DAVID MCKEEVER (HAS, June 19) disputes my contention that a drastic cut in immigration would mean a significant loss of revenue, and says that my conclusions are “never ever backed up by data.”

There is a huge amount of data to support my arguments, including the report I mentioned from the Office for Budget Responsibility, which predicts that if immigration continues at the current rate, public sector debt will gradually decline; whereas zero net migration would increase the debt from its present level of around 80 per cent of GDP to 140 per cent by 2060.

There is also research from University College London which shows that between 2001 and 2011, migrants from the EU contributed 34 per cent more to the treasury than they took out, with a net fiscal contribution of £22bn.

David’s argument that these contributions must be set against the cost of paying benefits to British citizens who could be doing jobs taken by immigrants seems plausible; but the truth is more complicated.

According to Oxford University’s Migration Observatory, immigration can actually create new jobs. Immigration leads to higher investment and increased demand for goods and services, which results in greater demand for labour and higher employment rates.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics show that the overall employment rate for UK nationals has remained constant over the past 20 years, despite a doubling of the number of EU nationals working here.

Pete Winstanley, Durham.