The snarling dud of May
Theresa May, the home secretary and would-be successor to David Cameron, this week declared that “there is no case, in the national interest, for immigration of the scale we have experienced”. Wrong. In 2001-11 new immigrants from the European Economic Area (EEA) contributed one-third more in revenues than they drew in public spending, subsidising native Britons. This boost to the public purse will be handy. The independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) expects the greying British public to push up borrowing requirements with its growing reliance on state health care and pensions. More young migrants would ease the pressure; under the OBR’s high-migration scenario, less borrowing would mean that by 2035 public debt would be lower than under the low-migration scenario to the tune of 7% of GDP. As well as reinforcing the Tories’ “nasty party” image, Ms May could undermine their reputation for fiscal prudence, too.
This article appeared in the Britain section of the print edition under the headline "The snarling dud of May"
From the October 10th 2015 edition
Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents
Explore the editionMore from Britain
Why Britain’s membership of the ECHR has become a political issue
And why leaving would be a mistake
The ECtHR’s Swiss climate ruling: overreach or appropriate?
A ruling on behalf of pensioners does not mean the court has gone rogue
Why are so many bodies in Britain found in a decomposed state?
To understand Britons’ social isolation, consider their corpses