Latest immigration figures.

Permabanned
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Posts
15,459
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ration-set-to-hit-record-levels-politics-live

Some of the key points.

Main points for year ending March 2015:

Net long-term international migration = +330,000 (up 94,000 from YE [year end] March 2014)

Immigration = 636,000 (up 84,000)

Emigration = 307,000 (down 9,000)

• The net migration figure was a statistically significant increase from 236,000 in YE March 2014 and is the highest net migration on record.

• Net migration of EU citizens showed a statistically significant increase to 183,000 (up 53,000 from YE March 2014). The increase in non-EU net migration to 196,000 (up 39,000) was also statistically significant and is a result of an increase in immigration (not statistically significant) and a decrease in emigration (statistically significant).

• The increase in long-term international immigration included a statistically significant increase for EU citizens to 269,000 (up 56,000), the highest recorded level for this group; and an increase for non-EU nationals to 284,000 (up 23,000) (not statistically significant).

• 53,000 Romanian and Bulgarian (EU2) citizens immigrated to the UK in YE March 2015, a statistically significant increase and almost double the 28,000 in the previous 12 months.

• 290,000 people immigrated for work in YE March 2015, a statistically significant increase of 65,000 from 225,000 in YE March 2014 continuing the upward trend.

• There were statistically significant increases of immigration for work for both EU citizens (from 134,000 to 162,000 in YE March 2015) and non-EU citizens (from 48,000 to 64,000). The increase for British citizens was not statistically significant. Of the 53,000 EU2 citizens immigrating to the UK, 42,000 were coming for work, a statistically significant increase of 20,000.

• 61% of EU citizens immigrating for work had a definite job to go to, whereas 39% were intending to look for a job rather than taking up an offer of employment.

All a a time when rents are rising, there is a housing shortage, the pressure on the NHS is increasing and there are cuts to public services.
 
Permabanned
OP
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Posts
15,459
There are over 600,000 empty homes in the England and over 200,000 dwellings that are unoccupied for over 6 months - so there isn't really a shortage of homes.
How many of those homes are social/private housing? Do local authorities/housing association have the money to bring social housing back into service given the cuts?

Private sector rents are rising, does increased demand lower or increase the price?

The NHS has a 1/4 of its workforce thanks to immigration - the NHS would collapse without it.
Are the numbers of doctors and nurses etc etc being increased to keep up with the demand?

The UK has the least amount of migration in the EU - so there isn't really a problem - other countries deal with it without much problem.
How are they dealing with it?
 
Permabanned
OP
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Posts
15,459
If there aren't enough houses, or enough healthcare or education, why do we blame the immigrants?

Surely it's the role of government to ensure provision (NHS, education) and suitably supportive policy (housebuilding)?

It suits politicians to shift blame for their failings onto immigrants - but don't fall for all that bull[poo] without thinking a little more critically.

Who is blaming immigrants?
 
Permabanned
OP
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Posts
15,459
We're not. Fortunately the economic benefits of immigration help us pay for more public services, houses, etc. The reason these things aren't happening is because of the government's we've voted in not because of people coming here.

Services are being cut.
 
Permabanned
OP
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Posts
15,459
...Yes? And, as I said, that's entirely due to our government.

In fact, the economic growth that we've gained through immigration has helped limit those cuts. Without immigration our GDP would still be lower than it was pre-crash. The tax revenue generated by that growth helps fund our public services.

Do these immigrants not need public services?
 
Permabanned
OP
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Posts
15,459
Conservative Minister Mr Brokenshire said:

These stark figures are deeply disappointing.

While these figures underline the challenges we need to meet to reduce net migration, they should also act as a further wake-up call for the EU.

Current flows of people across Europe are on a scale we haven't seen since the end of World War Two. This is not sustainable and risks the future economic development of other EU member states.

It wasn't that long ago that George Osborne said immigration was good because it showed the economy was recovering.
 
Permabanned
OP
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Posts
15,459
Immigrants are a net positive to our economy so how about directing your anger towards the correct people? ie the useless politicians who haven't spent this extra money on increasing public services:confused:

The amount of people here who lack critical thinking and believe any old crap they are told is utterly depressing, gullible ignoramuses :mad:

Does that somehow trump all the issues immigration brings?
 
Permabanned
OP
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Posts
15,459
How many of those homes are social/private housing? Do local authorities/housing association have the money to bring social housing back into service given the cuts?

Private sector rents are rising, does increased demand lower or increase the price?

How many of them are habitable? How long have they been empty? Are they in the right place to meet demand where it is? How big is the shortage and what period of time would those house cover if every single one was magically ready to go right now? Considering we need two or three hundred thousand houses every year for a long time, 600 000 really isn't that many in the grand scheme of things (and that's without considering the other things I mentioned).

Don't get me wrong I completely understand the attraction of the points system, and the allowance of a more systemic immigration approach. However I don't think we would have a solution that is fluid enough. Lots of us emigrate to the EU with ease, surely we want to continue to make it easy in all directions? But that's just the EU, so what's the problem with that? The actual number of non EU immigrants is tiny and rather insignificant. Sure some do not make an effort as much as they should, but generally this is the exception to the rule.

I think we have a duty of care to offer legitimate asylum seekers a chance to settle here should they choose to. I accept illegal immigration is not generally welcomed, but neither are benefit cheats, or tax dodgers, and many other British (non immigrant legal or not) people who flaunt the law and make the life for the rest of us miserable and costing us money. Attributing that solely to immigrants (or even illegal immigrants) is actually erroneous - there are more problems within the UK that need to be addressed rather than worrying about the insignificant number of people choosing the UK to be their home.

Maybe I'm blindly optimistic, but I see more benefits from having a diverse community than an insular one. However what I do agree with is that this argument goes round and round as there is no honest data, mainly anecdotal and opinion based.

Can you address the above points?
 
Permabanned
OP
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Posts
15,459
kind of is

you don't get Californians moaning about 'immigration' from other US states yet we have people come from certain other EU states - Romania, Bulgaria, Poland etc.. and the daily fail brigade is up in arms... strangely enough no one complains about highly educated French graduates working in the city, but as soon as it can be portrayed as affecting the chav class then tis quite easy for the xenophobia to be stirred up

I don't complain about highly educated Indian immigrants coming to this country, I have invited them to my house and broken bread with them.

Not sure what your point is really.
 
Back
Top Bottom