I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
It depends on who is in government, they could have gone up or down. I think they have a lot of control
Ever heard of Respect? Or the Islamic Party of Great Britain? There is a market out there - especially when Muslims are feeling ignored and watching grim scenes on the TV - but don't get over excited.
But they never really took off, did they? One was dominated too much by the eccentric Galloway the other was too weird
That’s why I said “serious” Muslim party. As the Muslim population grows it is quite possible to see a more impactful party forming - something more like Plaid Cymru - who actually win constituencies, regularly, and are influential at lower levels of governance
It is inevitable in my opinion. It was happening in East London already, and the Labour Party’s stance on Palestine seems to have sped things up
You think it’s a bad thing, I think it’s a good thing. Any such party would presumably attract much more conservative Muslims who see their religious identity as paramount. At the moment those people are in the Labour Party and - as I see it - neither side benefits from this
Much better to have them out and in their own party and we can see what they believe and desire - and we can choose how we feel about it
At the same time they will have a democratic voice and won’t have to abide by policies they abhor - eg Labour support for Israel at the moment
It is also, as you say; probably inevitable
That would be ok if the Islamic % of the population weren’t growing at such a rate. It can’t be good for social cohesion/migrant assimilation if a political party representing just Muslims becomes a major force - it would be like ghettoisation on steroids, both in the Muslim seats and a lot of non Muslim seats
The thing is we obviously always had control of non-EU migration while in the EU, and could never get that down to low levels, so it's not really a surprise that it's carried on is it?
Ever heard of Respect? Or the Islamic Party of Great Britain? There is a market out there - especially when Muslims are feeling ignored and watching grim scenes on the TV - but don't get over excited.
But they never really took off, did they? One was dominated too much by the eccentric Galloway the other was too weird
That’s why I said “serious” Muslim party. As the Muslim population grows it is quite possible to see a more impactful party forming - something more like Plaid Cymru - who actually win constituencies, regularly, and are influential at lower levels of governance
It is inevitable in my opinion. It was happening in East London already, and the Labour Party’s stance on Palestine seems to have sped things up
You think it’s a bad thing, I think it’s a good thing. Any such party would presumably attract much more conservative Muslims who see their religious identity as paramount. At the moment those people are in the Labour Party and - as I see it - neither side benefits from this
Much better to have them out and in their own party and we can see what they believe and desire - and we can choose how we feel about it
At the same time they will have a democratic voice and won’t have to abide by policies they abhor - eg Labour support for Israel at the moment
It is also, as you say; probably inevitable
If advocates of PR get their way, our politics would probably start to look quite Dutch before long, and maybe that's not a bad thing for democracy.
Yes, I think an early election is nailed on. Rishi has had quite a good time of it since the sacking of Braverman and the return of Dave. Use the next Budget to cement the economic joy in English hearts then Bang - just go for it. We're probably at peak Rishi, so no point whatsoever stretching it out for much longer.
Looking at the violence in Dublin last night, and the “election” of Wilders, it’s hard not to think Europe is heading for some major crisis centred on migration and culture wars and terror and all that jazz
It’s very cynical, but the Tories might calculate that the longer they wait the greater the chance some catastrophic black swan will break the arm of history - and give them a fighting chance
Yes, the Tories should run an election on their record on immigration...
@EdConwaySky Hard to put into words just how enormous the recent flows of migration into UK are, so this chart 👇 is prob a better place to start. This country has NEVER seen net migration as high as this. Look at the population-adjusted figures going back to 1850. It’s totally unprecedented.
@PickardJE it is objectively quite funny that the biggest surge in immigration in British history came *after* Brexit
I am not desperate to go down this road once again but does it ever cross your mind that with freedom of movement we simply had no idea how many people were coming here, not even to the nearest million, and what we are now seeing is the underlying picture being exposed with slightly better statistics?
As the three countries of origin which dominate the list for the most recent figures are India, Nigeria and China, it does not.
But the millions of east Europeans that came here during freedom of movement has slowed markedly creating demand for other sources.
There is only one reliable way of cutting immigration, and that is to raise the retirement age. An ever increasing number of non-working pensioners with high disposable incomes demanding labour intensive services creates an insatiable demand for working age labour. High immigration and high numbers of pensioners are two sides of the same coin.
Tax wealth not work.
Part of the solution, but in the next 20 years we are going to see the number of over 65s rise from 13mn to 18mn. Immigration is only going one way. There really are only two solutions - immigration or more over 65s working. If you have an ever increasing % of your population out of the labour force, you are going to create ever stronger pressure on the labour force to grow from some other source. It's not rocket science.
You can't solve a labour shortage by immigration any more than the myth of immigrants "taking our jobs".
Yes immigrants add to labour supply, but they also create new demand - and that demand includes structural demand on housing, school places etc and other things that don't exist yet, so need to be created and not just their demand for basic services.
Immigration is relatively neutral for supply and demand, labour shortages or unemployment is caused by an imbalance of prices and supply and demand, adding more immigrants adds both more supply and more demand so it cancels out.
If you want to solve labour shortages, then we need to see wages rise to the point that inefficient jobs are no longer affordable and inefficient businesses go out of business resulting in demand falling and the labour shortage is resolved that way. Its also how we can afford real terms pay rises and a better standard of living too.
Depends what age the immigrants are. The ideal migration strategy would be to import at 22 (or 18 if you want that tuition income), export at 50.
Yes and no.
Some countries do that, they say you can come to work but have no right to settle and will have to emigrate afterwards. Wouldn't fit with our standards of human rights though.
But either way 18/22 year olds coming are going to need somewhere to live (housing), they're going to probably be fertile (maternity is one of the leading NHS costs for young people), and they're going to need schools for children etc, etc, etc
All that new demand needs satiating, and which means extra labour going to providing those things. The only way to have immigration not create that demand is if its netted off against what would be population decline, but we're not having population decline, we have births exceeding deaths anyway.
If you want to solve labour shortages, we need more efficiency, which means higher pay and no longer doing inefficient work. Immigration to solve the shortage is as futile as a dog chasing its tail (and it goes both ways for those who claim immigration causes unemployment, they're wrong too).
Yet another comment which completely ignores the impending A.I. revolution - when the problem is likely to be too little work and too many idle workers
This is not a dig at @BartholomewRoberts - everyone on PB does this. It’s like A.I. isn’t happening
Because its not.
Its evolution not revolution.
For centuries some old jobs have been automated, and people find new jobs to do instead. AI is no different to robotics, machinery, assembly lines or any other form of technology we've had since the industrial revolution began.
No, AI is going to be much closer to revolution than evolution. Much more like the Industrial Revolution - but likely even faster
And that utterly transformed life and patterns of work, for everyone
Didn't hunter gatherers spend most of their time lounging around? And then some idiot invented farming and it's all been downhill from there.
Agricultural Revolution > Herring Fishing Industrial Revolution > child labour and losing your fingers in a mill Computers > Microsoft Excel Internet > interminable Teams calls
According to archaeological evidence, and the remaining hunter gatherer tribes, they spent their days in warfare, murder, rape....
So the hunter gatherers were no different to the Norse?
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
To be honest Richard, you don't really have a case to answer here. You've always been open you wanted a soft Brexit and to stay in the single market. It's Boris, Cummings, and morons such as JRM and Braverman who need to be held accountable here.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
The greater failing by this and previous Governments is for being in denial.
By acting as if net migration will be marginal or in the tens of thousands, there has been insufficient investment in services like schools, hospitals, roads, rails etc - or permission for the market to build enough houses and other things too.
France has the same population as us, but 10 million extra houses. Even if every single potential house that had planning permission was magically built overnight, there'd still be a shortage of millions of homes, and a shortage of schools, hospitals or anything else.
Since 2000 our population has grown by 14% but our road network has grown by less than 2%.
Same story for schools, hospitals and everything else.
Nothing wrong with population growth, but infrastructure needs to grow roughly proportionately with it. Simply throwing more people into the same infrastructure does not work.
Yes the You Gove poll shows the Cons vote going from 21 (you cannot get much lower than that) to 25 BUT Techne polling on the 22 and 23rd November, same dates as You Gov, have the Cons DOWN from 22 to 21. Really it does not matter when the election is held it will probably be a near wipe out.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
My answer to those questions are: No similar As much as they choose to have which is not a lot.
The Times helpfully explained that news & current affairs staff were blocked from this rally and also from pro-Palestine rallies.
But staff working in news and current affairs, factual journalism and senior leaders who have sought permission from the broadcaster to attend have been told that they need to adhere to the BBC’s existing guidance on attending marches, which state that staff in those divisions should not participate in public demonstrations or gatherings about controversial issues.
Individuals who have asked to take part in previous pro-Palestinian marches are understood to have received similar instructions.
Britain has had very low real productivity growth since the mid 2000s, and record levels of immigration. The new figures are simply mind-blowing.
When Labour come to power they will suddenly find themselves owning this. I wonder how prepared they are.
The problem isn't that we've had immigration, its that rather than seeking high-skilled immigration we've been getting cheap, unskilled immigration.
Getting more unskilled, cheap people into the country just devalues and deflates our productivity.
We have enough unskilled people in this country who can do menial jobs. What we need is a highly skilled, educated workforce. The more of that, the better.
Britain has had very low real productivity growth since the mid 2000s, and record levels of immigration. The new figures are simply mind-blowing.
When Labour come to power they will suddenly find themselves owning this. I wonder how prepared they are.
It’s a damn good question. And like you I suspect they have no clue
Britain is basically a failed Ponzi scheme. We got good growth from massive immigration, then we got mediocre growth from the same. Now we have near zero growth and even greater immigration
We are heading for a colossal explosion as it all breaks down. It might make Brexit look trivial
The Times helpfully explained that news & current affairs staff were blocked from this rally and also from pro-Palestine rallies.
But staff working in news and current affairs, factual journalism and senior leaders who have sought permission from the broadcaster to attend have been told that they need to adhere to the BBC’s existing guidance on attending marches, which state that staff in those divisions should not participate in public demonstrations or gatherings about controversial issues.
Individuals who have asked to take part in previous pro-Palestinian marches are understood to have received similar instructions.
Britain has had very low real productivity growth since the mid 2000s, and record levels of immigration. The new figures are simply mind-blowing.
When Labour come to power they will suddenly find themselves owning this. I wonder how prepared they are.
It’s a damn good question. And like you I suspect they have no clue
Britain is basically a failed Ponzi scheme. We got good growth from massive immigration, then we got mediocre growth from the same. Now we have near zero growth and even greater immigration
We are heading for a colossal explosion as it all breaks down. It might make Brexit look trivial
Growth without controlling for population is meaningless. We should lock any Chancellor that refers to growth without adding the words per capita in the Tower of London from now on.
Growth per capita was oddly enough highest pre-EEC, when we had a stable population.
Since we joined the EEC, growth per capita slowed, and we kept a stable population until the turn of the century.
And since the turn of the century, when our population growth started to take off dramatically, growth per capita has ground to a halt.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
What makes you think that Britain will be singularly resistant to the voices of the far right, as we are swamped by migration, when we have seen highly liberal countries like Sweden and Holland succumb?
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
It depends on who is in government, they could have gone up or down. I think they have a lot of control
My answers would be. No, higher, and not a lot.
Yes as others have pointed out of course technically they have the right to decide who to admit. But as the nations largest employer and having responsibility for provision of public services and balances of payments it really doesn't have much practical flexibility. The Tories, most of them at least, are not lying when they say they want lower immigration, they just can't find a sustainble way to deliver it.
The biggest group is students. About 80% leave within 5 years. We make over £20bn a year from fee income and indirectly a similar amount from their living costs and spending. That is a hell of a lot of money for a country with a big negative balance of payments. Yes we could stop letting them in, but the Chancellor will not be keen to raise income tax by 3 or 4p to compensate.
Look at worker visas: Over half are for health and care workers. 90% are for either health and care workers or skilled workers which have significant public support and are important to the economy. We could have less immigration but a government wouldn't survive long without those extra 75,000 care workers or 40,000 healthcare workers.
The two kind of discretionary areas in the latest numbers are Ukraine and Hong Kong, and this is where the Conservative party and indeed most of the wider right have been on board with accepting big numbers. Given the international and historical context I think that is fair but I would accept that is a government choice.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Reform?
I suppose so. If Farage becomes leader again he would surely make hay with the latest immigration numbers.
Instead he's in the Jungle and rather flopping. Viewing figures poor. Is he playing it too safe on the show iyo?
I don’t think so, he’s just saying what he always has said. He’ll still probably be leader of Reform at the next GE
In which case they'll poll well and probably increase the Labour majority. So I wouldn't mind if he does that. I'm not sure he will though. It depends on where he is now on the 'politics v grift' equation.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
What makes you think that Britain will be singularly resistant to the voices of the far right, as we are swamped by migration, when we have seen highly liberal countries like Sweden and Holland succumb?
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
Because we're a rational country, with a rational voting system, where extremist morons like the far right don't get their voices amplified by PR voting.
Our Parliament is in control and can either act on people's wishes, or the Opposition can come up with policies to enact people's wishes.
English democracy works and has worked for centuries. A better track record of democracy than pretty much any other nation on the planet.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
What makes you think that Britain will be singularly resistant to the voices of the far right, as we are swamped by migration, when we have seen highly liberal countries like Sweden and Holland succumb?
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
Because we're a rational country, with a rational voting system, where extremist morons like the far right don't get their voices amplified by PR voting.
Our Parliament is in control and can either act on people's wishes, or the Opposition can come up with policies to enact people's wishes.
English democracy works and has worked for centuries. A better track record of democracy than pretty much any other nation on the planet.
Netherlands and Sweden used to be regarded as rational countries as far as I can remember.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
What makes you think that Britain will be singularly resistant to the voices of the far right, as we are swamped by migration, when we have seen highly liberal countries like Sweden and Holland succumb?
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
Because we're a rational country, with a rational voting system, where extremist morons like the far right don't get their voices amplified by PR voting.
Our Parliament is in control and can either act on people's wishes, or the Opposition can come up with policies to enact people's wishes.
English democracy works and has worked for centuries. A better track record of democracy than pretty much any other nation on the planet.
Well yes. And I’d like to keep it that way, and hopefully it will stay that way
But if I had to choose one means our stability and tolerance might crumble away is if we continue to ignore the express wishes of the British people and we inflict on them continued and unprecedented levels of immigration - literally 1.3 million in 2 years - levels which can transform entire cities in a few years
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
What makes you think that Britain will be singularly resistant to the voices of the far right, as we are swamped by migration, when we have seen highly liberal countries like Sweden and Holland succumb?
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
Because we're a rational country, with a rational voting system, where extremist morons like the far right don't get their voices amplified by PR voting.
Our Parliament is in control and can either act on people's wishes, or the Opposition can come up with policies to enact people's wishes.
English democracy works and has worked for centuries. A better track record of democracy than pretty much any other nation on the planet.
Well yes. And I’d like to keep it that way, and hopefully it will stay that way
But if I had to choose one means our stability and tolerance might crumble away is if we continue to ignore the express wishes of the British people and we inflict on them continued and unprecedented levels of immigration - literally 1.3 million in 2 years - levels which can transform entire cities in a few years
It is madness
By the way, how is your move to become an immigrant in Portugal progressing?
The Times helpfully explained that news & current affairs staff were blocked from this rally and also from pro-Palestine rallies.
But staff working in news and current affairs, factual journalism and senior leaders who have sought permission from the broadcaster to attend have been told that they need to adhere to the BBC’s existing guidance on attending marches, which state that staff in those divisions should not participate in public demonstrations or gatherings about controversial issues.
Individuals who have asked to take part in previous pro-Palestinian marches are understood to have received similar instructions.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
What makes you think that Britain will be singularly resistant to the voices of the far right, as we are swamped by migration, when we have seen highly liberal countries like Sweden and Holland succumb?
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
Because we're a rational country, with a rational voting system, where extremist morons like the far right don't get their voices amplified by PR voting.
Our Parliament is in control and can either act on people's wishes, or the Opposition can come up with policies to enact people's wishes.
English democracy works and has worked for centuries. A better track record of democracy than pretty much any other nation on the planet.
Netherlands and Sweden used to be regarded as rational countries as far as I can remember.
Both have the idiotic PR voting system that gives extremist parties a leg up.
"West Midlands Police put into special measures over poor investigations, inspectors say
The police force is not carrying out investigations "which lead to satisfactory results for victims", or effectively managing the risk posed to the public by registered sex offenders, His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary (HMIC) said."
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
What makes you think that Britain will be singularly resistant to the voices of the far right, as we are swamped by migration, when we have seen highly liberal countries like Sweden and Holland succumb?
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
Because we're a rational country, with a rational voting system, where extremist morons like the far right don't get their voices amplified by PR voting.
Our Parliament is in control and can either act on people's wishes, or the Opposition can come up with policies to enact people's wishes.
English democracy works and has worked for centuries. A better track record of democracy than pretty much any other nation on the planet.
Well yes. And I’d like to keep it that way, and hopefully it will stay that way
But if I had to choose one means our stability and tolerance might crumble away is if we continue to ignore the express wishes of the British people and we inflict on them continued and unprecedented levels of immigration - literally 1.3 million in 2 years - levels which can transform entire cities in a few years
It is madness
By the way, how is your move to become an immigrant in Portugal progressing?
That's an argument on the level of Nella from I'm a Celebrity: "I'm an immigrant therefore there must be unlimited immigration."
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
What makes you think that Britain will be singularly resistant to the voices of the far right, as we are swamped by migration, when we have seen highly liberal countries like Sweden and Holland succumb?
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
Because we're a rational country, with a rational voting system, where extremist morons like the far right don't get their voices amplified by PR voting.
Our Parliament is in control and can either act on people's wishes, or the Opposition can come up with policies to enact people's wishes.
English democracy works and has worked for centuries. A better track record of democracy than pretty much any other nation on the planet.
Well yes. And I’d like to keep it that way, and hopefully it will stay that way
But if I had to choose one means our stability and tolerance might crumble away is if we continue to ignore the express wishes of the British people and we inflict on them continued and unprecedented levels of immigration - literally 1.3 million in 2 years - levels which can transform entire cities in a few years
It is madness
By the way, how is your move to become an immigrant in Portugal progressing?
I mean, it’s just so pathetic. Any attempt to discuss this is met with “oh you’re a racist” or “oh you’re a racist hypocrite”
And the argument never advances, as @Gardenwalker correctly notes
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
What makes you think that Britain will be singularly resistant to the voices of the far right, as we are swamped by migration, when we have seen highly liberal countries like Sweden and Holland succumb?
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
Because we're a rational country, with a rational voting system, where extremist morons like the far right don't get their voices amplified by PR voting.
Our Parliament is in control and can either act on people's wishes, or the Opposition can come up with policies to enact people's wishes.
English democracy works and has worked for centuries. A better track record of democracy than pretty much any other nation on the planet.
Well yes. And I’d like to keep it that way, and hopefully it will stay that way
But if I had to choose one means our stability and tolerance might crumble away is if we continue to ignore the express wishes of the British people and we inflict on them continued and unprecedented levels of immigration - literally 1.3 million in 2 years - levels which can transform entire cities in a few years
It is madness
By the way, how is your move to become an immigrant in Portugal progressing?
I mean, it’s just so pathetic. Any attempt to discuss this is met with “oh you’re a racist” or “oh you’re a racist hypocrite”
And the argument never advances, as @Gardenwalker correctly notes
I'll give my serious answers to the likes of Isam, and flippant answers to the wind up merchants like yourself.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
I hoped it would be higher at least for as long as we needed it and I expect that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
What makes you think that Britain will be singularly resistant to the voices of the far right, as we are swamped by migration, when we have seen highly liberal countries like Sweden and Holland succumb?
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
Because we're a rational country, with a rational voting system, where extremist morons like the far right don't get their voices amplified by PR voting.
Our Parliament is in control and can either act on people's wishes, or the Opposition can come up with policies to enact people's wishes.
English democracy works and has worked for centuries. A better track record of democracy than pretty much any other nation on the planet.
Well yes. And I’d like to keep it that way, and hopefully it will stay that way
But if I had to choose one means our stability and tolerance might crumble away is if we continue to ignore the express wishes of the British people and we inflict on them continued and unprecedented levels of immigration - literally 1.3 million in 2 years - levels which can transform entire cities in a few years
It is madness
By the way, how is your move to become an immigrant in Portugal progressing?
That's an argument on the level of Nella from I'm a Celebrity: "I'm an immigrant therefore there must be unlimited immigration."
I always like the flip side of that, the shock and pearl clutching from chatting classes that somebody with an immigrant background isn't especially for massive immigration..
How can this be, but you are an immigrant.
Worth remembering there were significant pockets of immigrant communities that voted heavily for Brexit and reporters couldn't get their heads around it.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
I read somewhere that Britain - right now - is experiencing net immigration which is larger - as a percentage of the native population - than anything which happened to the USA even at the peak years from 1830-1930
Now, that could be wrong - don’t quote me - but I read it in a serious journal (possibly the FT IIRC)
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal changes have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
Good! I hope he gets Sturgeon, Liz Lloyd, Leslie Evans and all the alphabetties that committed perjury to destroy him, locked up in the jail they wanted him locked up in.
I would say immigration is one issue where there is massive polarisation in the uk.
Unlike US, mainstream left / right in UK, differences over abortion, crime, taxation, there isnt really that big a difference. Its mostly nudge this way or that.
But immigration seems to have become this issue where for lower immigration gets labelled racist, want to deport everybody etc vs no level of immigration is too high, no issues ever with immigration, uk wouldn't survive without...that seems the level of debate.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
I read somewhere that Britain - right now - is experiencing net immigration which is larger - as a percentage of the native population - than anything which happened to the USA even at the peak years from 1830-1930
Now, that could be wrong - don’t quote me - but I read it in a serious journal (possibly the FT IIRC)
That doesn’t sound incorrect.
And while the explanation - Ukraine, Hong Kong, students, carehome workers, is all nicely logical it doesn’t really address the sheer scale.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What so the black man does have the whiphand over the white man in England these days then? Can't see it myself I must say.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
Look at Japan that has had very low immigration. It has also undergone immense and rapid social change.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
As I've said on here ad nauseam, the global movement of people is a 'tides of history' thing that, short of disengaging from the world N Korea stylee, the solutions to the various problems it causes can only really be resolved through international cooperation and compromise.
The Tories have talked tough and made life hell and been nasty and created a 'hostile environment' and have utterly, utterly failed to achieve what they set out to do. I was going to say fuck-all, but they've actually seen the situation become *more* drastic. The opposite of what they were trying to achieve.
This is where populism and government-by-optics gets you.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What so the black man does have the whiphand over the white man in England these days then? Can't see it myself I must say.
Well the brown man with the most power doesn't even know how to use contactless payment, so whips are definitely beyond him.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
We’ve had 100,000+ underage white girls raped, trafficked and tortured by “Asian grooming gangs”
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
As I've said on here ad nauseam, the global movement of people is a 'tides of history' thing that, short of disengaging from the world N Korea stylee, the solutions to the various problems it causes can only really be resolved through international cooperation and compromise.
The Tories have talked tough and made life hell and been nasty and created a 'hostile environment' and have utterly, utterly failed to achieve what they set out to do. I was going to say fuck-all, but they've actually seen the situation become *more* drastic. The opposite of what they were trying to achieve.
This is where populism and government-by-optics gets you.
I agree somewhat with the tide of history, and I’m broadly pro-immigration.
But Britain - an island - has somehow delivered to itself one of the largest influxes of immigration in western history.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
We’ve had 100,000+ underage white girls raped, trafficked and tortured by “Asian grooming gangs”
I am surprised the BBC documentary on catching a Rochdale OCG hasn't got more publicity. More grooming of kids, jury tampering, corrupt police....only thing missing was if local politicians had been bought off in the way others had.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
How do you feel about signs like this?
Bloody hell are those two green, red and black flags on the right (as in the right hand side!) of different countries? What a fiendish pub quiz question that would be.
Good! I hope he gets Sturgeon, Liz Lloyd, Leslie Evans and all the alphabetties that committed perjury to destroy him, locked up in the jail they wanted him locked up in.
Unlikely, unless their transgender policies were more self interested than they appeared.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
We’ve had 100,000+ underage white girls raped, trafficked and tortured by “Asian grooming gangs”
Does that count as violence or not?
Don't be a twat.
So we’re not allowed to mention possibly the greatest possible downside to mass immigration - wholesale gang rape on a scarcely credible scale - because it upsets you?
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal changes have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
Society is markedly less accepting of racism than it then was, for a start. Which wasn't exactly the change he was predicting.
That said, the numbers over the last few years are remarkable, and that might have quite different effects.
Hmm this seems a bit dodgy, bad form from HMKCIII.
Not at all. TSE tried to get all Republican uppity about it earlier until it was pointed out that it is actually run by a Cabinet Minister and is being done to improve the energy efficiency of old buildings.
There's certainly that angle to it, but three things bother me: first, there is a longstanding claim that the money is all distributed to charities, and it seems that isn't true; second, the restoration of the buildings allows the Dutchy to earn higher rents, so there is in fact a direct financial benefit derived; and third, the whole thing just seems feudal and outdated - why should dead people's money from one specific area of the country be deemed the property of this corporate entity that provides private income to the royal family, rather than the public purse? I am not a republican, incidentally, but this kind of thing really undermines faith in the monarchy.
I was intrigued by this - it does seem the Guardian is on a bit of a roll of attempted hit jobs on the King, and @TheScreamingEagles was trying to amplify it.
It seems that:
1. The money *used* to directly to the privy purse (ie income for the King) 2. He/the late Queen decided this should no longer be the case so they allocate it to charities instead 3. There are 3 charities: the Duchy of Lancaster Benevolent Fund; the Duchy of Lancaster Housing Trust and the Jubilee Trust 4. The Duchy of Lancaster Benevolent fund is allocated to the Lieutenancy offices in the County Palatine to “local good causes and community interests”. So basically the same as the Community Trusts (although one hopes more effective) 5. The Duchy of Lancaster Housing Trust is a housing association 6. The Duchy of Lancaster Jubilee Trust has for it purposes “(1)The maintenance and preservation for the public benefit of any monument, castle or other property of historical or architectural interest in the vicinity of the Duchy lands. (2)The advancement of the Christian faith by maintaining and supporting the Queen's Chapel of the Savoy and clergy whose livings are within the gift of the Duke of Lancaster. (3)Other such charitable purposes.” [charity commission website]
So basically from keeping 100%, the Duchy now gives it away, but might tangentially benefit from a proportion of the money spent to the extent that it increases the rent. But the work they are doing appears to be limited to the public benefit including environmental efficiency
Overall it seems to be a good thing to me
@OnlyLivingBoy specifically: the money is distributed to charities, restoration of properties may allow higher rents but this isn’t the purpose of the investment - it has to be for the public benefit; feudal and outdated yes but there are more important things to do & - assuming the money is split equally - can you really say that the government would spend the money better than local charities/housing provision/repair of historical building? Those all seem reasonable uses
NZ has finally formed its government. Chris Luxon, former Unilever executive and Air NZ CEO, will be Prime Minister.
Winston Peters of the populist NZ First is Foreign Minister, and will be Deputy PM for 18 months. David Seymour of the libertarian leaning Act Party is “Minister for Regulation” and will be Deputy PM for the second 18 months of the term.
The Times helpfully explained that news & current affairs staff were blocked from this rally and also from pro-Palestine rallies.
But staff working in news and current affairs, factual journalism and senior leaders who have sought permission from the broadcaster to attend have been told that they need to adhere to the BBC’s existing guidance on attending marches, which state that staff in those divisions should not participate in public demonstrations or gatherings about controversial issues.
Individuals who have asked to take part in previous pro-Palestinian marches are understood to have received similar instructions.
Now, you could ask whether opposing antisemitism should be seen as controversial but you could also ask whether the Mail is not stirring things up.
V good point. Is marching against anti-semitism controversial.
That's one for a lengthy discussion. Especially on here.
It shouldn't be, Captain, should it. Nor should (eg) marching for a ceasefire in Gaza. You often get unsavouries on political marches but we have laws in place for if they cross the line on things like violence and hate speech.
Why has your profile gone private btw? Seems a shame to hide your back catalogue. There's some gems in there.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
We’ve had 100,000+ underage white girls raped, trafficked and tortured by “Asian grooming gangs”
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
We’ve had 100,000+ underage white girls raped, trafficked and tortured by “Asian grooming gangs”
Does that count as violence or not?
Don't be a twat.
So we’re not allowed to mention possibly the greatest possible downside to mass immigration - wholesale gang rape on a scarcely credible scale - because it upsets you?
I am surprised the BBC documentary on catching a Rochdale OCG hasn't got more publicity. More grooming of kids, jury tampering, corrupt police....only thing missing was if local politicians had been bought off in the way others had.
Its not as if Rochdale hasn't got form.
I’ve not followed this. Is it a new scandal or historic?
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
I read somewhere that Britain - right now - is experiencing net immigration which is larger - as a percentage of the native population - than anything which happened to the USA even at the peak years from 1830-1930
Now, that could be wrong - don’t quote me - but I read it in a serious journal (possibly the FT IIRC)
That doesn’t sound incorrect.
And while the explanation - Ukraine, Hong Kong, students, carehome workers, is all nicely logical it doesn’t really address the sheer scale.
Sometimes quantity is its own quality.
The total number from Ukraine is probably less than 200k, Hong Kong less than that.
Neither is a significant factor this year - Ukraine around 35k, compared to over 250k from India.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
As I've said on here ad nauseam, the global movement of people is a 'tides of history' thing that, short of disengaging from the world N Korea stylee, the solutions to the various problems it causes can only really be resolved through international cooperation and compromise.
The Tories have talked tough and made life hell and been nasty and created a 'hostile environment' and have utterly, utterly failed to achieve what they set out to do. I was going to say fuck-all, but they've actually seen the situation become *more* drastic. The opposite of what they were trying to achieve.
This is where populism and government-by-optics gets you.
I agree somewhat with the tide of history, and I’m broadly pro-immigration.
But Britain - an island - has somehow delivered to itself one of the largest influxes of immigration in western history.
Yes the You Gove poll shows the Cons vote going from 21 (you cannot get much lower than that) to 25 BUT Techne polling on the 22 and 23rd November, same dates as You Gov, have the Cons DOWN from 22 to 21. Really it does not matter when the election is held it will probably be a near wipe out.
They certainly deserve a total wipeout.
Under FPTP when you get down to 20% you lose, and lose very very badly.
It's possible that's insufficient votes to win anything at all, outside a few islands of support.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
As I've said on here ad nauseam, the global movement of people is a 'tides of history' thing that, short of disengaging from the world N Korea stylee, the solutions to the various problems it causes can only really be resolved through international cooperation and compromise.
The Tories have talked tough and made life hell and been nasty and created a 'hostile environment' and have utterly, utterly failed to achieve what they set out to do. I was going to say fuck-all, but they've actually seen the situation become *more* drastic. The opposite of what they were trying to achieve.
This is where populism and government-by-optics gets you.
I agree somewhat with the tide of history, and I’m broadly pro-immigration.
But Britain - an island - has somehow delivered to itself one of the largest influxes of immigration in western history.
How does that work?
A fair bit is linked to Empire, some is linked to language. We're a trading nation, an outward looking nation. We also have a relatively good track record of making people English, Scottish or whatever, usually within a single generation folk are addicted to low-quality tea, Sunday roasts and unhappy but dedicated sport fandom.
But add to that the non-trivial Ukraine and Hong Kong figures, and the fact that the the Conservative approach to migration control can be boiled down to the image of Suella on the white cliffs waving a spiked bat but actually doing fuck all (clue -cos it costs quite a lot of money and The Quad gutted our national infrastructure so their mates could have bigger yachts).
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
There has been violence. Violence that would have been unthinkable in 1968. The reason it seems a peaceful transition is you’ve been slowly living through it
If only your second paragraph were realistic - in fact what you’ve said, the ‘colourblind’ argument, is considered an entitled, racist view nowadays
I am surprised the BBC documentary on catching a Rochdale OCG hasn't got more publicity. More grooming of kids, jury tampering, corrupt police....only thing missing was if local politicians had been bought off in the way others had.
Its not as if Rochdale hasn't got form.
I’ve not followed this. Is it a new scandal or historic?
Yes the You Gove poll shows the Cons vote going from 21 (you cannot get much lower than that) to 25 BUT Techne polling on the 22 and 23rd November, same dates as You Gov, have the Cons DOWN from 22 to 21. Really it does not matter when the election is held it will probably be a near wipe out.
They certainly deserve a total wipeout.
Under FPTP when you get down to 20% you lose, and lose very very badly.
It's possible that's insufficient votes to win anything at all, outside a few islands of support.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
How do you feel about signs like this?
Bloody hell are those two green, red and black flags on the right (as in the right hand side!) of different countries? What a fiendish pub quiz question that would be.
Personally I think the dredging up of 7/7 is unsavoury. Islamic terrorism doesn’t seem to me to be an essential ingredient of immigration.
Especially since the main mass of migration until recently was from Eastern Europe.
I’m more worried about ethnic ghettoisation, the strain on infrastructure, the seeming taboo on the existing populations right to preserve its own own culture, and the potential hit to liberal-conseravative-democratic norms.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
We’ve had 100,000+ underage white girls raped, trafficked and tortured by “Asian grooming gangs”
Does that count as violence or not?
Don't be a twat.
So we’re not allowed to mention possibly the greatest possible downside to mass immigration - wholesale gang rape on a scarcely credible scale - because it upsets you?
Or do you deny that these rapes happened?
I imagine the point was that plenty of hearty Englishmen were also involved in that exploitation. I'd put it less down to race and more to the seedy wideboys who crawl around the criminal edges of society.
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
Lots !
Who is responsible for issuing UK visa? What we do. UK Visas and Immigration is responsible for making millions of decisions every year about who has the right to visit or stay in the country, with a firm emphasis on national security and a culture of customer satisfaction for people who come here legally. UKVI is part of the Home Office.
Indeed. It's why the wailing and gnashing of teeth by Tory politicians about how terrible the figures are is so ridiculous. These migration figures represent UK policy. We could have zero net immigration next year if the Government chose. (I don't think they should, but it's within their power.)
The trouble is it'd collapse growth, spike inflation, and lead to a huge funding crisis for our universities, which the Government might then be obligated to bail out with money they don't have. And then there'd be even more austerity and tax rises.
That's why they don't. They calculate lesser of two evils.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Personally I think the dredging up of 7/7 is unsavoury. Islamic terrorism doesn’t seem to me to be an essential ingredient of immigration.
Especially since the main mass of migration until recently was from Eastern Europe.
I’m more worried about ethnic ghettoisation, the strain on infrastructure, the seeming taboo on the existing populations right to preserve its own own culture, and the potential hit to liberal-conseravative-democratic norms.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
We’ve had 100,000+ underage white girls raped, trafficked and tortured by “Asian grooming gangs”
Does that count as violence or not?
Don't be a twat.
So we’re not allowed to mention possibly the greatest possible downside to mass immigration - wholesale gang rape on a scarcely credible scale - because it upsets you?
Or do you deny that these rapes happened?
I imagine the point was that plenty of hearty Englishmen were also involved in that exploitation. I'd put it less down to race and more to the seedy wideboys who crawl around the criminal edges of society.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
The Irish police still haven’t ID’d the Dublin attacker
They have him in custody; they know exactly who he is
Again it’s the sense of evasiveness that makes people even angrier. Who does it benefit, if they continue to stall?
Do the police ever publicly ID before charging?
(Serious question - isn't it always 'a man in his 30s was arrested on suspicion of'. UK, maybe England, perspective of course, I'm not familiar with possible differences in Ireland. Sometimes the media will name a well-known person on arrest, but they tend to wait for people no one has heard of.)
Ridiculous conspiracy theories are spreading on social media
Lots of people are claiming it was a mossad operative! Others say it’s a white Irish guy and the “Nazis” are lying. Others are claiming he’s not nationalised at all and is a recent migrant
I have no idea which is true if any (tho I’m fairly skeptical about the mossad idea, to put it mildly)
The only way you stop this inflammatory speculation is by telling the people the truth, surely? That is better than a void of silence or, worse, a sense that the authorities are lying
Telling people the truth doesn't have a great track record for tackling ridiculous conspiracy theories
'Ridiculous conspiracy theories are spreading on social media' is one of life's eternal certainty, isn't it? Along with death and taxes.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
There has been violence. Violence that would have been unthinkable in 1968. The reason it seems a peaceful transition is you’ve been slowly living through it
If only your second paragraph were realistic - in fact what you’ve said, the ‘colourblind’ argument, is considered an entitled, racist view nowadays
Imagine if old Enoch had predicted that 100,000 underage white girls will end up raped, abused, trafficked, tormented and even murdered by large organised gangs of immigrants, and that anyone who tries to warn of it will themselves be silenced or even prosecuted
His already lurid predictions would have been laughed to scorn. And yet, that is exactly what happened
The public have increasingly liberal attitudes to immigration and multi-racialism but also worry at the same time about a clear minority within that who have more extreme views, don't respect the host culture, have no desire to integrate with it, and indeed want to undermine it. In fact, the two views might be linked rather than in opposition to each other.
A huge amount of public frustration and votes for populist parties come about because they're treated like fools and patronised by the commentariat and established parties alike.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
We’ve had 100,000+ underage white girls raped, trafficked and tortured by “Asian grooming gangs”
Does that count as violence or not?
7/7 Lee Rigby London Bridge
London Bridge? Are you pinning the death of QE2 on people of a funny tinge? I thought we all blamed Truss for that.
ETA: seriously though, do I need to post a list of horrors committed by white people with three or more generations of ancestry in the British Isles?
NZ has finally formed its government. Chris Luxon, former Unilever executive and Air NZ CEO, will be Prime Minister.
Winston Peters of the populist NZ First is Foreign Minister, and will be Deputy PM for 18 months. David Seymour of the libertarian leaning Act Party is “Minister for Regulation” and will be Deputy PM for the second 18 months of the term.
"Minister for Regulation" ! I want that job! I would carefully minister to the regulation of regulation via the regulation ministry. Of course I will also provide oversight, hence ministering to the ministration of the regulation of regulation of the regulations of the regulation ministry known as the "Ministry of Regulation"
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
Lots !
Who is responsible for issuing UK visa? What we do. UK Visas and Immigration is responsible for making millions of decisions every year about who has the right to visit or stay in the country, with a firm emphasis on national security and a culture of customer satisfaction for people who come here legally. UKVI is part of the Home Office.
Indeed. It's why the wailing and gnashing of teeth by Tory politicians about how terrible the figures are is so ridiculous. These migration figures represent UK policy. We could have zero net immigration next year if the Government chose. (I don't think they should, but it's within their power.)
The trouble is it'd collapse growth, spike inflation, and lead to a huge funding crisis for our universities, which the Government might then be obligated to bail out with money they don't have. And then there'd be even more austerity and tax rises.
That's why they don't. They calculate lesser of two evils.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
We’ve had 100,000+ underage white girls raped, trafficked and tortured by “Asian grooming gangs”
Does that count as violence or not?
7/7 Lee Rigby London Bridge
London Bridge? Are you pinning the death of QE2 on people of a funny tinge? I thought we all blamed Truss for that.
ETA: seriously though, do I need to post a list of horrors committed by white people with three or more generations of ancestry in the British Isles?
I think 745,000 is an extraordinary number. Thank goodness it was all under our control.
When oh when will the public realise that the government does not want to do anything about immigration.
The deceit by both parties is laughable - the Cons: tens of thousands; Lab: the Cons have failed by not controlling immigration.
But what was that definition of insanity again?
The UK does not want to bring down immigration. I think plenty of Brexit voters, as an example, were sold a pup but their relative intelligence was done to death yesterday so I won't bang on about that again today.
The point of Brexit for me was to give those in charge the opportunity to reduce migration, or rather take away from them the excuse that their hands were tied by FOM
The increase in immigration is incredible really. The shame for those who believe it’s too high is that there isn’t a party to vote for that would do anything about it.
Did you expect net migration to come down via Brexit? Do you expect net migration to be higher, similar or lower in the next ten years than the last ten years? How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
How much control do you think the government have over the numbers?
Lots !
Who is responsible for issuing UK visa? What we do. UK Visas and Immigration is responsible for making millions of decisions every year about who has the right to visit or stay in the country, with a firm emphasis on national security and a culture of customer satisfaction for people who come here legally. UKVI is part of the Home Office.
Indeed. It's why the wailing and gnashing of teeth by Tory politicians about how terrible the figures are is so ridiculous. These migration figures represent UK policy. We could have zero net immigration next year if the Government chose. (I don't think they should, but it's within their power.)
The trouble is it'd collapse growth, spike inflation, and lead to a huge funding crisis for our universities, which the Government might then be obligated to bail out with money they don't have. And then there'd be even more austerity and tax rises.
That's why they don't. They calculate lesser of two evils.
It goes without saying that British universities should never have become reliant on foreign students.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
As I've said on here ad nauseam, the global movement of people is a 'tides of history' thing that, short of disengaging from the world N Korea stylee, the solutions to the various problems it causes can only really be resolved through international cooperation and compromise.
The Tories have talked tough and made life hell and been nasty and created a 'hostile environment' and have utterly, utterly failed to achieve what they set out to do. I was going to say fuck-all, but they've actually seen the situation become *more* drastic. The opposite of what they were trying to achieve.
This is where populism and government-by-optics gets you.
I think the Tories have achieved what they wanted, but have lied about what they wanted. They have chosen to keep skilled immigration high, overseas student numbers high, Hong Kong/Ukraine numbers high etc., because that suits the economy (and, in the last case, is the right and proper reaction to the situations in Hong Kong/Ukraine), while they performatively declare immigration is too high.
It’s not about being “far right”, these latest numbers are an astonishing number for any western democracy outside wartime.
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
Well this is the thing that happened with Enoch Powell; he predicted profound societal change was inevitable due to a large increase in immigration, and that change/those numbers happened. But people who rubbished him at the time over the numbers and their effects changed the argument rather than admit he was correct.
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
What profound societal change have we witnessed since Enoch made his dire prophecy? I'm genuinely interested to hear views on this.
White British people being a minority in London seems a good place to start. Unthinkable in the 1960s
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
I don't think it is.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
We’ve had 100,000+ underage white girls raped, trafficked and tortured by “Asian grooming gangs”
Does that count as violence or not?
7/7 Lee Rigby London Bridge
The 7/7 bombers were British, weren't they? Same Lee Rigby and probably the same London Bridge. They were in each instance criminals and, I'd say, terrorists, as defined by seeking to effect political change via acts of violence towards the "civilian" population.
I used to go to a boxing gym in SE London which a lot of West Indian Muslim converts went to. Including, for example, Anthony Small - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Small. Anthony was born in Lewisham. He could as easily have perpetrated any of the incidents you described.
It is the criminals that are the issue (same with the "Asian" grooming gangs). People can be criminal whether they come from Lewisham, Lewes, or Lesotho. There are hundreds of thousands of people from Lewisham, as an example, who are not criminals or violent extremists. Should we somehow ban those people from taking the tube to Oxford Circus?
It is the fact that people are criminals that is the issue not where they are from. Being from Lewisham or Lahore doesn't inherently mean you are a criminal. Oh but there is a culture in eg Pakistan wrt girls. No there isn't there is a culture within criminals of such things.
The issue arises if people come from a culture, a violent repressive state, say an Islamic theocracy, who want to continue the behaviours of that state. In that case we have to rely on the rule of law here to prevent them from indulging in those behaviours. I think you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater if you say ok no more immigration from those countries.
NZ has finally formed its government. Chris Luxon, former Unilever executive and Air NZ CEO, will be Prime Minister.
Winston Peters of the populist NZ First is Foreign Minister, and will be Deputy PM for 18 months. David Seymour of the libertarian leaning Act Party is “Minister for Regulation” and will be Deputy PM for the second 18 months of the term.
"Minister for Regulation" ! I want that job! I would carefully minister to the regulation of regulation via the regulation ministry. Of course I will also provide oversight, hence ministering to the ministration of the regulation of regulation of the regulations of the regulation ministry known as the "Ministry of Regulation"
Pause
Yes, Minister... 😃
At first glance, it does appear that Act have done very badly from negotiations.
They must hope that this new Regulations Ministry (scope: all existing and new regulations) becomes a kind of super ministry for deregulation, but what are the chances of that?
More interesting for the UK: the new coalition will end the generational ban on buying tobacco policy.
Comments
The only point I would disagree with you on is Government control.
The bit they don't currently have control of - illegal migration - is a small fraction of overall immigration. The rest of it is entirely in their hands and I am glad they are ignoring the anti-immigrant crowd and acting in the best interests of the country.
The great failing by this and all previous Governments is not how many immigrants arrive but how they are integrated into society. But again that is entirely in their hands.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12787039/jewish-bbc-banned-anti-semitism-rally-pro-palestine.html
When Labour come to power they will suddenly find themselves owning this. I wonder how prepared they are.
It's Boris, Cummings, and morons such as JRM and Braverman who need to be held accountable here.
By acting as if net migration will be marginal or in the tens of thousands, there has been insufficient investment in services like schools, hospitals, roads, rails etc - or permission for the market to build enough houses and other things too.
France has the same population as us, but 10 million extra houses. Even if every single potential house that had planning permission was magically built overnight, there'd still be a shortage of millions of homes, and a shortage of schools, hospitals or anything else.
Since 2000 our population has grown by 14% but our road network has grown by less than 2%.
Same story for schools, hospitals and everything else.
Nothing wrong with population growth, but infrastructure needs to grow roughly proportionately with it. Simply throwing more people into the same infrastructure does not work.
No
similar
As much as they choose to have which is not a lot.
But staff working in news and current affairs, factual journalism and senior leaders who have sought permission from the broadcaster to attend have been told that they need to adhere to the BBC’s existing guidance on attending marches, which state that staff in those divisions should not participate in public demonstrations or gatherings about controversial issues.
Individuals who have asked to take part in previous pro-Palestinian marches are understood to have received similar instructions.
They are being directed to BBC guidelines stating that staff in those divisions should not go on marches, whatever the subject.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bbc-staff-blocked-from-march-against-antisemitism-68jwmjj9d (£££)
Now, you could ask whether opposing antisemitism should be seen as controversial but you could also ask whether the Mail is not stirring things up.
Getting more unskilled, cheap people into the country just devalues and deflates our productivity.
We have enough unskilled people in this country who can do menial jobs. What we need is a highly skilled, educated workforce. The more of that, the better.
Britain is basically a failed Ponzi scheme. We got good growth from massive immigration, then we got mediocre growth from the same. Now we have near zero growth and even greater immigration
We are heading for a colossal explosion as it all
breaks down. It might make Brexit look trivial
Growth per capita was oddly enough highest pre-EEC, when we had a stable population.
Since we joined the EEC, growth per capita slowed, and we kept a stable population until the turn of the century.
And since the turn of the century, when our population growth started to take off dramatically, growth per capita has ground to a halt.
Its insanity. There is no rule that says Britain will always be this super tolerant place and allergic to fascism
Advocates of continued mass migration are people letting off fireworks in an ammo depot
Yes as others have pointed out of course technically they have the right to decide who to admit. But as the nations largest employer and having responsibility for provision of public services and balances of payments it really doesn't have much practical flexibility. The Tories, most of them at least, are not lying when they say they want lower immigration, they just can't find a sustainble way to deliver it.
The biggest group is students. About 80% leave within 5 years. We make over £20bn a year from fee income and indirectly a similar amount from their living costs and spending. That is a hell of a lot of money for a country with a big negative balance of payments. Yes we could stop letting them in, but the Chancellor will not be keen to raise income tax by 3 or 4p to compensate.
Look at worker visas: Over half are for health and care workers. 90% are for either health and care workers or skilled workers which have significant public support and are important to the economy. We could have less immigration but a government wouldn't survive long without those extra 75,000 care workers or 40,000 healthcare workers.
The two kind of discretionary areas in the latest numbers are Ukraine and Hong Kong, and this is where the Conservative party and indeed most of the wider right have been on board with accepting big numbers. Given the international and historical context I think that is fair but I would accept that is a government choice.
Innovative.
Our Parliament is in control and can either act on people's wishes, or the Opposition can come up with policies to enact people's wishes.
English democracy works and has worked for centuries. A better track record of democracy than pretty much any other nation on the planet.
But if I had to choose one means our stability and tolerance might crumble away is if we continue to ignore the express wishes of the British people and we inflict on them continued and unprecedented levels of immigration - literally 1.3 million in 2 years - levels which can transform entire cities in a few years
It is madness
I think the argument is still stuck inside the prison of ten or twenty years ago.
But these figures suggest very profound societal change within only a few years.
While the public has also experienced the biggest drop in living standards.
I believe the projection is that these numbers will fall. But my cursory sweep of Twitter is that both left and right are just rehashing stale arguments pro and anti immigration in the abstract.
That's one for a lengthy discussion. Especially on here.
The police force is not carrying out investigations "which lead to satisfactory results for victims", or effectively managing the risk posed to the public by registered sex offenders, His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary (HMIC) said."
https://news.sky.com/story/west-midlands-police-put-into-special-measures-over-series-of-failings-13014865
And the argument never advances, as @Gardenwalker correctly notes
That’s what will happen in the future you envisage; People won’t focus on the numbers, but say that the profound societal change is a benefit.
How can this be, but you are an immigrant.
Worth remembering there were significant pockets of immigrant communities that voted heavily for Brexit and reporters couldn't get their heads around it.
Now, that could be wrong - don’t quote me - but I read it in a serious journal (possibly the FT IIRC)
Given labour has, in all but name, an open door policy when it comes to migration I will be interested to see how they manage that.
Unlike US, mainstream left / right in UK, differences over abortion, crime, taxation, there isnt really that big a difference. Its mostly nudge this way or that.
But immigration seems to have become this issue where for lower immigration gets labelled racist, want to deport everybody etc vs no level of immigration is too high, no issues ever with immigration, uk wouldn't survive without...that seems the level of debate.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:London_ethnic_demographics_from_1961_to_2021.gif
Tell people in Delhi that brown skinned Indians will be a minority in 50 years time and see if they think of that as a profound societal change or not
And while the explanation - Ukraine, Hong Kong, students, carehome workers, is all nicely logical it doesn’t really address the sheer scale.
Sometimes quantity is its own quality.
Powell was predicting violence, rivers of blood etc - instead we've had a peaceful transition from one irrelevant characteristic to another irrelevant characteristic.
Someone's skin colour means no more than their hair colour or anything else. Is going from a town of gingers to a town of brunettes a profound societal change?
The Tories have talked tough and made life hell and been nasty and created a 'hostile environment' and have utterly, utterly failed to achieve what they set out to do. I was going to say fuck-all, but they've actually seen the situation become *more* drastic. The opposite of what they were trying to achieve.
This is where populism and government-by-optics gets you.
Does that count as violence or not?
But Britain - an island - has somehow delivered to itself one of the largest influxes of immigration in western history.
How does that work?
Its not as if Rochdale hasn't got form.
So we’re not allowed to mention possibly the greatest possible downside to mass immigration - wholesale gang rape on a scarcely credible scale - because it upsets you?
Or do you deny that these rapes happened?
Which wasn't exactly the change he was predicting.
That said, the numbers over the last few years are remarkable, and that might have quite different effects.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-67517446
It looks like the police killed someone who was threatening to commit suicide!
It seems that:
1. The money *used* to directly to the privy purse (ie income for the King)
2. He/the late Queen decided this should no longer be the case so they allocate it to charities instead
3. There are 3 charities: the Duchy of Lancaster Benevolent Fund; the Duchy of Lancaster Housing Trust and the Jubilee Trust
4. The Duchy of Lancaster Benevolent fund is allocated to the Lieutenancy offices in the County Palatine to “local good causes and community interests”. So basically the same as the Community Trusts (although one hopes more effective)
5. The Duchy of Lancaster Housing Trust is a housing association
6. The Duchy of Lancaster Jubilee Trust has for it purposes “(1)The maintenance and preservation for the public benefit of any monument, castle or other property of historical or architectural interest in the vicinity of the Duchy lands. (2)The advancement of the Christian faith by maintaining and supporting the Queen's Chapel of the Savoy and clergy whose livings are within the gift of the Duke of Lancaster. (3)Other such charitable purposes.” [charity commission website]
So basically from keeping 100%, the Duchy now gives it away, but might tangentially benefit from a proportion of the money spent to the extent that it increases the rent. But the work they are doing appears to be limited to the public benefit including environmental efficiency
Overall it seems to be a good thing to me
@OnlyLivingBoy specifically: the money is distributed to charities, restoration of properties may allow higher rents but this isn’t the purpose of the investment - it has to be for the public benefit; feudal and outdated yes but there are more important things to do & - assuming the money is split equally - can you really say that the government would spend the money better than local charities/housing provision/repair of historical building? Those all seem reasonable uses
Hopefully your goat is now back wheee it belongs
Chris Luxon, former Unilever executive and Air NZ CEO, will be Prime Minister.
Winston Peters of the populist NZ First is Foreign Minister, and will be Deputy PM for 18 months. David Seymour of the libertarian leaning Act Party is “Minister for Regulation” and will be Deputy PM for the second 18 months of the term.
Why has your profile gone private btw? Seems a shame to hide your back catalogue. There's some gems in there.
Lee Rigby
London Bridge
I’ve not followed this. Is it a new scandal or historic?
Neither is a significant factor this year - Ukraine around 35k, compared to over 250k from India.
It's possible that's insufficient votes to win anything at all, outside a few islands of support.
But add to that the non-trivial Ukraine and Hong Kong figures, and the fact that the the Conservative approach to migration control can be boiled down to the image of Suella on the white cliffs waving a spiked bat but actually doing fuck all (clue -cos it costs quite a lot of money and The Quad gutted our national infrastructure so their mates could have bigger yachts).
If only your second paragraph were realistic - in fact what you’ve said, the ‘colourblind’ argument, is considered an entitled, racist view nowadays
Islamic terrorism doesn’t seem to me to be an essential ingredient of immigration.
Especially since the main mass of migration until recently was from Eastern Europe.
I’m more worried about ethnic ghettoisation, the strain on infrastructure, the seeming taboo on the existing populations right to preserve its own own culture, and the potential hit to liberal-conseravative-democratic norms.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/24/manston-immigration-staff-being-bussed-to-heathrow-to-cover-guard-shortage
We are incapable of handling and detaining refugees, never mind rendering them through a legal process and onto a plane...
That's why they don't. They calculate lesser of two evils.
'Ridiculous conspiracy theories are spreading on social media' is one of life's eternal certainty, isn't it? Along with death and taxes.
His already lurid predictions would have been laughed to scorn. And yet, that is exactly what happened
The public have increasingly liberal attitudes to immigration and multi-racialism but also worry at the same time about a clear minority within that who have more extreme views, don't respect the host culture, have no desire to integrate with it, and indeed want to undermine it. In fact, the two views might be linked rather than in opposition to each other.
A huge amount of public frustration and votes for populist parties come about because they're treated like fools and patronised by the commentariat and established parties alike.
Listening goes a long way.
ETA: seriously though, do I need to post a list of horrors committed by white people with three or more generations of ancestry in the British Isles?
Pause
Yes, Minister... 😃
I used to go to a boxing gym in SE London which a lot of West Indian Muslim converts went to. Including, for example, Anthony Small - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Small. Anthony was born in Lewisham. He could as easily have perpetrated any of the incidents you described.
It is the criminals that are the issue (same with the "Asian" grooming gangs). People can be criminal whether they come from Lewisham, Lewes, or Lesotho. There are hundreds of thousands of people from Lewisham, as an example, who are not criminals or violent extremists. Should we somehow ban those people from taking the tube to Oxford Circus?
It is the fact that people are criminals that is the issue not where they are from. Being from Lewisham or Lahore doesn't inherently mean you are a criminal. Oh but there is a culture in eg Pakistan wrt girls. No there isn't there is a culture within criminals of such things.
The issue arises if people come from a culture, a violent repressive state, say an Islamic theocracy, who want to continue the behaviours of that state. In that case we have to rely on the rule of law here to prevent them from indulging in those behaviours. I think you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater if you say ok no more immigration from those countries.
They must hope that this new Regulations Ministry (scope: all existing and new regulations) becomes a kind of super ministry for deregulation, but what are the chances of that?
More interesting for the UK: the new coalition will end the generational ban on buying tobacco policy.