Labour leaders pressure Tony Blair to stop EU citizens from arriving in the UK

In the United Kingdom, significant discussions among government officials occurred prior to the EU's expansion on May 1, 2004, when ten eastern European countries became new member states. Senior cabinet ministers, including Jack Straw and John Prescott, expressed strong concerns regarding the potential influx of migrants that such an expansion could entail. They suggested postponing the immediate freedom of movement for newly admitted EU citizens and proposed holding off on legislative changes until a calmer period later in the year. Despite these cautionary voices, the government chose to push ahead with the changes as initially planned. Home Office officials had projected the arrival of around 13,000 migrants in the first year, a figure that would later be far exceeded, with an estimated net total of 87,000 immigrants arriving instead. This decision reflected a split within the cabinet about the economic implications of migration. Some members, such as David Blunkett, then Home Secretary, argued for the need for migrant labor to maintain economic growth, believing that imposing restrictions would hinder flexibility and productivity. The UK, Ireland, and Sweden were the only pre-2004 EU member states to fully open their labor markets to new citizens without transitional controls. Communications between key ministers during the months leading to expansion show misgivings about the official projections and emphasize the contentious nature of the policy decisions surrounding EU migration. After the introduction of free movement, EU citizens arriving in the UK were essentially unrestricted in their ability to live and work, but they could only claim benefits if they were employed. Subsequent analyses suggested that the complete lack of transitional controls and preparations for managing the influx of workers from new EU nations constituted a critical oversight, with long-lasting implications for UK immigration policy. The conversations and meetings leading up to the policy change reflect a government struggling to balance differing viewpoints and anticipate future challenges related to migration.