving immigrants. The port areas of the East
of London have housed communities of foreign
seamen for hundreds of years. The area around
Spitalfields and Whitechapel has received different
waves of migrants including Huguenot refugeeswho in the eighteenth century settled in the
vicinity and set up weaving workshops. In the late
nineteenth and early twentieth century the area
received thousands of Jews fleeing pogroms in
Russia and Eastern Europe. With economic success
they moved out to other areas of the city and in
the 1970s the area started receiving large numbers
of Bengali migrants who have been joined more
recently by Somali and other groups. Some areas
of London have therefore played an important role
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
18/52
Immigration and Londons Labourmarket
Londons economy relies heavily on internationalmigrants at all levels. Within the citys economy,
however, migrants appear to play an especially
important role at the top and bottom ends of the
labour market. On one hand, companies benefit
from widening the pool from which they can recruit
top performers and people with particular skills that
are in short supply in the UK. On the other end of
the spectrum, the corporate and service economy
benefits from a large supply of labour doing low-
skilled jobs for low wages. These include personal
services for the growing professional classes and
33Piggott, Gareth, 2006,
Simpsons diversity indices by
ward 1991 and 2001, DMAG
Briefing 2006/2, London: GLA.
16 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
and nine London boroughs had a minority ethnic
population of more than 50 per cent. Some areas of
London have large proportions of a couple of ethnic
groups but others have become very diverse. Theborough of Newham, especially, has some of the
highest diversity indices in England. In 2001, nine of
the fifteen most ethnically diverse wards in England
and Wales were located in Newham.33
The clustering of migrants from certain countries
and their descendents has therefore created areas of
London with a wide offer of ethnic restaurants, shops
and religious facilities, adding to the diversity of the
city, but in these areas Londons neighbourhoods are
diverse with little evidence of ghettos.
LONDON BOROUGH % FOREIGN BORN
Brent 47.1
Kensington and Chelsea 45.1
Westminster 44.8
Newham 38.3
Ealing 37.9
Haringey 37.8
Camden 37.5
Tower Hamlets 35.2
Hackney 34.9
Hammersmith and Fulham 34.4
Harrow 33.5
Lambeth 31.9
Barnet 31.0
Southwark 30.9
Islington 30.6
Hounslow 30.2
City of London 28.5
Wandsworth 27.7
Merton 26.8
Source: Finella 2006
LONDON BOROUGH % FOREIGN BORN
Waltham Forest 25.6
Enfield 25.4
Redbridge 24.6
Lewisham 24.4
Croydon 22.1
Richmond upon Thames 20.3
Kingston upon Thames 20.2
Greenwich 18.5
Hillingdon 18.4
Sutton 12.3
Barking and Dagenham 11.7
Bromley 10.4
Bexley 8.4
Havering 5.9
Inner London 34.3
Outer London 23.4
London 27.6
TABLE 5. NONUK BORN R ESIDENTS BY LONDON BOROUGH, 2001
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
19/52
In recent years, large numbers of migrants from
the Eastern European countries that joined theEU in 2004 have provided a labour supply for this
sector of the economy. As a consequence, overseas
recruitment of non-EU labour for low skilled jobs
has been severely limited. However, migrant
workers continue to make up a very significant
proportion of the workforce in these sectors, with
large numbers of them coming from beyond the
EU. Most non-EU migrants are therefore recruited
in-country and will include people with diverse
immigration statuses and trajectories.
This labour market therefore means that there are
big differences between migrant groups in terms
of their employment rates and the type of work
that they do. The evidence thus shows, as would
be expected, that larger proportions of migrants
from high-income countries of origin work in highly
skilled and well paid jobs, while migrants from low-
income countries tend to be more concentrated
in low-skilled low-paid jobs. Whereas 60 percent
of migrants from high-income countries work in
professional and managerial occupations, the rate
for migrants from poor countries is 39 percent.36
Migrants from high-income countries also tend to
have higher employment rates than those from low
income countries. However, amongst the latter it is
countries of origin with a high proportion of asylum
seekers and refugees, such as Somalia, Congo,
Rwanda, Afghanistan and Serbia and Montenegro,
which have the lowest employment rates,
pointing to significant issues in terms of access to
employment for asylum seekers and refugees.37
The general trend is therefore for migrants to be
represented in all sectors of Londons economy
and in both high and low income jobs, but with
large differences in outcomes between migrants
from different countries of origin. Those from high
income countries tend to be represented in high
and low paid jobs from the start and many from
poor non-asylum countries over represented in
low paid work in the first years after migration and
slowly moving out into better paid jobs. Employed
migrants from asylum origin countries also tend
34LSE, 2009, Londons Place
in the UK Economy, 2009-10,
London: LSE, p33.
35Dawson, Ian, Andy
Jackson and Matt Rhodes,
2006, Graduate Skills and
Recruitment in the City,
London: City of London.
36 Spence, Lorna, 2005,
Country of Birth and Labour
Market Outcomes in London:
An analysis of Labour Force
Survey and Census Data,
DMAG Briefing 2005/1,
London: GLA, 3; more recent
work shows similar findings,
see LSE, 2007, The Impact of
Recent Immigration on the
London Economy, London:
City of London.
37 Ibid.
17 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
a host of jobs that keep the citys infrastructure
growing and working on a day to day basis, such asconstruction workers, cleaners, and catering staff.
At the top end of the labour market large
companies transfer and head-hunt people from
other locations to London and actively recruit
overseas. They aim to enlarge the available pool
of talent from which they can recruit to the whole
world, attracting the best workers to the UK. They
can also enlarge the supply of individuals with
specific skills that are in short numbers locally. The
effect of this is that only 25 percent of graduateworkers in London were born there, with 45 percent
coming from other areas of the UK and almost a
third (30 percent) born overseas.34The financial and
banking sector in London actively and increasingly
recruits workers amongst overseas students
studying in the UK and in foreign universities, who
are perceived to have attributes that UK graduates
lack.
A recent study amongst City companies found that
as many as 22 per cent of graduate recruits into the
financial and related business services sectors came
from abroad and in some organisations it was up
to half.35Business leaders have been successful in
lobbying for the possibility for top workers to be
able to work in London and immigration policy is
designed taking into account these needs. Thus,
managed migration and the points based system
aim at facilitating the continued recruitment of
workers at this level while restricting recruitment for
lower-skilled jobs unless there is a proved shortage
of labour.
At the other end of the labour market, that of low-
paid unskilled jobs, the driving factor with regards
to migration is the demand for labour willing to
take on jobs at a low wage that are generally not
coveted by local people because of their nature,
low pay, unsociable working hours, or the lack of
opportunities to progress. Until the 1970s, there was
active recruitment overseas for these jobs, but the
sectors for which it is possible to do so have been
progressively reduced.
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
20/52
38 Dench, Sally, Jennifer
Hursfield, Darcy Hill, Karen
Akroyd, 2006, Employers use
of migrant labour, Home Office
Online Report 04/06, London:Home Office.
39 Wills, Jane, Kavita Datta,
Yara Evans, Joanna Herbert,
Hon May and Cathy McIlwaine,
2010, Global Cities at Work:
New migrant divisions of
labour London: Pluto Press.
40 Ibid.
41MacInnes, Tom and Peter
Kenway, 2009, Londons
Poverty Profile, London: New
Policy Institute.
18 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
to be spread in terms of income but in their case
there are large proportions of migrants outsideemployment.
Furthermore, if migrants are an important element
in all sectors of the economy, they have become
essential for some specific sectors which virtually
depend on a migrant origin labour force. A 2006
report found that employers feel that migrant
workers are less crucial in high skilled sectors than
in low skilled sectors. In low skilled sectors the
problems are related to a shortage of domestic
labour while in the high skilled sectors it is relatedto skill gaps. Employers mostly did not seek out
to employ migrant workers specifically but for
certain types of jobs, especially low skilled jobs, the
response to the job advertisements came mostly
from migrants.38
Therefore, even though the proportion of foreign
born employees has grown as a whole, the sectors
that have become much more dependent on
migrant workers tend to be those that offer low
paid jobs. One analysis of Labour Force Survey
data shows that in the ten years from 1994-2004
the proportion of foreign born labour in London
increased from 25 to 34 percent. Yet amongst
chefs and cooks it increased from 51 to 76 percent,
amongst catering assistants from 42 to 62 percent
and amongst cleaners from 41 to 69 per cent.39
London has a much higher dependency on migrant
labour for low and medium paid essential jobs
than other areas of the UK, despite London also
having a higher unemployment rate. The high
unemployment and out of work rates in Londonare the result of low wages and poor working
conditions coupled with the high costs of living
in the capital. Efficiency drives in the public and
private sector as well as the preference for a flexible
workforce have led many organisations to outsource
essential services and to use agency staff.
The subcontracting of services has led to strong
competition between companies and agencies
offering services such as cleaning, temporary
staff and care workers. These companies can only
compete in the market by pushing down wages and
working conditions to the minimum legal standards.Wages in many of Londons low-paid jobs have
therefore been driven down by this competition
to levels that often make them unattractive to
British and settled workers. Most of these jobs are
therefore now carried out by recent migrants who
do not have access to welfare benefits.40
The problem of low-paid work in London is
compounded by exceptionally high housing
and transport costs. Housing, for example, is an
important key factor affecting poverty in the capital.If housing costs are not taken into account, the
rate of low income households in inner London (20
percent) is similar to that of England as a whole and
that of outer London (16 percent) is lower. However,
once housing costs are included, both inner and
outer London have much higher rates of low income
(31 and 25 percent) than the rest of England. Due to
this, housing benefit makes up a larger proportion
of household income in London than in other
areas.41
Once housing and transport costs are taken into
account, this means that households whose income
comes from low-paid work find it more difficult to
cover their living costs and have any disposable
income. For some authors, these costs put local
people off from relatively and very low-paid jobs
and make employment in these jobs attractive only
to the foreign born population that does not have
access to social housing and other benefits.
There are other reasons why migrant workers take
jobs that the settled population does not. Migrantsare often young and single and more willing
to tolerate poor housing conditions. For many
migrants living in London is not a permanent move
but a temporary life phase where they are gaining
in other ways from their life in the capital, such as in
education, or in the experience of living in a world
city. Many migrants are also willing to put on long
hours of work and multiple jobs in order to save
money as part of a transnational strategy, either
sending money to family members in their countries
of origin or saving for them to return with.
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
21/52
42May, Jon, et al., 2007,
Keeping London Working:
Global Cities, the British State
and Londons New Migrant
Division of Labour, p151-167.
43IPPR, 2005, Migration and
Health in the UK: an IPPR Fact
File, London: IPPR.
44Glover, Stephen, Ceri Gott,
Anais Lizillon, Jonathan Portes,
Richard Price, Sarah Spencer,
Vasanthi Srinivasan and Carole
Willis, 2001, Migration: an
economic and social analysis,
RDS Occasional Paper 67,London: Home Office, p38.
45Cangiano, Alessio, Isabel
Shutes, Sarah Spencer and
George Leeson, 2009, Migrant
Care Workers: Research
Findings in the UK, Oxford:
COMPAS, p70-73.
46Ibid. p64.
47 Wills, Jane, et al., 2010,
Global Cities at Work: New
migrant divisions of labour
London: Pluto Press.
19 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
Two sectors of Londons economy that generally
rely heavily on a migrant workforce are contract
cleaning and hospitality and catering. A recent
report on low paid work found amongst
the companies that were surveyed that the
proportion of foreign born workers was 95 per
cent in Underground cleaning staff, 93 per cent in
hospitality, 89 per cent in office cleaning and 56
per cent in the care sector. Half of these migrant
workers had arrived in the UK in the past five years. 42
Health is another sector which has for some
time has relied heavily on migrants to fill labour
shortages. Between 1992 and 2002 more than half
of new registered doctors and almost 40 percent
of nurses in the UK came from abroad.43A 2001
report stated that while London is less dependenton foreign doctors than the rest of the UK, the
proportion of nurses is four times as high with
almost half coming from abroad. In London 23
percent of doctors and 47 per cent of nurses are
foreign born.44This dependency on the work of
migrants in health related jobs is not restricted
to the NHS. The proportion of foreign-born care
workers and nurses is over 60 per cent in London,
more than twice that of the next highest region and
more than four times as high than in other regions.45
There are some similarities between these sectors
of employment that have a very high proportion of
migrants as part of their workforce. They provide
services either to individuals (catering, care workers,
nurses) or for the smooth operation of business and
infrastructure (contract cleaning). They often have
working hours outside the normal working day and
require working shifts. Crucially, they are jobs that
have increasingly been subject to subcontracting
and agency work and therefore subject to market
competition that pushes wages down.
These jobs are disproportionately carried out by
recently arrived migrants from poorer countries.
In some cases, certain jobs rely heavily on a
workforce recruited from people coming from
specific countries: people from India and thePhilippines account for over half of migrant nurses
who have arrived in the past 10 years 46and Black
Africans, especially from Ghana and Nigeria make
up the majority of the workforce cleaning the
underground.47Other sectors have workforces
coming from a diversity of countries of origin,
such as office cleaning, catering and social work.
Nevertheless, for certain nationalities there are
employment niches in which they concentrate.
Non-migrant 21% 20% 21% 19% 20%
High wage countries 0-3 18% 14% 12% 21% 35%
>3 19% 15% 16% 22% 28%
Asylum countries 0-3 31% 24% 14% 13% 18%
>3 23% 20% 14% 21% 22%
Other low wage countries 0-3 46% 20% 10% 14% 11%
>3 25% 19% 16% 17% 22%
Source: LSE 2007
YEARS IN THE
UK
BOTTOM QUINTILE
(20.8p.h)
TABLE 6. MIGRANTS ORIGINS AND LABOUR MARKET OUTCOMES
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
22/52
48The long term trend
suggested that changes
in Londons labour market
were characterised by a
process of professionalization
(Hammnet 2003), but the
new data suggests that there
is a process of polarisation
happening along the lines
of that described by Sassens
Global City hypothesis.
20 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
Some authors have suggested that low wages and
poor working conditions have created in Londona migrant division of labour, with foreign born
workers overwhelmingly performing most of the
low-paid work of several sectors of the economy.
Furthermore, there is evidence that the proportion
of people employed in the lowest paid jobs has
grown in the past few years. This is a significant
shift in the trend over the past couple of decades in
which the proportion of people employed in highly
paid jobs had been increasing while the proportion
of those in low paid jobs had stayed constant. This
recent growth in low-paid employment has reliedon the supply of migrant labour.48
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
23/52
21 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
3. Policy issues arising from immigration in aglobal city
Key points:
y Migrants are estimated to make higher relative fiscal contributions than non-
migrants.
y Londons local authorities are getting a raw deal from migration because of
problems with the population estimates on which their budgets are allocated.
y There are some direct public sector costs associated with immigration related to
integration and administrative costs.
y Recent migrants tend to be housed in the private rented sector which has been
able to accommodate the recent influx but as they settle, migrants tend to have
similar housing needs to those of long term residents.
y Homelessness amongst migrants with no entitlement to housing support is an
emerging issue of concern in London.
y Migrants are relatively healthy and a key source of labour for the NHS, but a
number of them find it difficult to access health services.
yMigration has not had a significant effect on employment and unemploymentrates in London but has had an effect in depressing wages in low paid jobs.
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
24/52
As well as benefits, immigration brings about a
series of challenges to which policy makers haveresponded to in a variety of ways. One of the big
issues raised by the large numbers of new arrivals
in the past decade has been the ways in which the
increase in population can put pressure on services
and on the strategies of authorities at different
levels.
Another area of concern is the way in which migrant
workers affect the labour market, with debates on
whether migrants depress wages and whether they
contribute to unemployment amongst native bornworkers and other long-term residents. The rapid
turnover in population evidently has implications
and costs for policies and service provision at the
local level. While some of the actions taken by local
authorities and other public bodies to adapt to
these changes have been documented, there is,
however, little available evidence of the real scale
and costs of these changes.49
Some immigrant groups contribute more in revenue
than other groups, but work by the Institute of
Public Policy Research has estimated that overall
the relative net fiscal contribution of migrants is
higher than that of the UK born population. The
annual net contribution of the migrant and UK born
populations alike is positive or negative depending
on whether there is a deficit or not in the annual
budget, but the net contribution of migrants is
higher than that of the British born population in
any case.50However, because budget allocation for
local areas is partly based on population estimates
which have been shown to be inaccurate, the fiscal
contribution of migrants is often not adequatelyreflected in the budgets of local authorities.
A lot of the negative coverage on migration in
the popular press has focused on access to public
services such as housing and health, with stories
of abuse of the system, allegations that migrants
have been given priority over the settled population
and that services are being over stretched. These
stories, focused as they are on extreme cases, often
give the erroneous impression that migrants put
more demands on services than settled residents.
22 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
However, the largest problem local authorities claim
to be facing in terms of funding is not that migrantsare more demanding on services than the settled
population, but with the problematic population
estimates on the basis of which public funds are
allocated.51
Population estimates and projections for local areas
play a key role in the way that the government
calculates the grants that fund the work of local
authorities. Their funding is allocated according
to the estimated and projected population of the
area and this population is calculated using figuresfrom the last census in 2001 updated with changes
due to births and deaths, internal migration and
international migration.
The International Passenger Survey, which is used
to estimate international migration, has been
especially singled out as not fit for purpose in
producing these estimates. The association of
London councils has expressed its dissatisfaction
with the accuracy of population estimates for
London boroughs, stating that these underestimate
the real numbers of residents.52
A recent report from the House of Commons
Treasury Committee suggested that the Statistics
Authority should as a priority develop better
local population estimates and the London
Regional Committee of the House of Commons
has stated its preoccupation that the 2011 census
may undercount Londons population.53Despite
changes in the way population numbers are
estimated, London boroughs continue to feel there
are problems and have warned about possibleundercounts in the forthcoming census.
Research with local authorities has singled out that
poor population estimates mean that they are being
under resourced as the figures used to allocate their
budgets are not accurate.54Furthermore, short term
and irregular migrants are generally not included
in these estimates but local authorities still have to
provide them with some services.
49Travers, Tony, Rebecca
Tunstall and Christing
Whitehead, 2007, Population
Mobility and Service Provision:
A report for London Councils,
London: LSE, p17.
50Sriskandarajah,
Dhananjayan, Laurence Cooleyand Howard Reed, 2005,
Paying their way: the fiscal
contribution of immigrants in
the UK, London: IPPR.
51House of Commons
Treasury Committee, 2008,
Counting the Population,
Eleventh Report of Session
2007-08, London: House of
Commons; Audit Commission,
2007, Crossing borders:
Responding to the local
challenges of migrant
workers, Public Services
National report, London:
Audit Commission; iCoCo,
2007, Estimating the scale and
impacts of migration at the
local level, London: LGA.
52 London Councils, 2010,
Counting the cost: improvingthe accuracy of population
figures; London Councils, 2007,
Population Measures and
Grant Distribution.
53 House of Commons London
Regional Committee, 2010,
Londons population and
the 2011 Census: First report
of session 2009-10, London:
House of Commons.
54iCoCo, 2007, Estimating the
scale and impacts of migration
at the local level, London: LGA.
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
25/52
55Travers, Tony, Rebecca
Tunstall and Christing
Whitehead, 2007, Population
Mobility and Service Provision:
A report for London Councils,
London: LSE.
23 Migrant Capital: a perspective on contemporary migration in London
Two important elements to highlight here are that,
first, international migration is only one elementamongst others in terms of population change and
the way it is estimated. Internal migration also plays
an important part. The second is that there is no
implication that migrants place higher demands on
services than non-migrants, but that migrants are
being undercounted due to problems in population
estimates.
A further cost for local authorities arising from
immigration is the administrative costs incurred
in processing the new population in terms ofupdating records and services. This, however, is a
common feature for all types of mobility, not only
international, and thus the scale of the problem
goes well beyond the impact of international
migrants, including the movement of people within
the UK and within London. These costs are thus
associated with mobility generally, and not just with
international migrants.55
Immigration policy and its
implications
Immigration policy and the different rights and
entitlements assigned to the different categories of
immigration status frame much of the subsequent
impact that migrants have on local areas and
policies. Immigration status puts conditions
on migrants rights to enter the country, their
authorised length of stay, activities they can
undertake and access to public funds.
Access to some public services is limited for migrantsdepending on immigration status. Thus, welfare
support, social housing and free secondary health
provision are restricted for those who are not settled.
Other services are universal, for example emergency
and primary health care and childrens education.
This means that there are often significant differences
between settled and recent migrants in terms of
access and use of public services. There are several
immigration pathways into the UK which can be
grouped under the broad headings of freedom of
movement within the EU, family reunion, asylum and
migration for work and study.
People from most of the EU countries are not
subject to immigration control, although for a
transition period those from the A8 countries are
required to register under the Worker Registration
Scheme and have limited access to public funds
until settled. People from Bulgaria and Romania,
also need to apply for permission to work in the UK.
For non-EU nationals wishing to move to the UK
on a long term basis there are three main routes of
entry: as workers through the points based systemand work permits; through family reunion or through
applying for asylum. There are also temporary entry
permissions for students and visitors.
Policy around asylum seekers and refugees has been
at the heart of changes to the immigration system.
The changes were introduced as a reaction to the
large increase in asylum applications in the late
1990s and early 2000s and the concurrent public
fear that the asylum system was being abused. The
restrictions, however, covered all asylum seekers
who were going through a decision and appeals
system that often took several years to produce a
final decision.
As a result of these changes, a special public
support service was set up to provide housing and
subsistence support to asylum seekers. Housing
support was conditional on applicants moving to
allocated areas of the country. Similarly, asylum
seekers can only enter employment with Home
Office authorisation if their cases have taken more
than a year to be resolved.
The limited access to welfare and housing
entitlements and, in some cases, restrictions
on working, means that asylum seekers can be
especially vulnerable to destitution, homelessness
and health problems. Similarly, A8 migrants who
lose their jobs before having worked continuously
for 12 months in the UK can also become destitute.
Even though there is not much data available, it has
been suggested that the cost for London boroughs
of supporting people from abroad with no recourse
-
8/13/2019 MRN Migrant Capital June 2010
26/52
UK. Those not recognised by the government as
unable to return home become irregular migrantsand often end up destitute.59
The irregular population, however, also includes
overstayers, people who remain in the country once
their temporary visas expire, and illegal entrants,
those who either evade entry control or enter
on false documents. A further group of irregular
migrants is that of those who have authorisation
to be in the country but are in breach of their visa
conditions. A common case is that of students
who are in employment more than the authorisednumber of hours and/or who do not attend their
courses.
Irregular migrants are a diverse population but
the bulk of the estimated irregular population
is made up of failed asylum seekers. Contrary to
press coverage focusing on irregular migrants
entering the UK hidden in lorries, the vast majority
of irregular migrants have entered the country
legally. Furthermore, the trajectory of many of these
individuals often involves changing status, moving
between regularity and irregularity.
Some of these issues are more prominent in
London than in other areas due to the particular
characteristics of the capital.
Language and information provision
The main responses that local authorities have had
to undertake in respect of international migrants
relate to aiding the settlement of migrants, a largepart of which involves provision of information and
language issues. Many local authorities have had
to provide information services, publications and
advice to newcomers, as well as training staff on
diversity and creating new posts in order to improve
communications with new communities. Equally,
there has been an increase in the need to provide
translation and interpretation services. Finally,
there is an increased demand on courses of English
for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) which
are seen as a priority for effective integration.60In
56Travers, Tony, Rebecca
Tunstall and Christing
Whitehead, 2007, Population
Mobility and Service Provision:
A report for London Councils,
London: LSE, p32.
57 Home Office, 2009, Control
of Immigrations: Statistics
United Kingdom 2008, Home
Office 2009; ICAR, 2007,
Asylum Appeals Process,
Thematic Briefing, London:
ICAR.
58 ICAR, 2009, Key Statistics
about asy