Disclosure statement

Karen Bloor has received project funding from the National Institute for Health Research, the Department of Health's Policy Research Programme and the European Union. The views expressed are her own.
Andrew Street has recived project funding from the National Institute of Health Research, the Department of Health's Policy Research Programme, and the European Union. The views expressed are his own.

I notice how you have a knack of putting words in peoples mouths? But I'll answer. Probably not 'Null & Void' but very likely heavily Biased.
In much the same way that If someone who worked in the Oil industry said global warming didn't exist.

[Figures quoted from 'Migration Watch']
Immigration means that there are more people for the NHS to care for. In 2013/2014 there were 600,000 new migrant GP registrations in England, Wales and Northern Ireland – that’s a new registration every minute. Migrant women have a higher fertility rate than the UK born and therefore place a disproportionate burden on maternity care – more than one in four babies born in England and Wales (27%) in 2015 was to a migrant mother.While migrants might be young when they first arrive they will also inevitably age and go on to place pressure on the NHS just as the existing population does.

The government introduced an NHS surcharge of £150 per year in 2015 for students and temporary migrants from outside the EU. By Autumn 2016 this had raised an extra £164 million. However, the NHS has also been criticised by the National Audit Office for inefficiency in collecting debts from non-EEA visitors and also for not being rigorous enough in checking the status of visiting patients from other European countries. In 2014/2015, the UK paid out £674 million to European Economic Area (EEA) countries for the treatment of UK nationals visiting Europe yet received just under £50 million from other European nations in the same year for the treatment of EEA visitors in Britain. The NAO adds that the failure to collect debts for treating visitors will cost the health service more than £200 million in 2017.

Some argue that the NHS would collapse without migrant labour. It is true that migrants make up a significant share of the workforce. Research suggests that 26%-35% of doctors and 22% of nurses were born abroad, but no one is advocating restricting doctors or nurses from coming to work in Britain where they are needed.
The UK is failing to maintain the supply of UK-trained nurses and doctors. If it did perhaps we would not need to recruit so many doctors from overseas. The OECD finds that in Italy, the percentage of doctors born abroad is 5% while in Germany it is around 11%. There are of course additional moral reasons why the UK should not be taking medical professionals from countries where medical needs are far greater. For example, there are more nurses from Malawi working in London than there are Malawian nurses working in Malawi. The World Health Organisation says that a shortage of seven million doctors worldwide is particularly acute in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia.

In summary, while migrants undoubtedly make a valuable contribution to the health profession, they also place certain pressures on it.

Migrants that become “ordinarily resident” in the UK are entitled to use the NHS on the same terms as people born here. But they are less likely than the native population to do so. People who migrate tend to be younger and healthier than native populations. Older people and those with disabilities and severe illness are less likely to move, apart from in extreme circumstances. This underpins a longstanding epidemiological phenomenon, called the “healthy migrant effect”.

Perhaps more Brits should house and bill share then.

Do you disagree with the Oxford study that found
On average, a 10% increase in the share of migrants living in a local authority reduced waiting times by nine days. The authors find no evidence that immigration affects waiting times in A&E and in elective care.

Edited by nickgusset (09 Oct 2017 4.50pm)