The recent enlargement of the European Union has seen a re-emergence of the debate on migration, and the effect on our economy. It's a highly emotive issue to many people, but I am pleased that, amidst the usual scaremongering by the right-wing press, there has been some sound reporting of the facts by the more responsible end of the British press.

Two reports I especially wanted to highlight:

The Independent:

"The feared flood of workers from Bulgaria and Romania failed to materialise at Heathrow airport yesterday as citizens of the European Union’s two newest member states appeared to prefer to stay at home. Flights arriving at terminal one from Bucharest yesterday carried visitors from the Indian sub continent and crestfallen representatives of certain newspapers who had been sent to the Romanian capital to chronicle the expected influx, only to find no takers. As one photographer for a red-top newspaper put it: “Complete waste of time. No one wanted to fly. We even offered to help with the fare”.

Of course, this did not deter the red tops who went ahead and printed stories of mass migration anyway.

The second was a speech, reported in the Times, given by leading economist David Blanchflower, (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2532521,00.html). Professor Blanchflower highlights how migrant workers have not generally taken jobs from British people, have helped keep the economy stable and that there is no evidence to support suggestions that Eastern European workers are keeping wages artificially low.

Of course, many people will have a view of whether immigration is a good thing or otherwise, and they’re entitled to it, but when one of London’s most respected economists, presenting facts and figures, disagrees with the views of a red top journalist, I know who I think is more credible!