Friend or Foé wrote: ↑Fri Nov 04, 2022 7:50 am
I make no distinction because this thread is about migrants crossing the channel Illegally for immigration purposes. It doesn’t form any part of our normal immigration policy of selection based on application and approval process.
Put it this way, the census reveals that you need not worry about low population growth stalling economic growth to fund essential services and pensions. In fact at no other time in our recent modern history as a nation, records have never shown such a rate of increase as the last set of figures and worryingly the same occured from the previous census. Your concern should really be that all those services haven’t been able to grow quick enough to adapt to population growth at these rates.
If you’re comfortable in the thought that we can absorb an immigration invasion that increases the population by the factor equal to a small city over a couple of years just by illegal means alone (not counting those we didn’t catch !) then I’d politely suggest you tell us how the equivalent services are physically tailored to match or exceed demand. The only way a nation can gain from immigration into an economy is through correct means via immigration policy using a vetting process that lets in people that have been assessed to be an economic benefit.
There is not a single person posting in this thread arguing that we should be accepting of, encourage, or not care about illegal immigration. This is a lie that comes from the same place as the accusation of Starmer (or any other senior Labour figure) wanting open borders. It's nonsense designed to move the conversation away from asking questions about why the problem is getting worse.
How much of the growth between the last two census' (censii?) was due to illegal immigration then? Again, I don't know a number here but I'm supposed to be scared of it so it would be good to know what we're dealing with. And this is where my confusion with your point is - if you're talking about census numbers then you're likely talking about legal immigration which will make up the vast majority of any increase in population that has been caused by migration.
You might sense a theme here but if public services, utilities and infrastructure aren't managing to keep up with the growth of population (and tax revenues which pay for them all), who do you think I'm going to blame for that? I'll give you a clue it's not an Albanian bloke who eventually gets turfed out, a family of Syrian refugees, a class of Chinese students or a chippy from Bucharest.
sendô wrote: ↑Fri Nov 04, 2022 1:20 pm
This government doesn't want solutions.
A government that champions a tough border regime wants to be seen as failing? I think we all know that's tosh, but Labour sorts are wriggling uncomfortably because they are known or perceived to be just as bad or worse.
The proposals Delbs refers to are a combination of tried and failed, or riddled with bizarre impracticalities that would almost necessitate the Border Force morphing into a full blown home guard lining the south and east coast.
As for the Rwanda plan - there is a reason the Public and Civil Servants union is so keen to make sure this doesn't succeed, and it has bugger all to do with the welfare of migrants.
Macca1973 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 04, 2022 1:51 pm
You’re having a shocker. Should Abbott also point out women shouldn’t go out on their own at night or girls shouldn’t wear short skirts?
I was exaggerating for lazy effect, Sammy. I should have said less rather than no more.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics- ... m-36454908
Having said that, anecdotally it's quite believable that some Vote Leavers did really believe that leaving the EU would result in less immigration despite even then, non-EU migration being higher than EU.
Samba wrote: ↑Fri Nov 04, 2022 8:08 pm
Having said that, anecdotally it's quite believable that some Vote Leavers did really believe that leaving the EU would result in less immigration despite even then, non-EU migration being higher than EU.
For sure some did. Check out page 33, Table 1, in THIS article. Multiple regression stats aside, it's the last 8 variables that are informative. All of those factors played a role including a belief that leaving the EU would just reduce immigration [full stop].
DrVenk wrote: ↑Fri Nov 04, 2022 8:25 pm
For sure some did. Check out page 33, Table 1, in THIS article. Multiple regression stats aside, it's the last 8 variables that are informative. All of those factors played a role including a belief that leaving the EU would just reduce immigration [full stop].
Yeah I had to explain to my parents that being in the EU had nothing to do with non-EU immigration into the UK! Sadly this was after the referendum.
likemydreams wrote: ↑Sun Nov 06, 2022 12:02 am
No places for local kids in years 7 and 9 in kent now, but at least we dont have the same numbers as france and germany
Terrible situation. Will you be writing to the Home Office to ask them to do the sensible thing and relieve the pressure on infrastructure in Kent by dispersing asylum seekers further afield?
likemydreams wrote: ↑Sun Nov 06, 2022 12:02 am
No places for local kids in years 7 and 9 in kent now, but at least we dont have the same numbers as france and germany
Monkeybubbles wrote: ↑Sun Nov 06, 2022 7:33 am
Terrible situation. Will you be writing to the Home Office to ask them to do the sensible thing and relieve the pressure on infrastructure in Kent by dispersing asylum seekers further afield?
I'd counsel against sending children to places where there is already a chronic shortage of school places. But I imagine that the Home Office and Serco will plough on regardless.
Firstly, Labour tried dispersal about twenty years ago . The locals in Glasgow (? - it was definitely Scotland) murdered one of the new arrivals.
Secondly, why would the new arrivals stay dispersed? The evidence is that people left to their own devices will huddle together in a community that builds an infrastructure they are familiar with, where they share a common language and a common culture (e.g. similar places of worship).
Whilst dispersal seems the sensible per capita and integrationist answer, there are so many natural reasons why it does not happen, at least in any sense of the immediate or short term. Over generations, it changes though.
Oldun wrote: ↑Sun Nov 06, 2022 8:42 am
Why would a year 9 be involved ,surely they are already in the school or do you think they remove our kids and replace them with illegal immigrants?
Because people move home and need new schools maybe?