Much of the popular press in the UK has been ranting about immigration for a couple of years now, as has been the case in a number of other European countries, particularly since the population of the countries which have joined the EU in the last few years have had more options to move. However, last night at the rugby club I hear an assertion that I felt must be wrong. The assertion was that 4 million 'British' people had left the UK, taking their money with them.
A quick bit of searching unearthed an article on the BBC which gave the most recent official figures, the article was from November and the figures are the 2006 figures (the 2007 figures will not be out until late 2008). According to the article the official figures were:
- Immigration (to the UK): 591,000.
- Emigration (from the UK): 400,000 - looks like the 4 million was a decimal place issue.
- Net migration: 191,000 moved to the UK.
The article also said that half of the 400K people who left the UK were British passport holders, which means that 200K were not, indeed 15,000 were Eastern Europeans who were leaving the UK after only staying for one year or less.
Also! Just over 80,000 of the people migrating to the UK were British, i.e. people who had previously migrated and were coming home.
In addition to the official figures there is broad agreement that there are a large number of illegal immigrants, that is people who are overstaying a visitors visa or who have been smuggled into the country, but since they are not legally here, there are no good statistics on how many there are.
When I look at the debate about immigration statistics, which are not particularly complicated, and I see the use and misuse those poor numbers are subject to, I tend to worry about whether evidence-based, quantitative decision making will ever really take hold in the UK. Are clients, researchers, and the co-creating consumer likely to treat market research data with due respect, or will they/we simply look for numbers that support our position?