Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sunak-Braverman: Misreading the public mood on immigration? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited May 2023 in General
Sunak-Braverman: Misreading the public mood on immigration? – politicalbetting.com

With the much anticipated ONS 2022 immigration stats arriving shortly, its time for a quick thread on where the public are on immigration drawing on my report last year with @MarleyAMorris and @IPPR . TL;DR – public is not where you might expect!

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262
    First.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262
    edited May 2023
    That's surprising!

    (The findings in the header, I mean, not me being first.)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708
    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,583
    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,081
    Talking loudly to that 17% does seem to have been the Tory strategy for a while, though.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,592

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Some perspective on the immigration numbers:

    The new total will include 174,200 Ukrainian refugees and 160,700 Hongkongers fleeing repression in China — groups entering the country via special visa schemes that command considerable public support.

    It will also include large numbers of foreign students — they totaled 485,758 last year


    https://www.politico.eu/article/tories-brexit-done-uk-conservatives-on-immigration-rishi-sunak/

    Though to be fair since we are talking net migration and a significant number of those students will leave each year, it is debatable how much influence student numbers have on the figures we are talking about.
    I am very cynical about "students".

    I think it's a back-door for many to get into the UK permanently, particularly since they can bring families too - it's only the fees that cap the numbers.
    If we greatly reduce the numbers of foreign students, we will need to find alternative funding for universities. Though we know the instinct of the right would be simply to shut half of them down, why waste money on "David Beckham Studies" anyway?
    Figures for courses should be published against average non graduate stats. For each course

    Course name
    %unemployed and %wage differential vs non graduates at 1,5,10,20 and 30 years.
    I suspect indeed on those measures some courses are worthless.

    While some take a course out of pure intellectual interest many however do so because they think it will give them a higher paying job.

    Students deserve these figures to allow them the information they need to choose.
    Why waste money on "Jane Austen studies"? English was the media studies of its day. For the sake of the country, employers need to become less snooty about where they recruit from, like when Google discovered its best programmers did not come from Ivy League colleges.

    I'm in favour of education for all. Cynics can have a field day allocating courses to trade schools or finishing schools but the rich and powerful often went to the latter.
    Having to do all those trendy things like learn Anglo Saxon, read Beowulf, The Battle of Maldon and the Parlement of Foules never felt quite to have the robust rigour of a proper old fashioned media studies course. But distance lends enchantment perhaps.

    If you look back to when English courses were introduced over a hundred years ago, the arguments were the same. Learning poems was for schoolchildren. Reading novels was a trivial pursuit; worse than that, a woman's hobby. Face it, an English degree is a posh version of Richard & Judy's book club. And how many English graduates go on to become poets or novelists?
    The capacity to translate Beowulf or to identify classical sources in Paradise Lost has never failed to give me that extra edge in the competitive race of life. Pub talk is always enlivened by informed discussion of The Dream of the Rood. Grandchildren open mouthed and enchanted by tales of Gorboduc and the Dunciad.

    I'm reading Paradise Lost right now. It doesn't half go on.
    And the bad guy's the only interesting character.
    Yeah I'm getting that. Satan. Complex guy.
    Mammon seems like a good guy. Perhaps I've been working in the financial sector too long but I found his speech in book 2 quite persuasive.
    Pilgrims' Progress, now almost unread, is a much more fun read from the puritan tradition of the 17th century. Very English, no classical allusions much, short and to the point, unerring in its aim at fallen human nature. And, most of all, gives us 'Vanity Fair', title of great novel and a two word description of so much of modernity.

    And then there's this:

    Then went the jury out, whose names were, Mr. Blind-man, Mr. No-good, Mr. Malice, Mr. Love-lust, Mr. Live-loose, Mr. Heady, Mr. High-mind, Mr. Enmity, Mr. Liar, Mr. Cruelty, Mr. Hate-light, and Mr. Implacable......

    And that's without even starting on the House of Commons.
    It is of course a list of PBers' real names but I'm not going to dox anybody - you can work them out for yourselves.
    Hmmm....

    First one is @SeanT, second @SeanT, third.....

    Yup, they are all @SeanTs
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557
    ...“Glitchy. Tech issues. Uncomfortable silences. A complete failure to launch. And that’s just the candidate!” a spokesperson for the Trump campaign sent out to reporters...
    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/24/desantis-twitter-campaign-glitch-00098748
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708
    edited May 2023

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Some perspective on the immigration numbers:

    The new total will include 174,200 Ukrainian refugees and 160,700 Hongkongers fleeing repression in China — groups entering the country via special visa schemes that command considerable public support.

    It will also include large numbers of foreign students — they totaled 485,758 last year


    https://www.politico.eu/article/tories-brexit-done-uk-conservatives-on-immigration-rishi-sunak/

    Though to be fair since we are talking net migration and a significant number of those students will leave each year, it is debatable how much influence student numbers have on the figures we are talking about.
    I am very cynical about "students".

    I think it's a back-door for many to get into the UK permanently, particularly since they can bring families too - it's only the fees that cap the numbers.
    If we greatly reduce the numbers of foreign students, we will need to find alternative funding for universities. Though we know the instinct of the right would be simply to shut half of them down, why waste money on "David Beckham Studies" anyway?
    Figures for courses should be published against average non graduate stats. For each course

    Course name
    %unemployed and %wage differential vs non graduates at 1,5,10,20 and 30 years.
    I suspect indeed on those measures some courses are worthless.

    While some take a course out of pure intellectual interest many however do so because they think it will give them a higher paying job.

    Students deserve these figures to allow them the information they need to choose.
    Why waste money on "Jane Austen studies"? English was the media studies of its day. For the sake of the country, employers need to become less snooty about where they recruit from, like when Google discovered its best programmers did not come from Ivy League colleges.

    I'm in favour of education for all. Cynics can have a field day allocating courses to trade schools or finishing schools but the rich and powerful often went to the latter.
    Having to do all those trendy things like learn Anglo Saxon, read Beowulf, The Battle of Maldon and the Parlement of Foules never felt quite to have the robust rigour of a proper old fashioned media studies course. But distance lends enchantment perhaps.

    If you look back to when English courses were introduced over a hundred years ago, the arguments were the same. Learning poems was for schoolchildren. Reading novels was a trivial pursuit; worse than that, a woman's hobby. Face it, an English degree is a posh version of Richard & Judy's book club. And how many English graduates go on to become poets or novelists?
    The capacity to translate Beowulf or to identify classical sources in Paradise Lost has never failed to give me that extra edge in the competitive race of life. Pub talk is always enlivened by informed discussion of The Dream of the Rood. Grandchildren open mouthed and enchanted by tales of Gorboduc and the Dunciad.

    I'm reading Paradise Lost right now. It doesn't half go on.
    And the bad guy's the only interesting character.
    Yeah I'm getting that. Satan. Complex guy.
    Mammon seems like a good guy. Perhaps I've been working in the financial sector too long but I found his speech in book 2 quite persuasive.
    Pilgrims' Progress, now almost unread, is a much more fun read from the puritan tradition of the 17th century. Very English, no classical allusions much, short and to the point, unerring in its aim at fallen human nature. And, most of all, gives us 'Vanity Fair', title of great novel and a two word description of so much of modernity.

    And then there's this:

    Then went the jury out, whose names were, Mr. Blind-man, Mr. No-good, Mr. Malice, Mr. Love-lust, Mr. Live-loose, Mr. Heady, Mr. High-mind, Mr. Enmity, Mr. Liar, Mr. Cruelty, Mr. Hate-light, and Mr. Implacable......

    And that's without even starting on the House of Commons.
    It is of course a list of PBers' real names but I'm not going to dox anybody - you can work them out for yourselves.
    Hmmm....

    First one is @SeanT, second @SeanT, third.....

    Yup, they are all @SeanTs
    There are a few missing from the list of course: Mr. Excessive-modesty, Mr. Never-wrong, Mr. Exploding-turnip...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    Tempted to report Reeves to the stats regulator:

    https://twitter.com/RachelReevesMP/status/1635626844228657152

    I think there should be a ban on the reporting of forecasts.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It wasn't even that - the issue was we needed (and still need) a contribution based welfare system...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Some perspective on the immigration numbers:

    The new total will include 174,200 Ukrainian refugees and 160,700 Hongkongers fleeing repression in China — groups entering the country via special visa schemes that command considerable public support.

    It will also include large numbers of foreign students — they totaled 485,758 last year


    https://www.politico.eu/article/tories-brexit-done-uk-conservatives-on-immigration-rishi-sunak/

    Though to be fair since we are talking net migration and a significant number of those students will leave each year, it is debatable how much influence student numbers have on the figures we are talking about.
    I am very cynical about "students".

    I think it's a back-door for many to get into the UK permanently, particularly since they can bring families too - it's only the fees that cap the numbers.
    If we greatly reduce the numbers of foreign students, we will need to find alternative funding for universities. Though we know the instinct of the right would be simply to shut half of them down, why waste money on "David Beckham Studies" anyway?
    Figures for courses should be published against average non graduate stats. For each course

    Course name
    %unemployed and %wage differential vs non graduates at 1,5,10,20 and 30 years.
    I suspect indeed on those measures some courses are worthless.

    While some take a course out of pure intellectual interest many however do so because they think it will give them a higher paying job.

    Students deserve these figures to allow them the information they need to choose.
    Why waste money on "Jane Austen studies"? English was the media studies of its day. For the sake of the country, employers need to become less snooty about where they recruit from, like when Google discovered its best programmers did not come from Ivy League colleges.

    I'm in favour of education for all. Cynics can have a field day allocating courses to trade schools or finishing schools but the rich and powerful often went to the latter.
    Having to do all those trendy things like learn Anglo Saxon, read Beowulf, The Battle of Maldon and the Parlement of Foules never felt quite to have the robust rigour of a proper old fashioned media studies course. But distance lends enchantment perhaps.

    If you look back to when English courses were introduced over a hundred years ago, the arguments were the same. Learning poems was for schoolchildren. Reading novels was a trivial pursuit; worse than that, a woman's hobby. Face it, an English degree is a posh version of Richard & Judy's book club. And how many English graduates go on to become poets or novelists?
    The capacity to translate Beowulf or to identify classical sources in Paradise Lost has never failed to give me that extra edge in the competitive race of life. Pub talk is always enlivened by informed discussion of The Dream of the Rood. Grandchildren open mouthed and enchanted by tales of Gorboduc and the Dunciad.

    I'm reading Paradise Lost right now. It doesn't half go on.
    And the bad guy's the only interesting character.
    Yeah I'm getting that. Satan. Complex guy.
    Mammon seems like a good guy. Perhaps I've been working in the financial sector too long but I found his speech in book 2 quite persuasive.
    Pilgrims' Progress, now almost unread, is a much more fun read from the puritan tradition of the 17th century. Very English, no classical allusions much, short and to the point, unerring in its aim at fallen human nature. And, most of all, gives us 'Vanity Fair', title of great novel and a two word description of so much of modernity.

    And then there's this:

    Then went the jury out, whose names were, Mr. Blind-man, Mr. No-good, Mr. Malice, Mr. Love-lust, Mr. Live-loose, Mr. Heady, Mr. High-mind, Mr. Enmity, Mr. Liar, Mr. Cruelty, Mr. Hate-light, and Mr. Implacable......

    And that's without even starting on the House of Commons.
    It is of course a list of PBers' real names but I'm not going to dox anybody - you can work them out for yourselves.
    Hmmm....

    First one is @SeanT, second @SeanT, third.....

    Yup, they are all @SeanTs
    There are a few missing from the list of course: Mr. Excessive-modesty, Mr. Never-wrong, Mr. Exploding-turnip...
    Mr Too-Goody Shoes.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,042
    I watched an interesting (to me) long interview on this subject last night with Matt Goodwin on Spectator TV:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xx5GTtFbgp8

    He makes a strong case that this issue is going to balloon in salience over the next few years.

    I think 'it's not the legal migration it's the illegal I don't like' is a fairly common view and to me it may indicate participants conflating the small boats (which have got all the attention) with overall immigration levels.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,592
    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It wasn't even that - the issue was we needed (and still need) a contribution based welfare system...
    Also a welfare system that means those on benefits, who get a job, don't see the amount of money they get increase by pennies. In return for doing, generally, a shitty job.

    We are penalising people for getting jobs. It's the Laffer curve in action. And then people are surprised that people don't get jobs.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    HYUFD voted remain?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557
    Nigelb said:

    ...“Glitchy. Tech issues. Uncomfortable silences. A complete failure to launch. And that’s just the candidate!” a spokesperson for the Trump campaign sent out to reporters...
    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/24/desantis-twitter-campaign-glitch-00098748

    https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1661496322980028423
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557
    Major League... Cricket.

    Jason Roy set to end England deal to play in America's Major League Cricket
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/65711625
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262
    edited May 2023
    Rishi Sunak misled the House of Commons and the country yesterday when he said that it’s a “long established practise”for govt (taxpayers) pay legal fees for former ministers.

    https://twitter.com/KarlTurnerMP/status/1661684272925638659?s=20
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926
    Nigelb said:

    Major League... Cricket.

    Jason Roy set to end England deal to play in America's Major League Cricket
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/65711625

    A trend that could be problematic.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708
    edited May 2023

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262

    I watched an interesting (to me) long interview on this subject last night with Matt Goodwin on Spectator TV:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xx5GTtFbgp8

    He makes a strong case that this issue is going to balloon in salience over the next few years.

    I think 'it's not the legal migration it's the illegal I don't like' is a fairly common view and to me it may indicate participants conflating the small boats (which have got all the attention) with overall immigration levels.

    Indeed, I am sure a some people seeing today's headlines will be thinking most of those 600k came in on small boats.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,004
    Who to believe?

    A new video has been released showing the moment a Ukrainian naval drone impacts the Ivan Khurs. The damage sustained by the Russian ship is unknown. The Russian Defense Ministry claimed to have destroyed all the drones.
    https://twitter.com/COUPSURE/status/1661727122577326080
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 25% in 2004, 27% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    One wonders why you didn't, ah, Be-Leave strongly enough in the UK to vote Leave in 2016.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708
    edited May 2023
    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It wasn't even that - the issue was we needed (and still need) a contribution based welfare system...
    Nope, that wouldn't have helped with the undercutting of wages for the low skilled in areas like hospitality and construction. Most Eastern Europeans came here to work not claim welfare (though they needed housing and used the NHS and schools). We had a contributions based JSA even then and do now if you have too many savings for UC
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,592
    @JosiasJessop and the other space fans...

    https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/holistic-approach-launchers-exploration-europe-josef-aschbacher

    This guy - how long before he gets kicked out of his job for daring to talk sense?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,392
    AlistairM said:

    Who to believe?

    A new video has been released showing the moment a Ukrainian naval drone impacts the Ivan Khurs. The damage sustained by the Russian ship is unknown. The Russian Defense Ministry claimed to have destroyed all the drones.
    https://twitter.com/COUPSURE/status/1661727122577326080

    Technically, the drone was destroyed.

    When it impacted the ship.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164

    Nigelb said:

    Major League... Cricket.

    Jason Roy set to end England deal to play in America's Major League Cricket
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/65711625

    A trend that could be problematic.
    Possibly, but possibly not. It's not impossible that we get to a point where those players who want to play franchise T20 cricket leave the traditional game completely.

    Then we can get back to organising our calendar in a sensible way and not have to worry about those competitions or players.
  • TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,592

    AlistairM said:

    Who to believe?

    A new video has been released showing the moment a Ukrainian naval drone impacts the Ivan Khurs. The damage sustained by the Russian ship is unknown. The Russian Defense Ministry claimed to have destroyed all the drones.
    https://twitter.com/COUPSURE/status/1661727122577326080

    Technically, the drone was destroyed.

    When it impacted the ship.
    With drones like that, could it have been a coordinated multi-axis attack?

    The interesting question is how the video was relayed back to the Ukrainians.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So the country was held to ransom for a Con PM's weakness. Thank goodness that couldn't happen nowadays!
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,112

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Ending "discrimination" by the EU? That's like saying that the UK discriminates in favour of existing subjects of HMtK when it comes to passports, etc.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    AlistairM said:

    Who to believe?

    Neither is probably a healthy starting point. Both sides have been lying their arses off from the start.
  • Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Ending "discrimination" by the EU? That's like saying that the UK discriminates in favour of existing subjects of HMtK when it comes to passports, etc.
    Yes, end discrimination by the EU.

    If you want the EU to be a single country, then that's a perfectly legitimate argument to make, but its not what a majority of this country ever wanted. And unless or until the EU becomes a single nation then when it comes to immigration into this country it was absolutely extremely discriminatory in the past with citizens of some other countries able to move here freely and draconian restrictions on non-EU migrants.

    By having a level playing field people are treated more fairly regardless of nationality.

    Since I oppose discrimination, I think a level playing field is a good thing.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    If a racist shitbag said listen to me I have a whole agenda and need your vote to help me enact it would you vote with and for the racist shitbag?
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 18,154
    edited May 2023
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    If a racist shitbag said listen to me I have a whole agenda and need your vote to help me enact it would you vote with and for the racist shitbag?
    Not for that shitbag no, but I might coincidentally vote the same way as that shitbag if non-shitbags were making non-shitbag convincing arguments as to why that should be the case.

    Racist shitbags like the BNP and UKIP etc have long been in favour of voting reform to Proportional Representation because it will make it easier for racist shitbags to be elected to Parliament. If a Liberal Democrat votes for proportional representation in a referendum then does that mean they're voting with and for racist shitbags?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Plus who cares about the "official Vote Leave campaign". Leave won because of racist shitbags. And the official Vote Leave campaign knew perfectly well and adapted their message to suit the racist shitbags. Or in certain cases the racist shitbags who wanted to appear as though they weren't actually racist shitbags.

    You can applaud as much as you like the increase in non-EU immigration but your fellow travellers most certainly did not want more immigration.

    Perhaps you, @Richard_Tyndall and six others purport to welcome immigration. The vast majority of Leave voters voted Leave to end/reduce immigration.

    But whatever gets you through the day.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So the country was held to ransom for a Con PM's weakness. Thank goodness that couldn't happen nowadays!
    Had there been no EU referendum promise then I expect the 2015 general election would have been something like Tories 32%, Labour 30% UKIP 17%, LDs 8% rather than the Tories 37%, Labour 30%, UKIP 12%, LDs 8% it was.

    So may well have ended up with an EU referendum anyway with UKIP having won a few more FPTP seats and with the DUP holding the balance of power in a hung parliament rather than the narrow Tory majority we got
  • TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Plus who cares about the "official Vote Leave campaign". Leave won because of racist shitbags. And the official Vote Leave campaign knew perfectly well and adapted their message to suit the racist shitbags. Or in certain cases the racist shitbags who wanted to appear as though they weren't actually racist shitbags.

    You can applaud as much as you like the increase in non-EU immigration but your fellow travellers most certainly did not want more immigration.

    Perhaps you, @Richard_Tyndall and six others purport to welcome immigration. The vast majority of Leave voters voted Leave to end/reduce immigration.

    But whatever gets you through the day.
    Lets see, Vote Leave said by controlling immigration we could increase non-EU migration. And what happened is we have controlled immigration and non-EU migration has gone up, exactly as we were told, and exactly as we voted for.

    Myself, @Sandpit , @Richard_Tyndall and the five others who welcome immigration have got what we wanted.

    The racist shitbags have not got what they wanted.

    So if anyone was played, it was the racist shitbags. And if racist shitbags don't get what they want, then what's the harm in that?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Ending "discrimination" by the EU? That's like saying that the UK discriminates in favour of existing subjects of HMtK when it comes to passports, etc.
    Yes, end discrimination by the EU.

    If you want the EU to be a single country, then that's a perfectly legitimate argument to make, but its not what a majority of this country ever wanted. And unless or until the EU becomes a single nation then when it comes to immigration into this country it was absolutely extremely discriminatory in the past with citizens of some other countries able to move here freely and draconian restrictions on non-EU migrants.

    By having a level playing field people are treated more fairly regardless of nationality.

    Since I oppose discrimination, I think a level playing field is a good thing.
    False dichotomy. Allowing freedom of movement between given geographies is not EITHER a function of a single state OR discriminatory.
    There are sound reasons why different pairs of countries have different migration statuses, which are sometimes asymmetrical. A lot could depend on the level of economic integration between the countries. The EU's single-market approach requires freedom of movement of labour for citizens of member countries for perfectly sound reasons. It acknowledges that labour is part of that market.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 926


    Myself, @Sandpit , @Richard_Tyndall and the five others who welcome immigration have got what we wanted.

    The racist shitbags have not got what they wanted.

    So if anyone was played, it was the racist shitbags. And if racist shitbags don't get what they want, then what's the harm in that?

    Thing is, the 48% who voted remain didn't get what *they* wanted either. So as an exercise in democracy, "a very small number of people got what they wanted and most people ended up disappointed" isn't a great outcome...
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 18,154
    edited May 2023
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772

    Nigelb said:

    Major League... Cricket.

    Jason Roy set to end England deal to play in America's Major League Cricket
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/65711625

    A trend that could be problematic.
    No-one is ever going to challenge the England wickets and runs records of Root and Anderson, because no-one is ever going to play anywhere near as many Test matches - most of the top players in most countries will be playing in franchise leagues year round.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    Did you not read your own post?

    1999 - 6%
    2004 - 15%
    2009 - 16%
    2014 - 26%
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708
    edited May 2023

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    Had we had PR in 2015 for Westminster elections as well as the EU Parliament Farage would have held the balance of power in the Commons even after Cameron's EU referendum pledge of course given UKIP got 12% of the vote in 2015
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    Farooq said:

    Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Ending "discrimination" by the EU? That's like saying that the UK discriminates in favour of existing subjects of HMtK when it comes to passports, etc.
    Yes, end discrimination by the EU.

    If you want the EU to be a single country, then that's a perfectly legitimate argument to make, but its not what a majority of this country ever wanted. And unless or until the EU becomes a single nation then when it comes to immigration into this country it was absolutely extremely discriminatory in the past with citizens of some other countries able to move here freely and draconian restrictions on non-EU migrants.

    By having a level playing field people are treated more fairly regardless of nationality.

    Since I oppose discrimination, I think a level playing field is a good thing.
    False dichotomy. Allowing freedom of movement between given geographies is not EITHER a function of a single state OR discriminatory.
    There are sound reasons why different pairs of countries have different migration statuses, which are sometimes asymmetrical. A lot could depend on the level of economic integration between the countries. The EU's single-market approach requires freedom of movement of labour for citizens of member countries for perfectly sound reasons. It acknowledges that labour is part of that market.
    Accusations of racism on here to support a particular point of view are risible.

    Australia and NZ have FOM.
    Is that racist against countries with whom there is no similar arrangement? Only an utter nut job would argue thus.

    It is also not necessarily racist to prefer lower immigration. Let us be honest that the volumes of migration since the late 90s have been unprecedentedly massive.

    It’s true that Nigel Farage in particular flirted with racist tropes during the Brexit campaign, and xenophobia of various types, including outright racism, likely swung the vote to Brexit.

    Brexiters have to live with that.
  • Farooq said:

    Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Ending "discrimination" by the EU? That's like saying that the UK discriminates in favour of existing subjects of HMtK when it comes to passports, etc.
    Yes, end discrimination by the EU.

    If you want the EU to be a single country, then that's a perfectly legitimate argument to make, but its not what a majority of this country ever wanted. And unless or until the EU becomes a single nation then when it comes to immigration into this country it was absolutely extremely discriminatory in the past with citizens of some other countries able to move here freely and draconian restrictions on non-EU migrants.

    By having a level playing field people are treated more fairly regardless of nationality.

    Since I oppose discrimination, I think a level playing field is a good thing.
    False dichotomy. Allowing freedom of movement between given geographies is not EITHER a function of a single state OR discriminatory.
    There are sound reasons why different pairs of countries have different migration statuses, which are sometimes asymmetrical. A lot could depend on the level of economic integration between the countries. The EU's single-market approach requires freedom of movement of labour for citizens of member countries for perfectly sound reasons. It acknowledges that labour is part of that market.
    Its not a false dichotomy and it absolutely is discriminatory.

    Now you may want to argue that discrimination was a good thing. If so, please feel free to argue why we should discriminate against Asians, Africans, Americans, Australians etc but discriminate in favour of Europeans.

    But it 100% was absolutely and unequivocally discriminatory. Treating people differently based on their nationality is an absolute definition of discrimination.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708
    edited May 2023

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    Did you not read your own post?

    1999 - 6%
    2004 - 15%
    2009 - 16%
    2014 - 26%
    As I said, they doubled their vote in 2004, the year Blair failed to impose transition controls and Poland etc joined the EU and increased it at the following 2 elections even more after Romania etc joined too
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Plus who cares about the "official Vote Leave campaign". Leave won because of racist shitbags. And the official Vote Leave campaign knew perfectly well and adapted their message to suit the racist shitbags. Or in certain cases the racist shitbags who wanted to appear as though they weren't actually racist shitbags.

    You can applaud as much as you like the increase in non-EU immigration but your fellow travellers most certainly did not want more immigration.

    Perhaps you, @Richard_Tyndall and six others purport to welcome immigration. The vast majority of Leave voters voted Leave to end/reduce immigration.

    But whatever gets you through the day.
    Lets see, Vote Leave said by controlling immigration we could increase non-EU migration. And what happened is we have controlled immigration and non-EU migration has gone up, exactly as we were told, and exactly as we voted for.

    Myself, @Sandpit , @Richard_Tyndall and the five others who welcome immigration have got what we wanted.

    The racist shitbags have not got what they wanted.

    So if anyone was played, it was the racist shitbags. And if racist shitbags don't get what they want, then what's the harm in that?
    Point of order: the racist shitbags have not got what they want yet. Ending free movement was always a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to curtailing migration dramatically.
    The "failure" of the government to bring immigration down shows that they are at the least on friendly terms with reality, and they deserve some small praise for not going full racist shitbag (although there are still some in cabinet that have deeply problematic views).
    The question is, has leaving the EU drawn the racist poison out of the body politic, or given them succour to continue to the next stage? Are we at a "this far and no further" point, or did we step onto a well-greased but gentle incline?
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    Farooq said:

    Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Ending "discrimination" by the EU? That's like saying that the UK discriminates in favour of existing subjects of HMtK when it comes to passports, etc.
    Yes, end discrimination by the EU.

    If you want the EU to be a single country, then that's a perfectly legitimate argument to make, but its not what a majority of this country ever wanted. And unless or until the EU becomes a single nation then when it comes to immigration into this country it was absolutely extremely discriminatory in the past with citizens of some other countries able to move here freely and draconian restrictions on non-EU migrants.

    By having a level playing field people are treated more fairly regardless of nationality.

    Since I oppose discrimination, I think a level playing field is a good thing.
    False dichotomy. Allowing freedom of movement between given geographies is not EITHER a function of a single state OR discriminatory.
    There are sound reasons why different pairs of countries have different migration statuses, which are sometimes asymmetrical. A lot could depend on the level of economic integration between the countries. The EU's single-market approach requires freedom of movement of labour for citizens of member countries for perfectly sound reasons. It acknowledges that labour is part of that market.
    Its not a false dichotomy and it absolutely is discriminatory.

    Now you may want to argue that discrimination was a good thing. If so, please feel free to argue why we should discriminate against Asians, Africans, Americans, Australians etc but discriminate in favour of Europeans.

    But it 100% was absolutely and unequivocally discriminatory. Treating people differently based on their nationality is an absolute definition of discrimination.
    Well then all immigration policy anywhere in the world is discriminatory.

    You're confusing effects and motives. To have any kind of border means "discriminating" on the basis of nationality. But the motivation doesn't have to be sinister.
  • Farooq said:

    Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Ending "discrimination" by the EU? That's like saying that the UK discriminates in favour of existing subjects of HMtK when it comes to passports, etc.
    Yes, end discrimination by the EU.

    If you want the EU to be a single country, then that's a perfectly legitimate argument to make, but its not what a majority of this country ever wanted. And unless or until the EU becomes a single nation then when it comes to immigration into this country it was absolutely extremely discriminatory in the past with citizens of some other countries able to move here freely and draconian restrictions on non-EU migrants.

    By having a level playing field people are treated more fairly regardless of nationality.

    Since I oppose discrimination, I think a level playing field is a good thing.
    False dichotomy. Allowing freedom of movement between given geographies is not EITHER a function of a single state OR discriminatory.
    There are sound reasons why different pairs of countries have different migration statuses, which are sometimes asymmetrical. A lot could depend on the level of economic integration between the countries. The EU's single-market approach requires freedom of movement of labour for citizens of member countries for perfectly sound reasons. It acknowledges that labour is part of that market.
    Accusations of racism on here to support a particular point of view are risible.

    Australia and NZ have FOM.
    Is that racist against countries with whom there is no similar arrangement? Only an utter nut job would argue thus.

    It is also not necessarily racist to prefer lower immigration. Let us be honest that the volumes of migration since the late 90s have been unprecedentedly massive.

    It’s true that Nigel Farage in particular flirted with racist tropes during the Brexit campaign, and xenophobia of various types, including outright racism, likely swung the vote to Brexit.

    Brexiters have to live with that.
    Of course the Aus and NZ agreement is discriminatory. 🤦‍♂️

    Now sound arguments are made as to why that discrimination is a good thing: the reciprocity, the small numbers involved (New Zealanders make up only 7.5% of Australia's overseas born population) etc

    Its possible to be discriminatory and for the discrimination to be a good thing. The problem is, that the UK's discrimination until recently was not a good thing - Australia makes it a lot easier for non-NZ migrants to migrate to Australia than the UK did for non-EU migrants.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Plus who cares about the "official Vote Leave campaign". Leave won because of racist shitbags. And the official Vote Leave campaign knew perfectly well and adapted their message to suit the racist shitbags. Or in certain cases the racist shitbags who wanted to appear as though they weren't actually racist shitbags.

    You can applaud as much as you like the increase in non-EU immigration but your fellow travellers most certainly did not want more immigration.

    Perhaps you, @Richard_Tyndall and six others purport to welcome immigration. The vast majority of Leave voters voted Leave to end/reduce immigration.

    But whatever gets you through the day.
    Lets see, Vote Leave said by controlling immigration we could increase non-EU migration. And what happened is we have controlled immigration and non-EU migration has gone up, exactly as we were told, and exactly as we voted for.

    Myself, @Sandpit , @Richard_Tyndall and the five others who welcome immigration have got what we wanted.

    The racist shitbags have not got what they wanted.

    So if anyone was played, it was the racist shitbags. And if racist shitbags don't get what they want, then what's the harm in that?
    You have contributed to a situation where racist shitbags are emboldened and believe they have popular support for their racist shitbag policies and emboldened others to participate in racist shitbag actions.

    "Increase in hate crimes after the Brexit referendum suggest that the result created a public information shock, which in turn led to a re-evaluation of society’s tolerance towards racist action and induced some individuals to commit a hate crime."

    Interesting that having unleashed this the govt then acted swiftly to try to curtail it, so the study says.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    Of course one could blame Margaret Thatcher who vigorously supported the extension of the EU to the East and Southeast.
    Personally I thought at the time that wasn’t a good idea.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,874
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Plus who cares about the "official Vote Leave campaign". Leave won because of racist shitbags. And the official Vote Leave campaign knew perfectly well and adapted their message to suit the racist shitbags. Or in certain cases the racist shitbags who wanted to appear as though they weren't actually racist shitbags.

    You can applaud as much as you like the increase in non-EU immigration but your fellow travellers most certainly did not want more immigration.

    Perhaps you, @Richard_Tyndall and six others purport to welcome immigration. The vast majority of Leave voters voted Leave to end/reduce immigration.

    But whatever gets you through the day.
    Lets see, Vote Leave said by controlling immigration we could increase non-EU migration. And what happened is we have controlled immigration and non-EU migration has gone up, exactly as we were told, and exactly as we voted for.

    Myself, @Sandpit , @Richard_Tyndall and the five others who welcome immigration have got what we wanted.

    The racist shitbags have not got what they wanted.

    So if anyone was played, it was the racist shitbags. And if racist shitbags don't get what they want, then what's the harm in that?
    You have contributed to a situation where racist shitbags are emboldened and believe they have popular support for their racist shitbag policies and emboldened others to participate in racist shitbag actions.

    "Increase in hate crimes after the Brexit referendum suggest that the result created a public information shock, which in turn led to a re-evaluation of society’s tolerance towards racist action and induced some individuals to commit a hate crime."

    Interesting that having unleashed this the govt then acted swiftly to try to curtail it, so the study says.
    I'm dubious that there was a surge in hate crime - at least one prominent case, flagged at the time as anti-European, turned out to be nothing of the kind. I'm skeptical of reporting bias - see also pollution in UK rivers.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    AlistairM said:

    Who to believe?

    A new video has been released showing the moment a Ukrainian naval drone impacts the Ivan Khurs. The damage sustained by the Russian ship is unknown. The Russian Defense Ministry claimed to have destroyed all the drones.
    https://twitter.com/COUPSURE/status/1661727122577326080

    If they’d kept the video running, so that we could see the undamaged ship afterwards, then perhaps we might for once be impressed with the Russian military. But no, it wasn’t there afterwards now, was it?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited May 2023
    On topic, there’s a massive difference between being against any and all immigration - and being against unlimited levels of unskilled immigration, only open to certain countries, that depress wages at the bottom of the scale and lead to housing and services shortages.

    The aim isn’t to curtail immigration, the aim is to keep immigration numbers aligned with the aims of growing wages per capita, housebuilding, services provision, and addressing labour shortages in key areas.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
    So the 17 million people who voted to Leave were all racists, and yet the UK is consistently one of the least racist countries in the world. Im not following your logic.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    Of course one could blame Margaret Thatcher who vigorously supported the extension of the EU to the East and Southeast.
    Personally I thought at the time that wasn’t a good idea.

    Youre showing your age, lefties are now blaming everything on Brexit.

    Brexit is the new Thatcher.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    Ukraine's Commander-in-Chief Valerii Zaluzhnyi has ended speculation about his disappearance by appearing in a video posted on Telegram. He must have been busy planning something over the last few weeks...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Farooq said:

    Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Ending "discrimination" by the EU? That's like saying that the UK discriminates in favour of existing subjects of HMtK when it comes to passports, etc.
    Yes, end discrimination by the EU.

    If you want the EU to be a single country, then that's a perfectly legitimate argument to make, but its not what a majority of this country ever wanted. And unless or until the EU becomes a single nation then when it comes to immigration into this country it was absolutely extremely discriminatory in the past with citizens of some other countries able to move here freely and draconian restrictions on non-EU migrants.

    By having a level playing field people are treated more fairly regardless of nationality.

    Since I oppose discrimination, I think a level playing field is a good thing.
    False dichotomy. Allowing freedom of movement between given geographies is not EITHER a function of a single state OR discriminatory.
    There are sound reasons why different pairs of countries have different migration statuses, which are sometimes asymmetrical. A lot could depend on the level of economic integration between the countries. The EU's single-market approach requires freedom of movement of labour for citizens of member countries for perfectly sound reasons. It acknowledges that labour is part of that market.
    Accusations of racism on here to support a particular point of view are risible.

    Australia and NZ have FOM.
    Is that racist against countries with whom there is no similar arrangement? Only an utter nut job would argue thus.

    It is also not necessarily racist to prefer lower immigration. Let us be honest that the volumes of migration since the late 90s have been unprecedentedly massive.

    It’s true that Nigel Farage in particular flirted with racist tropes during the Brexit campaign, and xenophobia of various types, including outright racism, likely swung the vote to Brexit.

    Brexiters have to live with that.
    If a British government today, were to make the decision to abandon Commonwealth immigration in favour of EU immigration, do you think that they wouldn’t be accused of racism, and that modern human rights courts wouldn’t agree with them?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,874

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
    So the 17 million people who voted to Leave were all racists, and yet the UK is consistently one of the least racist countries in the world. Im not following your logic.
    Its an astonishing belief among some hardened remainers, that anyone who voted leave is a racist, despite reams of evidence that the UK is one of the most welcoming, least racist nations on Earth. The bitter reality is that many voted leave to shake up the system - the smug bubble of smarmy middle class people who think they run the world. Literally the people of nowhere - houses in England, France and elsewhere. The Polly Toynbees of the world.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    BREAKING: Three-vehicle crash in Godshill causes traffic chaos
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
    So the 17 million people who voted to Leave were all racists, and yet the UK is consistently one of the least racist countries in the world. Im not following your logic.
    You can want immigration to be reduced and not be a racist. But the referendum was fought over immigration. That will necessarily include a lot of racist shitbags. No one on PB, of course.

    As they say, not everyone who voted Leave was a racist, while everyone who was a racist voted Leave.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,838
    17%. That's also how many Brits support Donald Trump. And who positively wanted a No Deal Brexit. Same people. The basket of deplorables.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,874
    IanB2 said:

    BREAKING: Three-vehicle crash in Godshill causes traffic chaos

    I can't work out if you are posting this ironically, or if there is some reason why I (or anyone else on PB) needs to know about this!
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    "Police Scotland chief says force is institutionally racist"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65706748
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
    So the 17 million people who voted to Leave were all racists, and yet the UK is consistently one of the least racist countries in the world. Im not following your logic.
    Its an astonishing belief among some hardened remainers, that anyone who voted leave is a racist, despite reams of evidence that the UK is one of the most welcoming, least racist nations on Earth. The bitter reality is that many voted leave to shake up the system - the smug bubble of smarmy middle class people who think they run the world. Literally the people of nowhere - houses in England, France and elsewhere. The Polly Toynbees of the world.
    I couldn't agree more. It was the big red button that they could push whereas that button is usually behind armoured glass and inaccessible.

    But it also emboldened racists that they were living in a country that "didn't like immigration".

    See also Jeremy Corbyn, for emboldening racists.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    Of course one could blame Margaret Thatcher who vigorously supported the extension of the EU to the East and Southeast.
    Personally I thought at the time that wasn’t a good idea.

    In the context of the cold war it was a fantastic idea, and she was right.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,874
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
    So the 17 million people who voted to Leave were all racists, and yet the UK is consistently one of the least racist countries in the world. Im not following your logic.
    You can want immigration to be reduced and not be a racist. But the referendum was fought over immigration. That will necessarily include a lot of racist shitbags. No one on PB, of course.

    As they say, not everyone who voted Leave was a racist, while everyone who was a racist voted Leave.
    No racists in the Labour party of course (at least not NOW Starmer has kicked them out). How many racists do you think there are in the UK?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812

    Farooq said:

    Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Ending "discrimination" by the EU? That's like saying that the UK discriminates in favour of existing subjects of HMtK when it comes to passports, etc.
    Yes, end discrimination by the EU.

    If you want the EU to be a single country, then that's a perfectly legitimate argument to make, but its not what a majority of this country ever wanted. And unless or until the EU becomes a single nation then when it comes to immigration into this country it was absolutely extremely discriminatory in the past with citizens of some other countries able to move here freely and draconian restrictions on non-EU migrants.

    By having a level playing field people are treated more fairly regardless of nationality.

    Since I oppose discrimination, I think a level playing field is a good thing.
    False dichotomy. Allowing freedom of movement between given geographies is not EITHER a function of a single state OR discriminatory.
    There are sound reasons why different pairs of countries have different migration statuses, which are sometimes asymmetrical. A lot could depend on the level of economic integration between the countries. The EU's single-market approach requires freedom of movement of labour for citizens of member countries for perfectly sound reasons. It acknowledges that labour is part of that market.
    Accusations of racism on here to support a particular point of view are risible.

    Australia and NZ have FOM.
    Is that racist against countries with whom there is no similar arrangement? Only an utter nut job would argue thus.

    It is also not necessarily racist to prefer lower immigration. Let us be honest that the volumes of migration since the late 90s have been unprecedentedly massive.

    It’s true that Nigel Farage in particular flirted with racist tropes during the Brexit campaign, and xenophobia of various types, including outright racism, likely swung the vote to Brexit.

    Brexiters have to live with that.
    Of course the Aus and NZ agreement is discriminatory. 🤦‍♂️

    Now sound arguments are made as to why that discrimination is a good thing: the reciprocity, the small numbers involved (New Zealanders make up only 7.5% of Australia's overseas born population) etc

    Its possible to be discriminatory and for the discrimination to be a good thing. The problem is, that the UK's discrimination until recently was not a good thing - Australia makes it a lot easier for non-NZ migrants to migrate to Australia than the UK did for non-EU migrants.
    Do you know the difference between racist and discriminatory? Read my post again, read it and understand it.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,243
    IanB2 said:

    BREAKING: Three-vehicle crash in Godshill causes traffic chaos

    Well, it would, with the entire IoW vehicle fleet involved!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,755
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
    So the 17 million people who voted to Leave were all racists, and yet the UK is consistently one of the least racist countries in the world. Im not following your logic.
    You can want immigration to be reduced and not be a racist. But the referendum was fought over immigration. That will necessarily include a lot of racist shitbags. No one on PB, of course.

    As they say, not everyone who voted Leave was a racist, while everyone who was a racist voted Leave.
    No racists voted Remain?

    That's troll logic.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    Sandpit said:

    Farooq said:

    Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    It's ok - you are on the right side of history on this one. Sometimes it is worth being on a particular side just because of who is on the other side.

    Despite all the PB Leavers falling over themselves to say how much they welcome immigration, nevertheless they hitched their trailer to quite a racist undertaking in the campaigns to leave the EU.
    The official Vote Leave campaign made a point, quite a good one, that by controlling immigration we could end discrimination against non-Europeans and increase non-EU migration.

    Which is exactly what has happened.

    Yes Farage and co may have been racist shitbags, but so what? If a racist told you not to cross a level crossing while the red lights were flashing and a train was approaching would you say "well if you're telling me not to, I better had"?
    Ending "discrimination" by the EU? That's like saying that the UK discriminates in favour of existing subjects of HMtK when it comes to passports, etc.
    Yes, end discrimination by the EU.

    If you want the EU to be a single country, then that's a perfectly legitimate argument to make, but its not what a majority of this country ever wanted. And unless or until the EU becomes a single nation then when it comes to immigration into this country it was absolutely extremely discriminatory in the past with citizens of some other countries able to move here freely and draconian restrictions on non-EU migrants.

    By having a level playing field people are treated more fairly regardless of nationality.

    Since I oppose discrimination, I think a level playing field is a good thing.
    False dichotomy. Allowing freedom of movement between given geographies is not EITHER a function of a single state OR discriminatory.
    There are sound reasons why different pairs of countries have different migration statuses, which are sometimes asymmetrical. A lot could depend on the level of economic integration between the countries. The EU's single-market approach requires freedom of movement of labour for citizens of member countries for perfectly sound reasons. It acknowledges that labour is part of that market.
    Accusations of racism on here to support a particular point of view are risible.

    Australia and NZ have FOM.
    Is that racist against countries with whom there is no similar arrangement? Only an utter nut job would argue thus.

    It is also not necessarily racist to prefer lower immigration. Let us be honest that the volumes of migration since the late 90s have been unprecedentedly massive.

    It’s true that Nigel Farage in particular flirted with racist tropes during the Brexit campaign, and xenophobia of various types, including outright racism, likely swung the vote to Brexit.

    Brexiters have to live with that.
    If a British government today, were to make the decision to abandon Commonwealth immigration in favour of EU immigration, do you think that they wouldn’t be accused of racism, and that modern human rights courts wouldn’t agree with them?
    I’ve no idea.
    I don’t comment on hypothetical counterfactuals made up by WEF-fearing loons.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,441

    IanB2 said:

    BREAKING: Three-vehicle crash in Godshill causes traffic chaos

    I can't work out if you are posting this ironically, or if there is some reason why I (or anyone else on PB) needs to know about this!
    To be fair, if God is omnipotent youd have thought he could manage a bit of afternoon traffic on his own hill?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Of course one could blame Margaret Thatcher who vigorously supported the extension of the EU to the East and Southeast.
    Personally I thought at the time that wasn’t a good idea.

    In Thatcher’s time, it was a good idea. It was the subsequent Treaties of Maastricht and Lisbon that were the problems.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Sean_F said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
    So the 17 million people who voted to Leave were all racists, and yet the UK is consistently one of the least racist countries in the world. Im not following your logic.
    You can want immigration to be reduced and not be a racist. But the referendum was fought over immigration. That will necessarily include a lot of racist shitbags. No one on PB, of course.

    As they say, not everyone who voted Leave was a racist, while everyone who was a racist voted Leave.
    No racists voted Remain?

    That's troll logic.
    I'm ignoring rounding errors.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    Andy_JS said:

    "Police Scotland chief says force is institutionally racist"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65706748

    Well I’m sure the First Minister will be welcoming his letter of resignation this afternoon.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    Some of the racists didn't vote at all :smile:
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
    So the 17 million people who voted to Leave were all racists, and yet the UK is consistently one of the least racist countries in the world. Im not following your logic.
    You can want immigration to be reduced and not be a racist. But the referendum was fought over immigration. That will necessarily include a lot of racist shitbags. No one on PB, of course.

    As they say, not everyone who voted Leave was a racist, while everyone who was a racist voted Leave.
    No racists in the Labour party of course (at least not NOW Starmer has kicked them out). How many racists do you think there are in the UK?
    Plenty of flavours of racist and as for the Labour Party we can take a guess at how their leader at the time voted in 2016, given his long-standing attitude towards the EU.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
    So the 17 million people who voted to Leave were all racists, and yet the UK is consistently one of the least racist countries in the world. Im not following your logic.
    You can want immigration to be reduced and not be a racist. But the referendum was fought over immigration. That will necessarily include a lot of racist shitbags. No one on PB, of course.

    As they say, not everyone who voted Leave was a racist, while everyone who was a racist voted Leave.
    Unlikely lots of people who hate Jews Hindus and Muslims voted remain. You only have to look at Momentum or Remain voting Leicester. It's a stupid statement.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909
    Andy_JS said:

    "Police Scotland chief says force is institutionally racist"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65706748

    Tsk! SIXTEEN years of SNP mis-rule!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557

    Of course one could blame Margaret Thatcher who vigorously supported the extension of the EU to the East and Southeast.
    Personally I thought at the time that wasn’t a good idea.

    It was a bloody good idea, though, given the economic improvement now delivered to those countries, the impact on English as a working language of the EU, and the notable shift toward a more Atlanticist view (or counter view) inside Brussels.
    One of the more positive aspects of her very mixed legacy.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909
    Dura_Ace said:

    AlistairM said:

    Who to believe?

    Neither is probably a healthy starting point. Both sides have been lying their arses off from the start.
    But only one has been in occupation of their neighbour's territory since 2014...
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,281
    edited May 2023
    Nigelb said:

    Major League... Cricket.

    Jason Roy set to end England deal to play in America's Major League Cricket
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/65711625

    The ECB is going to have to up the pay of England players significantly.

    England players salaries have historically always been very low compared to the revenue generated - because you have no choice which country you play for - so the ECB could get away with underpaying.

    ECB gets £220m per year from Sky - vast majority of that relates to international cricket. But how much goes to England players? I would say about £20m.

    In most professional sports the players get well over 50% of the revenue generated.

    Whereas the ECB has historically spent all kinds of money on various projects, admin etc (plus in fairness supporting the counties).

    Going forward this will have to change. They'll need to move top England players on to say £2m+ and everyone playing regularly will need to be on £1m+. So probably £50m to the players (allowing for all formats you are probably looking at about 30-35 England players).

    But the ECB can do that if they want to. They will just have to get real and take on the competition.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has reason substantially to now over 500,000.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

    Mayor of London Sadiq Khan however makes clear he still welcomes immigrants as Mayor of the socially liberal capital, making a change from Starmer and Cooper who have accused the government 'of failing to get a grip on immigration' as they try and appeal to the much more immigration hostile redwall
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661656627102007298?s=20
    https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1661657110923313158?s=20

    "Note immigration has fallen below 100, 000 for EU net immigration post Brexit, it is non-EU immigration where it has risen substantially to now over 500,000".

    Remain should have put that on the side of a bus.
    It couldn't have done pre referendum. It is Brexit and the end of EU free movement that has reduced net EU immigration.

    Though I take the view it was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on Eastern European migration for 7 years in 2004 like Germany that won it for Leave. Had he done so it would probably have been Remain 52% Leave 48% rather than the reverse
    I don't think this is true. The wave of migration into Europe in 2015 was a much bigger factor than migration within the EU after expansion.
    It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls from 2004 that led to the real UKIP surge and pressure for the EU referendum though.

    UKIP went from just 6% in the 1999 EU Parliament elections in the UK to 15% in 2004, 16% in 2009 and then topped the poll in 2014 with 26%. Pressure of leaking Tory votes to UKIP then forced Cameron as PM to concede the promise of an EU referendum if the Tories won a majority in 2015
    So UK's initial polling surge predated EU expansion and they made no progress in the subsequent 5 years when net EU migration spiked?
    UKIP's initial polling surge was 2004-2009 ie exactly when transition controls were not imposed
    1999-2004 predates EU expansion though and that's when they went from also-rans to 15%.

    Of course a big booster to their campaign was the fact the EU elections became proportional representation - something long desired by racist shitbag parties of all stripes as it makes it much easier for them to get elected. Which is why the EU elections had significant numbers of racist shitbags elected but Parliament does not.

    I'm curious if @TOPPING will answer as to whether everyone who voted Yes to AV in 2011 as Farage wanted and Farage campaigned in favour of was voting with and for racist shitbags? As that's his logic.
    By all means continue with the fiction that the referendum was fought over widget regulations. It was fought over immigration. I don't think the 2011 AV vote likewise had immigration at its core.
    So the 17 million people who voted to Leave were all racists, and yet the UK is consistently one of the least racist countries in the world. Im not following your logic.
    You can want immigration to be reduced and not be a racist. But the referendum was fought over immigration. That will necessarily include a lot of racist shitbags. No one on PB, of course.

    As they say, not everyone who voted Leave was a racist, while everyone who was a racist voted Leave.
    Unlikely lots of people who hate Jews Hindus and Muslims voted remain. You only have to look at Momentum or Remain voting Leicester. It's a stupid statement.
    You make my point for me.

    Jeremy Corbyn emboldened racists within the Labour party to think that it was ok to be racist.
    The referendum result emboldened racists in the UK to think that it was ok to be racist.

    Not every Lab Party member is racist, not every Leave voter is racist.

    But their actions (Jezza and Leave as exemplified by Nige) emboldened racists.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909

    AlistairM said:

    Who to believe?

    A new video has been released showing the moment a Ukrainian naval drone impacts the Ivan Khurs. The damage sustained by the Russian ship is unknown. The Russian Defense Ministry claimed to have destroyed all the drones.
    https://twitter.com/COUPSURE/status/1661727122577326080

    Technically, the drone was destroyed.

    When it impacted the ship.
    With drones like that, could it have been a coordinated multi-axis attack?

    The interesting question is how the video was relayed back to the Ukrainians.
    "He will make an excellent drone!"
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    Of course one could blame Margaret Thatcher who vigorously supported the extension of the EU to the East and Southeast.
    Personally I thought at the time that wasn’t a good idea.

    It was a bloody good idea, though, given the economic improvement now delivered to those countries, the impact on English as a working language of the EU, and the notable shift toward a more Atlanticist view (or counter view) inside Brussels.
    It's arguable that Brexit itself has had the paradoxical effect of anchoring the EU to a more Atlanticist position. The Gaullist view of the EU is weaker than ever.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,874
    MikeL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Major League... Cricket.

    Jason Roy set to end England deal to play in America's Major League Cricket
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/65711625

    The ECB is going to have to up the pay of England players significantly.

    England players salaries have historically always been very low compared to the revenue generated - because you have no choice which country you play for - so the ECB could get away with underpaying.

    ECB gets £220m per year from Sky - vast majority of that relates to international cricket. But how much goes to England players? I would say about £20m.

    In most professional sports the players get well over 50% of the revenue generated.

    Whereas the ECB has historically spent all kinds of money on various projects, admin etc (plus in fairness supporting the counties).

    Going forward this will have to change. They'll need to move top England players on to say £2m+ and everyone playing regularly will need to be on £1m+. So probably £50m to the players (allowing for all formats you are probably looking at about 30-35 England players).

    But the ECB can do that if they want to. They will just have to get real and take on the competition.
    Yes and no. Test cricket is still the pinnacle of the game, and the best players want to prove themselves at that level. This has been the causes of most of the issues with IPL etc - if players didn't care about test cricket they would have just gone for the money, but they mostly have tried to balance things.

    I'm also not sure that the vast majority is about test cricket. Sky shows the T20 Blast through the summer, and also County Champs games too. I get that the international games are huge, but Sky are buying the whole package, not just internationals.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812

    Of course one could blame Margaret Thatcher who vigorously supported the extension of the EU to the East and Southeast.
    Personally I thought at the time that wasn’t a good idea.

    It was a bloody good idea, though, given the economic improvement now delivered to those countries, the impact on English as a working language of the EU, and the notable shift toward a more Atlanticist view (or counter view) inside Brussels.
    It's arguable that Brexit itself has had the paradoxical effect of anchoring the EU to a more Atlanticist position. The Gaullist view of the EU is weaker than ever.
    I don’t think the Gaullist view of the EU is weaker than ever.

    Ostpolitik, maybe.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 2,720
    MikeL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Major League... Cricket.

    Jason Roy set to end England deal to play in America's Major League Cricket
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/65711625

    The ECB is going to have to up the pay of England players significantly.

    England players salaries have historically always been very low compared to the revenue generated - because you have no choice which country you play for - so the ECB could get away with underpaying.

    ECB gets £220m per year from Sky - vast majority of that relates to international cricket. But how much goes to England players? I would say about £20m.

    In most professional sports the players get well over 50% of the revenue generated.

    Whereas the ECB has historically spent all kinds of money on various projects, admin etc (plus in fairness supporting the counties).

    Going forward this will have to change. They'll need to move top England players on to say £2m+ and everyone playing regularly will need to be on £1m+. So probably £50m to the players (allowing for all formats you are probably looking at about 30-35 England players).

    But the ECB can do that if they want to. They will just have to get real and take on the competition.
    I'm going to have to pay more for my Sky Cricket subscription aren't I? :angry:
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    Manchester has had both rail upgrades and hospital improvements cancelled today.

    Who’d be a Tory in the North West?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,629

    Lots of action on the animal welfare front today. The Government has dropped its own Kept Animals Bill, which would have banned live exports and had already passed two readings in the Commons, and instead have said that its contents will be put forward in separate bills later in this Parliament. This is a long-standing commitment which was advanced as one benefit of Brexit, and it featured prominently in the Government Animal Welfare Plan only last year. Campaigners are incensed, and I've got a strong interview on it which will probably be in tomorrow's Farming Today.

    Meanwhile, the Animal Sentience Committee has finally been set up, after a year's delay - this is a genuinely positive measure with five independent experts monitoring what the Government does on animal welfare. To be fair, it's not often that Governments set up bodies to challenge Ministers, and they deserve credit for it

    Out of curiousity why have they dropped it? I can't imagine that most in the uk would be particularly incensed by its passing and would welcome it.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812

    Lots of action on the animal welfare front today. The Government has dropped its own Kept Animals Bill, which would have banned live exports and had already passed two readings in the Commons, and instead have said that its contents will be put forward in separate bills later in this Parliament. This is a long-standing commitment which was advanced as one benefit of Brexit, and it featured prominently in the Government Animal Welfare Plan only last year. Campaigners are incensed, and I've got a strong interview on it which will probably be in tomorrow's Farming Today.

    Meanwhile, the Animal Sentience Committee has finally been set up, after a year's delay - this is a genuinely positive measure with five independent experts monitoring what the Government does on animal welfare. To be fair, it's not often that Governments set up bodies to challenge Ministers, and they deserve credit for it

    There isn’t that much time left in Parliament.
    Is this another broken Tory / Brexit promise?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    edited May 2023
    MikeL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Major League... Cricket.

    Jason Roy set to end England deal to play in America's Major League Cricket
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/65711625

    The ECB is going to have to up the pay of England players significantly.

    England players salaries have historically always been very low compared to the revenue generated - because you have no choice which country you play for - so the ECB could get away with underpaying.

    ECB gets £220m per year from Sky - vast majority of that relates to international cricket. But how much goes to England players? I would say about £20m.

    In most professional sports the players get well over 50% of the revenue generated.

    Whereas the ECB has historically spent all kinds of money on various projects, admin etc (plus in fairness supporting the counties).

    Going forward this will have to change. They'll need to move top England players on to say £2m+ and everyone playing regularly will need to be on £1m+. So probably £50m to the players (allowing for all formats you are probably looking at about 30-35 England players).

    But the ECB can do that if they want to. They will just have to get real and take on the competition.
    That will work in the short-term, but unlike, say, the IPL, or the EPL, the ECB only pay the players for one team, and they'll make sod all from Sky if they don't have decent quality opponents to play international cricket against.

    How do they schedule 14 Tests a year when they only have Australia, India and Pakistan to play (and the latter only because the IPL bans their players)?
This discussion has been closed.