Is the baby boom really the problem the press suggest?

posted by: Nick | on: Wednesday, 30 January 2008, 08:19

Yesterday there was news of how the ‘baby boom’ was costing the taxpayer an extra £200m a year. Much of this boom, a study by the NHS found, came from foreign-born mothers having children here. Of course the story was written up as another example of how immigrants are draining our economy.

I have four observations. Firstly, most of these babies will grow up to be UK citizens, get jobs and pay tax. I’m sure over their lifetime they will quite comfortably put back into the system far more than the maternity costs.

Secondly, an increase in babies is actually good for the economy. A couple of years ago one Government Department produced figures showing that by 2050 there would only be two people in work for every pensioner. Surely having more people of working age in 2050 is going to help us pay for our own retirement (yes, the pensions of the very journalists writing these stories).

My third observation is that, according to the same statistics that the BBC and others use, the cost of maternity actually was down last year compared to the year before. Of course, this fact didn’t make it into the main news.

Finally, the 60% increase in maternity spending over the last 10 years has to take inflation and the cost of more expensive new equipment into account. Suddenly the increase is not as large as the lurid headlines suggest.

The media have flagged up some genuine problems, of that I have no doubt. But surely it is just as much a problem of poor forward planning and relocating resources than anything else.

I wonder whether there would have been the same hysterical headlines if there had not been an ‘immigrant’ angle to the story!