GORDON Brown has rebuffed calls by senior parliamentarians to cap the number of migrants to Britain, insisting that foreigners are vital to the economy.
The Prime Minister was speaking after a Lords economic affairs committee, which included two former chancellors, disputed government claims that migrants boosted national income by £6 billion.
At his Downing Street press conference, Mr Brown insis
ted that British business had benefited "very substantially" from immigration in the last decade.
But the Prime Minister also accepted it was important to get the balance right, given "pressures on the economy".
He said gross domestic product per head had risen dramatically since 1997, from £13,900 then to £22,840 in the last year.
A cap on potential immigrants could only be applied to those outside the EU, he said.
"And of course many of these people are the highly skilled workers who are important to the economy," he went on. "But we want to get the balance right between that and being sensible about the pressures on our economy."
He said the government had introduced a points system so that there would be no unskilled immigrants from outside the European Union.
It had also set up a citizenship fund requiring immigrants to pay a higher charge for services they use while in the UK. And the government had addressed strains on services in certain areas with additional financial support.
The economic affairs committee's report concludes that record levels of immigration have brought little or no economic benefit.
Lord Wakeham, the inquiry chairman, said: "Looking to the future, if you have got that increase in numbers and you haven't got any economic benefit from it, you have got to ask yourself, is this a wise thing to do? That is why we want the government to look at it."
Liam Byrne, the immigration minister, pledged to put national interests "centre stage".
The report, he said, had argued that ministers should be taking into account the wider impact of immigration when setting immigration policy. He insisted: "I think that is absolutely right."
David Cameron, the Conservative leader, said: "We want people to work here and come to Britain. The problem with the government is that they absolutely refuse to set any sort of limit on immigration."
Business leaders last night appeared at odds over the government's policy. Neil Carberry, the CBI's head of employment, said while businesses had called for a flexible immigration system, they had never called for mass, uncontrolled migration.
"Large-scale movement of labour is no long-term answer to our skills needs.
"The government must do more to ensure that the young people emerging from our education system have the right skills for the workplace."
But Chris Hannant, of the British Chambers of Commerce, said UK businesses depended on immigration. "Many businesses are reliant on migrant workers because increasingly large numbers of British people do not have either the right skills or aptitude for work," he said.
"Without the steady flow of migrant labour into the UK most businesses would be struggling to expand or fill vacancies."
Meanwhile, Mr Brown suggested that the current shortage of curry chefs in Britain could be filled by local people retraining. Restaurant owners have warned a new points-based system would halt the arrival of Bangladeshi cooks and force closures.
Mr Brown said: "We will make it possible for people who work in this country to train to be either chefs or restaurant workers in the industry."
LABOUR REBELS EMBARRASS SMITH OVER TERROR DETENTION PLANTHE Home Secretary faced embarrassment in the Commons last night, as she attempted to secure backing for a plan to increase the amount of time terrorist suspects can be held without charge from 28 to 42 days.
Jacqui Smith was quizzed by MPs over comments by Sir Ken Macdonald, the director of public prosecutions, that 28 days was sufficient and had resulted in a 92 per cent conviction rate.
Chris Mullin, a rebel Labour MP, insisted the remarks by Sir Ken presented an "insurmountable obstacle" to the government's attempts to force through the changes in the Counter-Terrorism Bill.
David Winnick, a back-bench Labour MP, said: "There is no evidence whatsoever to support such an extension."
A previous attempt to increase the period of pre-charge detention from 14 days to 90 days resulted in Tony Blair's first parliamentary defeat as prime minister and the compromise of the 28-day limit.
Ms Smith admitted that she was seeking to win support on "this thorny issue", with the key votes expected next month.
And she went on: "The response of the law cannot remain frozen when the scale and nature of the threat grows."
She said that the terrorist threat was now "more ruthless, very often aiming to cause mass civilian casualties without warning, using suicide attacks and with even chemical, biological and radiological weapons".
There were more than 200 groups and 2,000 individuals being monitored in the UK – an "unprecedented scale", she said.
The bill aims to introduce a "reserve power", which would have to be ratified in each case by parliament, for police to be able to interview suspects for up to 42 days to cope with increasingly complex terror plots.
