Migration Advisory Committee minutes, 11 October 2019
Updated 15 July 2021
120th meeting of the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC)
Friday 11th October 2019 11am to 1:30pm
Conference room 2, 2 Marsham Street, London
Attending:
- Professor Alan Manning
- Professor Jo Swaffield
- Professor Jackline Wahba
- Madeleine Sumption
- Professor Brian Bell
- Professor Jennifer Smith
- Anna Weedon (for Paul Regan)
- MAC Secretariat
Agenda item 1 - Welcome and introductions.
1. The chair thanked Jennifer Bradley for her service to the MAC before her departure at the end of October 2019 and welcomed Toby Nutley as the incoming Deputy Director of the MAC Secretariat. Goodbye was also said to Dominic Hearth who is leaving for a role elsewhere in the Home Office and, his replacement, Tom Blanchard was welcomed to the MAC.
Agenda item 2 - Home Office, MAC Secretariat and MAC updates
2. Anna Weedon updated the MAC on Home Office business. The EU council will meet next week, if a meaningful agreement is met, there will be a vote on the 19th October in Parliament to leave the EU on the 31st October. The Queen’s speech is on Monday (14th October) within there is expected to be four points of business from immigration including the new immigration bill, the European leave to remain scheme, the new post study work visa and an expansion for scientists of the Tier 1 Exceptional Talent Visa. The European settlement scheme has had 2 million applicants, with 1.5 million processed and approved.
3. Jennifer Bradley updated on the MAC secretariat and business.
Agenda item 3 - Modelling update
4. Peter Gambrill thanked the MAC committee members for their views on the follow up note on the modelling from the last meeting. The MAC members were asked their views on using the public sector pay scales for modelling, which they agreed with.
5. The committee were asked for their opinions on the uniform reduction factor in the modelling and whether it should be kept in the equation. The agreement was made to keep it in given that wage progression without could be unrealistically large.
6. Regional variation was discussed with the conclusion being to consider a London vs. UK view, but further analysis on this is required.
7. The value of ‘gamma’ in the white paper was discussed. The conclusion was to hold off on a definite answer on the appropriate level of gamma until further analysis is completed.
8. The committee were asked if there were any other outcomes in the modelling not listed that should be included. Brian Bell requested that percentages in employment by gender be included.
Agenda item 4 - Report outline and plan
9. Holly White presented the plan of the report and asked for members views. Professor Jennifer Smith raised the point that not having leads could be more efficient and collaborative. The conclusion was that other members can comment on chapters, but leads will still stand. Dr. Brian Bell swapped chapter leads with Professor Jennifer Smith.
Agenda item 5 - Stakeholder views – advisory groups and other events
10. Sheena Kerr thanked the committee for their work in stakeholder engagement so far and outlined when and with who the upcoming meetings over the next month are. Susie Constable then outlined the plans for the analysis of the stakeholder engagement, a mix of qualitative and quantitative.
11. The committee were asked to provide feedback on previous engagements they have attended thus far. They thanked the team for their work and stated it was useful to hear differing views from different groups and will continue to attend.
12. Anita Singh provided the committee an update on the Call for Evidence. A total of 34 surveys have been completed with 150 more signed up for far. Follow up emails will be sent to those who have started the survey but have not completed it. The committee stated that groups could be waiting until they have attended the advisory groups with the MAC.
Agenda item 6 - Future Social Research plan
13. Susie Constable presented the proposed future social research plan under the enhanced role for the MAC set out by the immigration white paper. This includes possible future research on Public opinion, evaluation of policy and longitudinal research of certain cohorts. The committee stated that public opinion of migration research should not be conducted by MAC, however did agree that policy evaluation and longitudinal studies could be worthwhile.
Agenda item 7 - Tailor Review – MAC response
14. Chris Haynes presented the proposed response by the MAC to the Tailor Review. Madeleine Sumption proposed agreeing, where possible, to recommendations made. This was generally accepted by the committee. The conclusion was agreed that the MAC will wait for the review to be published then Professor Alan Manning should write a letter in response to the Home Secretary.
Agenda item 8 - Any other business
15. Professor Brian Bell asked if the distribution of the size of the workforce is included in APS data. The secretariat stated that it was.