PEOPLE born to the baby boomer generation are more likely to have a negative view of immigration than those born after 1980, according to a major on-going study.
Public perceptions on immigration are shaped by their age rather than their social class, according to Ipsos MORI survey drawn from surveys conducted over many years
The report has been released following the lifting of rules governing immigration to the UK from Romania and Bulgaria on New Year's Day. It found that immigration increasingly divides the generations in the UK, with those born between 1945 and 1965 that have becoming increasingly negative about the impact of immigration during the past decade, in contrast to younger generations, who have become more positive.
It also indicates that attitudes are changing, with manual workers who used to be much more likely to be concerned than the highest social classes now half as likely to have fears about foreigners arriving in the country.
But there are still different concerns by class and income, with those on low incomes more likely to be worried about the impact of immigration on jobs while those on high incomes are more concerned about immigrants' use of benefits and public services.
Those earning more than £75,000 a year are nearly twice as likely to say pressure on benefits/public services is a reason for their concern than those earning less than £10,000.
The report also shows that immigration has only become an issue of concern during the past 20 years, and barely registered as a national concern before 1990.
Bobby Duffy, managing director of the Ipsos MORI Social Research Institute and one of the report authors, said: "Looking across such a wide range of surveys over such a long period provides a really clear view of our attitudes.
"It shows a public that is generally very sceptical about immigration - but also that there are many more nuances and qualifications than can be picked up in individual surveys. Politicians and the media need to tread a very careful line in recognising the public's significant and genuine concerns while not encouraging unfounded fears based on misperceptions."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article