Not foreigners just working people

 We have watched the political climate of late and frankly it makes us sick. Migrant workers are real people after all, so why not just call it wage slavery and be done. It is easy for populists to preach fear and intolerance, based on speculation. Only 3% of all EU citizens live in a member state other than their own. Free movement of workers was enshrined in the Treaty of Rome in 1957 as one of the four key freedoms and the right to move freely around the European Union has been one of the greatest expansions of liberty for workers. Many students are keen to study abroad, and pensioners often see retirement as an opportunity to use their free movement rights and settle in another member state.

For reasons of domestic politics, leaders of some member states ignore the historic achievements that have taken place since the fall of the Berlin Wall, and how much worse the outcome could have been without the accession of 13 countries to the EU in 2004, 2007, and 2013. Some leaders, who now argue for new restrictions on free movement, were among those who pushed most strongly for the Union to expand from 12 members in 1995 to the current 28. Austerity have failed to meet citizens' concerns about the recession and people have understandable concerns about the impact of free movement because the crisis and the impact of austerity have made them vulnerable and fearful for their own prospects. Populists seek to divide their nationals from EU citizens of other member countries. They want to drive a wedge between nationals and "foreigners." Populists paint a picture of free movement as a threat, bringing hordes of "benefit tourists" who abuse the system and are a burden on social provision. Unlike the general narrative presented by populists access by EU citizens to welfare benefits is not an unrestricted right. No EU citizen can reside in another EU country without working or studying and simply claim benefits there unconditionally. During the first three months of residence the host Member State is not obliged by EU law to grant social assistance to economically inactive EU citizens. Nor is it obliged to grant social assistance to first-time jobseekers.  Germany – not the UK – is officially the main destination of free movement within the European Union, a study suggests. Nearly 30 per cent of migrants taking advantage of free-movement rules inside the EU in 2012 travelled to Germany, compared with just 7 per cent of such migrants who moved to Britain, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development said.

Cameron insists that child benefit to children living abroad will halt but has he considered the alternative that it is the case it is cheaper for the state to pay the child benefit rather than having to pay for all the various education and medical costs of children if they were to come into the country. Migrants want to find work and when they work they pay taxes so why shouldn’t they be entitled to the same entitlements?

Some left nationalists argue for work quotas and restrictions on migrants arriving for work and they argue that the present rules favour the employers but as the economist Joan Robinson put it: “The misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all.”  But the main argument is that increased competition for work decreases the bargaining power of local workers. Supposing such regulations were introduced, employers would simply adjust and it would be to the detriment of all. Abandoning free movement may well bring back the era of seasonal work, when men and women from all over Europe are recruited on a temporary basis, live in barrack-like accommodation isolated and away from the centres of population, and are not allowed to bring family members with them. As soon as the work is finished, they will be sent back home. They will have none of the rights now enjoyed by foreign workers under free movement. It would be a return to that era where everything is geared up to make it as cheap as possible, and to get labour as cheap as possible.

It is unscrupulous employers, not workers, who set lower and even illegal wages, promote and profit from social dumping and the black market in labour. Governments can strengthen national laws on unfair dismissal and shorten qualifying periods to prevent exploitation, enforce minimum wage laws, ensuring that breaches are subject to strict sanctions, and guarantee the right to union membership. But that approach goes against the wishes of employers. When workers unite for fair pay and conditions, it strengthens the position of all workers.

The reason we have immigration now is a market dynamic, not because our laws are too lax. We will have migrant labour in the future, legal or otherwise, because the market demands relative low wage labour and there are people for whom our low wage is their good wage.