Theresa May repeatedly tried to interfere with a crucial Government report to put a negative slant on the effects of immigration ahead of the EU referendum, it has been alleged.
The former Home Secretary is accused of playing up the significance of “benefits tourism” - EU nationals coming to the UK to live on welfare - despite reliable evidence that it was only a “small-scale problem”.
Ms May also removed figures supporting EU immigration from the report, according to Liberal Democrat advisers working in the then Coalition Government.
The allegations have come to light after internal emails among Lib Dem immigration experts dating back to 2014 were leaked to The Guardian.
Referring to evidence from the Department of Work and Pensions - that benefits tourism was not a major issue - one adviser said: “My impression is that Conservative secretaries of state are determined not to admit this.”
A large amount of evidence supporting free movement was purportedly removed from the report under the Conservative minister’s leadership, including a report by UCL that found EU migrants were 58 per cent less likely to live in social housing.
The Liberal Democrats denied that they leaked the emails, but Tim Farron said: “These emails show that the then Home Secretary did everything in her power to try and water down the positives of our membership of the EU to try and curry favour with a few backbench Tory MPs.
“It worked for her in the long run, but Theresa May joins the band of Tory politicians who, for the last 30 years, have repeatedly done down our place in Europe for a tabloid headline.
“Now the PM has to pick up the pieces."
The allegations surfaced after Sir Craig Oliver, David Cameron’s former Director of Communications, accused Ms May of betraying David Cameron by failing to back the campaign to stay in the EU wholeheartedly.
The immigration report is not the first Government assessment Ms May has been accused of interfering with. In April, former deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg accused Ms May and her aides of deleting sentences backed be scientific evidence from a report on drugs because they “didn’t like the conclusions”.
