The author thinks the report is good and can be trusted.
What does the author complain about (§1)?
that somebody compiled some evidence
that work on the report started in 1990 and took very long
that the British do not think enough about migration
that nobody used solid facts in the discussion
What should the UK have done in 2004?
leave the EU
join the EU
have no election
There were no solid facts for a long time. What did this lead to?
Nobody knew for sure what migration meant for the UK.
Lies were spread.
Citizens relied on hearsay.
The mood of the country turned anti-migration.
What will you not find in the report?
more than 100 pages
data, facts, statistics
ideas on how to handle migration
Read this sentence closely and in its context (=the paragraph). Which information does it contain?
"Years of using immigration as a political football with which to achieve short-term goals have clearly come at a cost."
Politicians abused the topic to gain popularity.
Parliament had a football match on the topic.
The blame is mainly on the politicians.
This was a long development.
Is the summary of the report as given in the paragraphs "Among the most common phrases..." and "Other sections of the MAC..." correct as an over-all impression of the report?
Does the information in the paragraph "The only areas of life..." give the reader the impression that there are serious drawbacks to migration?
What does the author express which this phrasing, "the issue at the heart of the greatest political folly of our age [...] was – after all – founded on a fantasy"?
what you think you know about migration is not true
the political discussion was utterly useless
the discussion was the single biggest mistake of the last years
there is some truth to the discussion
Does the author believe that the report will change the discussion on migration?