Because the net migration figure was 764,000 - an eye-watering number.
Net migration during this Parliament has added 2 million people. (Around the population of West Yorkshire).
80% of the public want net migration below 100,000 a year.
The Brexit vote hasn't led to a reduction.
Because immigration is currently at the highest level it has ever been, and significantly beyond what our country can cope with. It is causing problems with resources not having sufficient capacity to cope with the increased demand (housing being the obvious example of that), and there are huge cultural problems that derive from a lack of integration too.
And rather unsurprisingly, people are upset about that. And the complete lack of any workable plan from politicians to be able to deal with it.
Over the last three years, three and a half million people migrated to the UK. Almost entirely *legal* migration. This has had and will have consequences. The consistent levels of net migration since the mid 1990s are historically *entirely unprecedented* for this island.
We are living through a great experiment that will fundamentally change this country (and already has).
Many worry that social cohesion, national unity and shared cultural values will become further undermined this century. Some link ultra high migration with the fact we can't catch up with the required level of house building - locking out young people from having reliable, affordable housing, making it less appealing to start a family.
Those in power, whether politically or in a role of societal influence tend to be people who are insulated from the negative aspects of immigration.
Immigration is a positive thing - if it happens at a sustainable level, with democratic approval. Immigrant groups should've been dispersed throughout the country and not allowed to form concentrated populations, as seen in many towns and cities across England and Wales.
Denmark's Social Democrats have started to clear out ethnic enclaves:
**Denmark Aims a Wrecking Ball at ‘Non-Western’ Neighborhoods**
https://archive.ph/2023.10.27-224108/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/26/world/europe/denmark-housing.html
*The law mandates that in neighborhoods where at least half of the population is of non-Western origin or descent, and where at least two of the following characteristics exist — low income, low education, high unemployment or a high percentage of residents who have had criminal convictions — the share of social housing needs to be reduced to no more than 40 percent by 2030.*
It's possible but it requires mainstream politicians to see the merit in doing so. The Danish Social Democrats have crushed the far right by tackling a problem most other European mainstream parties have totally ignored.
Demolishing social housing and building new social housing elsewhere sounds fairly impossible for us tbh.
It's also not just about social housing (it may well not even be a majority)
First and foremost, wanting to control and/or reduce immigration isn't anti-immigration. Any modern country controls and manages their immigration levels - or they at least *should*.
Even under a net-zero immigration policy, you could still have 500,000 immigrants enter the country every year as around 500,000 people emigrate from the UK most years.
The problem is, the electorate has not voted for mass-migration and rapid demographic change - the Tories have campaigned multiple times on reducing immigration, but the figures have only gone up over the last 14 years.
Net-migration figures used to be in the tens of thousands, which was manageable. However, the past few years has seen net migration figures of around 700,000 a year. This clearly isn't sustainable, not only from a practical point of view but also from a cultural point of view. It may not be a popular opinion, but bringing in huge numbers of people from countries whose values and culture directly conflict with our own isn't a good thing. For a country to be strong and socially cohesive, we all have to be singing from the same or similar hymn sheets. Different opinions are fine, but accepting people into the country who are vehemently against the most fundamental rights and values of Britain is insane to me.
If the Palestinian people have a right to the land of Palestine and to protect their culture for example, then the British people have that same right.
You can read about British culture in books or read about it online. Or you can even experience it by going outside.
However, some aspects of British culture that stand out are respect for social etiquette, our varied and wide-ranging accents, our music, our writers, our film-making, our sport (especially creating football in its modern form, which is the most popular sport in the world), and yes, even our food is a cultural product. As a nation, we have also accepted many different religions into our society and allow people to practice them freely.
You can even look at specifc aspects of our culture through the individual countries that make up the United Kingdom - Morris dancing in England and Ceilidh dancing in Scotland, for example.
Despite what you'll read in the media and online, the vast majority of British people are accepting of LGBT+ people - most British people have a "live and let live" attitude. Our laws are also a reflection of our culture - we have some of the most liberal laws in regards to abortion in Europe, we treat women as equal to men under the law, nor are women aren't treated as property within the law. Fair trials, individual liberty, equality between the sexes. We enjoy these fundamental civil rights that date back to the 13th Century in the Magna Carta, these rights and values are inherently a part of our culture as well.
Those from abroad, or even those already here, who seek to oppose our fundamental rights, our cultural values, and our way of life, should not be welcomed or tolerated in my view.
Because we have unbelievable immigration numbers & the response to any criticism of the issues with it is to call the criticism "far right". Like you have here.
Far right like the criticism you always have and still do get from workers unions.
It's not far right to say over a million immigrants a year has downsides, it's extreme to say otherwise.
It's not far right to say foreign criminals should be deported or shouldn't be here in the first place, it's extreme to say otherwise.
It's not far right to want to help genuine refugees instead of the asylum seeker claims we get, it's extreme to say otherwise.
You should be asking about the extremists that do want those things and ask why it's such an issue and the media isn't even calling them extreme.
You know the greens are open borders? An extreme idea and yet they get none of this attention on what is the most extreme opinion on immigration in mainstream politics.
Because the public surprisingly don’t actually support rapid and unsustainable demographic change that they’ve never once voted for.
Add on to it that it means competing with the world for housing and wages whilst our already crumbling public services and infrastructure need to cope with the population of Glasgow being added to the country every single year.
I wonder why anyone would ever be against it, they must just be racist!
The tories have ran on a platform of reducing migration in every election they’ve won since 2010. They’ve done the opposite every time and raised it, since 2019 it has accelerated that badly that people can no longer fall for their lies about it and they’re about to be annihilated because of it.
We also have no points system, pretty much anyone who wants to come here can, be it through abusing “student” visas or as a “skilled” worker that pretty much encompasses every job under the sun.
Not true. We have never had a points based system.
We have a flat wage cap with fast track visas for people working in specific areas that simultaneously allows them to bring dependents which defeats the point.
The demographic change is only unsustainable because for decades the government has ignored the desperate need to invest before sustainable growth is possible.
Since Thatchers time, we have just expected factories, hospitals, schools and affordable homes to magically appear from nowhere via private investors or something... only unsurprisingly they haven't.
The thing is that as a nation we need that demographic change to survive let alone prosper This is clearly illustrated by the decline we have suffered since Brexit.
So I take it that you are a full blown Celt then with not a descendent of saxon/viking/french migrant, or any more recent migrants then? It's kinda a silly argument we could take back to the Beaker People no?
I think it’s even sillier to compare our current immigration model to invasions that happened over 1000 year ago and didn’t even come close in terms of scale.
If you want to base your entire argument on pedantry and the fact that over a thousand years ago Britain was invaded by people from areas close to here therefore we should allow hundreds of thousands of people from every corner of the globe to arrive here annually then you can, I just think it’s a bad argument and it clearly isn’t convincing anyone.
The scale of migration into the UK today is completely unprecedented, there is absolutely nothing in history to compare it to. The invasions you want to compare modern immigration to didn’t even come close in terms of scale.
If you told someone not even 50 years ago that this would be happening theyd balk at you as a madman.
It's not that silly if you are talking hyperbolicly about becoming a minority in your own country though.
My point is that most people in the UK were immigrants from somewhere else at some stage and imported their culture and customs with them when they came.
How should you differentiate between an early migrant and a recent migrants? One generation? Ten? What makes that difference? Why is one acceptable and the other not to you?
It’s not hyperbole I can literally just [post this](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/Ethnic_demographics_of_England_from_1981_-_2021.gif/640px-Ethnic_demographics_of_England_from_1981_-_2021.gif) gif and immediately refute anything you’ve got to say.
Immigration is only increasing, that change is only accelerating. You can deny it all you like but it’s the reality of what’s happening. In 20 years time under current trends this country will be unrecognisable.
Most people weren’t immigrants from somewhere else. It’s a lie your side of the argument continually try to push to make the public receptive to mass immigration and net immigration of 700k+ people every year. It doesn’t work and goes down like a bag of cold sick.
A few people having an Irish grandparent is in no way comparable to hundreds of thousands of people arriving annually from every corner of the globe with zero connection to the country.
It’s also completely stupid to pretend that immigrants from over 1000 years ago like the invasions you want to compare to are in any way relevant to the modern situation.
I can trace my family back in this country for hundreds if not thousands of years, my ancestors seen pretty much every single major event in this countries history and fought and died in nearly every one of its wars. The idea that someone 1 generation removed from the other side of the globe is “just as British as me” is a complete falsehood. I hold no ill will against them for it but it’s something that isn’t true.
>why is one acceptable and not the other
Because relatively small waves of migration from culturally similar countries hundreds of years ago integrated into wider British culture without clashing. It’s far easier to integrate and assimilate with these conditions. The numbers were also completely manageable and the native British population was never in any danger of becoming a minority/plurality in our own country.
The immigration we have just now where people come in huge numbers from every corner of the globe with zero connection to the country means they’ve got absolutely zero incentive to integrate into wider British culture. Why would they need to when they self segregate into their own National communities as is visible in pretty much every single city in the country.
Our current immigration system has led to completely parallel societies existing in this country and it’s getting worse not better.
73% ethnic white is still a massive majority. Still I guess if it bothers you that much it's your problem and not mine.
I'm surprised though you don't class other European as migrants though and it's just the people clased as brown, black people or Asian you seem to object to. Are they really so bad?
One of the reasons why they apparently don't integrate so well as self segregate as you put it is that many of the white population are racist and let's face it, who wants to live amongst people who hate them for the colour of their skin.
Yes but it’s not staying static at 73% it’s still decreasing that’s my entire point, I don’t understand how you can watch that and come away with that conclusion. You watched it go from 95% to 73% in the space of 40 years.
Immigration is now higher than ever, what do you think that number will be in another 40 years?
It’s got nothing to do with skin colour, call me a racist all you like it won’t change mine or anyone else’s beliefs. It doesn’t work for you anymore.
Trying to reduce my argument down to race is completely dishonest. I’ve given you a detailed explanation as to why I wasn’t totally against small numbers of culturally similar immigrants arriving in small waves over a much larger period of time whilst being against hundreds of thousands of people arriving from completely different cultures from every corner of the globe. If you want to just scream racist at me go ahead but it clearly isn’t working for your side is it.
No the reason they don’t need to integrate has nothing to do with racism, they don’t need to integrate because there is already huge populations of people from their culture arriving every year and they can continue to live amongst their communities with zero need to integrate.
Again lazily attributing to racism is completely stupid, you are completely losing the battle on immigration and are still desperately throwing out arguments from years ago and relying on the racist card.
A 22% gain in nearly half a century? I'm honestly not sure that is very much really.
My point about you reducing this down to skin colour comes from the fact that you used a comparison between white Europeans and "others". There are 2.2 million Eastern European nationals alone living in the UK at the moment who don't seem to figure in your biased - Is that because they are white?
The reason I'm not at all worried by our so called migration issues is down to actual facts surrounding immigration itself. Have a read of this - [Net migration to the UK by the University of Oxford](https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/long-term-international-migration-flows-to-and-from-the-uk/). Understand the data and and take away this key finding "The UK has experienced broadly similar levels of migration compared to other high-income countries, on average, over the past few decades"
Our issues are about they way our government has handled migration and our own infrastructure needs and not because brown and black people come here. Unfortunately this down to systemic governmental failings, lazy racists and their knee jerk reaction to those failings and the popularist politics that panders to it.
I suppose because their other parent is not of recent British extraction, so they are exposed to both a British and non-British culture from their parents.
I do agree that, people complain about immigrants sucking up local facilities etc but never once consider why isn't the state building more in general.
It seems like everyone has just accepted the neoliberal arguement that the state can't do anything anymore and these things are a zero sum game with everyone else.
This is my point entirely that many here seem to have missed. The issues we face as a by-product of immigration - legal or otherwise are a direct result of policy failings going back decades.
Even when you consider we have no way of finding and removing the 80% of illegal migrants in the UK who came here legally first and overstayed their visas. That's a government failing in that they allowed it to happen in the first place. It is however in my opinion, to use the remaining 20% (boat people, refugees ect) wrong to use them as a scape goat via the media.
We do have a way of finding them. The government is simply too afraid to do so because of the reaction they’d get from the media that hates them.
The means of doing so exist, the government just don’t have the will to do it.
We shouldn’t have any negative by products of policy failings regarding immigration because we never once actually voted for mass immigration. The problem simply shouldn’t exist.
Housing is an issue because alot of properties are bought out by rich foreigners who put them on rent. If there were laws preventing such competition from abroad then maybe citizens would have a chance.
It's not the only reason but it's a huge factor in it.
This happens all over Britain, all of the time. My sister in law was an estate agent and frequently had companies buying up 10-20 properties in new developments at once. An ex's uni landlord was an Indian multi-millionaire who owned 50 properties in that city alone. My old landlords were from abroad and had many places to let with our agents. And as you say, a huge number of properties in London are owned by Chinese, Russian, Indian etc investors.
This is all just anecdotal but it reflects a demonstrable trend across the whole sector. Sure there are greedy domestic owners, but the rising prevalence of foreign investment in our housing market is helping ramp up prices to an ever more unattainable height for the average buyer.
> It's not the only reason but it's a huge factor in it.
Circa 1% of UK housing stock is owned by foreign owners. It is absolutely *not* a huge factor.
[From here:](https://www.ft.com/content/e36cec28-7acd-4154-b57d-923b5d1610da)
> *"Close to 250,000 residential properties in England and Wales are registered to individuals based overseas,* ***amounting to roughly 1 per cent of total housing stock,*** *up from less than 88,000 homes in 2010, according to CFPD, which used freedom of information requests to HM Land Registry to collate the analysis."*
Its not racism, its realism. The tories have overseen an absolutely gigantic increase in legal migration, especially since Brexit cut off a significant amount of workers from the EU. And this country cannot sustain it
For the record I'm voting labour. I dont know what the solution is but something must be done.
The biggest problem with cutting migration to the bone is it doesn't really work, you just look at the care system in Japan to see the problem.
Unless we can automate care work or substantially change how our economy works to allow for more people to shift from "bullshit jobs" to doing something actually useful then the only solution is to ship in cheap labour.
And immigration works?
Have you seen the care worker shortages?
Have you seen the visas issued?
It makes the problem worse not better because it suppresses the wages and makes more leave the job for literally supermarkets.
But where does that money come from? You'd need to do some hefty reshaping of the economy to do that (which would be my preferred solution but I don't see it advocated for, +£2 an hour isn't close to enough to plug the hole).
Knowing how much care actually costs paying care workers a fair wage would be a rise almost nominal compared to the amounts we're talking about.
Frankly we shouldn't be running an economy that requires working British people to be undercut in order to function in the first place.
My mother in law’s care is £78k a year in a very average home. If they can’t afford to pay decent wages it’s either very bad management or excessive profit margins. I know where my money would be…..
That's how business works, charge more than it costs to provide a service. Adding a National Social Care service would probably count as a significant change to the UK economy.
I’ve been in business for 25 years and understand the principles involved, thanks. I also understand that when you have a captive customer base and no regulatory pressure on prices, you will get profiteering. At present, care business providers are raking it in. I have some as clients and know this to be a fact.
Believe it or not, there was a time in this country when long term care was free and only the wealthy used private care facilities. We could afford it then and, if it were provided for sensibly, we could afford it now. The greatest victory the Tories have had in the past 50 years is in convincing people, even Labour politicians, that only the private sector can provide healthcare efficiently.
I agree, and obviously my comment was flippant. I meant that the cost had to come from somewhere, be it paid for by the government or family. The times when care was free had a much, much higher ratio of working adults to elderly needing care. That is the biggest problem that immigration is being used to address.
I would love it if there were other viable options to pursue, but until those are proven effective I'm dubious about advocating a large reduction in immigration and hoping these problems go away.
> Who is “suppressing” the wages?
Those in government who keep artificially increasing the supply of labour. Supply goes up, price goes down.
Meanwhile, those same people are also limiting the supply of housing, forcing prices into ridiculous territory, inflicting pain on everyone.
Increasing the population by ~1% per year through immigration doesn't work unless we can build homes, roads, schools, hospitals, water/power infrastructure, and more at a similar rate (while also maintaining the existing stuff!)
because it changes the culture and value of people living here in ways that some don’t want,
and because the economic effect depends on the characteristics of the immigrants (how educated, smart and hard working are they) and there is the perception that many are lazy and just come here to get handouts
Could it be that the people who have been raising concerns about 3rd world immigration for years are correct?
That a lot of these people are misogynist, violent, uneducated people with nothing to offer western society?
There is plenty of evidence of this stuff. You’re just not seeing it because mainstream news won’t cover it and everyone else who shares stories about it gets written off as far right.
Probably because English people clocked on to the fact that they're going to become a minority in their own country very quickly at current rates of immigration. Every town and city will become a replica of Birmingham and no one really wants that because it's just grim. Those making the videos are just cashing in on this anxiety.
12 month old account with no other posts and no comments, posting about immigration during an election? Seems a bit suspect to me...
In case you are being sincere, it is not a surge. People do not want Mass migration and that is what we have currently. 600,000 people in 2022 and 700,000 people in 2023.
We built 231,000 houses in 2023 and 252,000 in 2022.
Do the math there.
Mass migration is an issue. However, this was less of a problem during the 1980s, 90s, and early 2000s when governments were, on average, completing 150K homes annually. We must reduce the numbers to ensure sustainable growth for the UK. However, 10 years of stagnant house-building has severely strained this sustainable growth.
> However, this was less of a problem during the 1980s, 90s, and early 2000s when governments were, on average, completing 150K homes annually.
And when net migration was a tiny percentage of what it is now...
Yes it was less of a problem when immigration was near zero or even negative and we built less houses than we do now.
Have you even seen how many houses have been built in the last few years? I see housing estates popping up all over the place.
We built 250k homes in 2022 and 220k homes in 2023.
Migration was 750k in 2023 and 640k in 2022. It was average 55k a year during the 1980's. Think about that, we had 50% more people arrive in ONE year alone than we did during the entire decade of the 80's.
We are building homes, we just have far too many people arriving.
If the public don’t want it, why did they keep voting for a party (the Tory party) that is such a high fan of immigration, and of halting wage growth for Brits?
> Is there a Russian angle to the post?
>
> Stir up anti immigration tensions to destabilise the UK?
Another (more plausible) theory is that Russian propaganda is being used to encourage mass illegal migration to Europe, to destabilise the west.
It would be more likely for pro-migration accounts to be Russian. Most of the UK population both severely underestimates migration rates, and yet still thinks it's too high. They wouldn't find anything other than broad agreement by being anti-migration.
From Russia's perspective, pushing for mass migration both undermines cultural cohesion and social trust, it further taxes our already straining resources, and it fuels the rise of the far right as other parties refuse to deal with it.
I fully welcome sustainable migration and I am always sympathetic to those who come here in search of a better life.
However, the numbers are simply too high. And whilst I hated and opposed Brexit with a passion, it happened in large part due to the public's concerns about the level of net migration. Brexit has now happened and yet the amount of people coming in has skyrocketed, I think the public are entitled to be quite pissed off.
For sure, there's always going to be a noisy minority for whom it's always too much. People moaned like shit about the 100/200 thousand net figures during my childhood, and racism is definitely an element in some of the complaints. But the general anxiety about immigration mirrors a concern about lack of investment in housing, public services and efforts to integrate new comers.
The general mood of the public is that the country isn't working, and rightly or wrongly many are concerned about the further strain the large influx of people will contribute to already floundering public services and infrastructure.
I can see both sides to this. With people moving out of the centres and the below replacement birth rate for fifty years, then without immigration, we were looking at dead cities. That is no good for local business or big player investors.
On the other hand, all over Europe, from Hungary, to France and Ireland, high immigration is rejected on cultural grounds, yet the EU, NGO’s and UN continue to ensure it happens.
Because some / many (depending on where you live) believe that reducing immigration will make their lives better, whether you agree with the statement or not.
There is also the issue of conflating legal visa driven migration, and asylum seekers, the language that conflates the two is really unhelpful.
legal visa immigration is the problem here. whilst the boats are an in issue we need to solve the numbers coming are miniscule compared to the chancers we allow in legally.
I agree, we need to tackle the root cause of why the country "needs" so much legal migration, but I am not convinced people are prepared to have an honest and balanced discussion about that, yet.
We are addicted to cheap migrant labour that certain industries can exploit. Farming, hospitality and care come to mind.
Pay people enough and they will do these jobs. But these business either cannot or will not pay the wages needed to attract UK workers.
I agree that immigration has been an issue for the UK over the last 10 years. Prior to this, and during the Blair years, net migration was between 150K-250K, but it was less of an issue due to a more robust economy and greater spending on public services.
However, I would argue, immigration is an issue to Britons, because it's been put in the agenda as an issue for Britons. Successive Tory governments, aided by the rattling voices of UKIP and Farage, have made immigration the scapegoat for many of the structural problems that face the UK. Whether it be the cost of living, access to services, quality of the NHS, economic growth, or unemployment, *the bain of immigration* has been an easy political message that sells newspapers, catches people's attention, and gives the presiding government unwarranted legitimacy.
We can't avoid the reality that immigration is an issue in the UK. However, its inflation as the most damning cause of the UK's many problems is untrue and unfair.
It’s a cycle.
Media reports on a thing, people care about a thing, media reports more about things people say they care about.
Coincidentally, talking about immigration a lot is a great way for the government to avoid talking about how their terrible policies have absolutely fucked up Britain for 14 long years. They don’t even need to explicitly say “immigrants are why you can’t get a GP appointment”, they can just let the idea float in the ether.
Not original poster, but of course there is are genuine concerns. But there are genuine concerns around dozens of policy areas.
The question is why is immigration being presented as the most critical concern by the government, and the media. Over (for example), waiting lists, cost of living, mortgage rates, education standards etc.
I have never perceived immigration to be a threat to my way of life, what are you talking about? Spend a winter unable to afford to heat your home, or afford a good meal, that will really threaten your way of life.
Street crime. Not being able to leave your house without fear of being mugged, or if you’re a woman, being assaulted.
This kind of thing is happening in areas with lots of certain types of migration and it will ruin your life pretty quickly.
This is the reality of what is happening in Europe for many people.
Here's a man talking about what life is like for his family [living in Sweden](https://x.com/AsianDawn4/status/1803935475641856106) post mass immigration.
In Spain, a man was just [killed by 3 morrocans](https://okdiario.com/comunidad-valenciana/cientos-personas-piden-justicia-david-joven-asesinado-palos-unos-marroquies-gata-gorgos-13069431) with baseball bats after he confronted them about harassing women in his area. (I'm a brit living in Spain and stuff like this happens a lot here, sadly)
This post from a [woman in Lyon](https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/french-woman-devastating-effects-mass-immigration-pleads-help) just went viral. She discusses how unsafe her neighbourhood is and how she basically lives in fear.
So, because you personally have never perceived it, it isn’t really an issue? I live in rural Norfolk and I’ve never experienced any significant impact from immigration, but I’m still able to understand that my experience isn’t the only one. I also travel extensively in the UK and visit places I lived in 20,30,40 years ago and see them changed beyond recognition by immigration. The people who live in these places are, largely speaking, those who voted Brexit and will vote Reform. If not in this election, the next. Just look at what is happening in France if you want to know where denial of the negative impact of immigration gets you eventually.
Fair enough, I don't want to deny the negative impacts of immigration, but calling it a unique threat to our way of life is hyperbole. I see it as potentially causing localised problems that our political parties absolutely need to acknowledge and address.
Where I'd push back is that places looking different is not evidence of a threat to a way of life. People move, societies change, this does not mean a way of life is being destroyed.
On the France point, I totally agree, it is ridiculous that there is not a mainstream party willing to represent a commonly held view that we need drastically lower net migration.
‘People move, societies change’ all sounds very benign when you say it quickly. Places looking different can, and often is, evidence not just of a threat to a way of life, but the demise of it. Entire working class communities have been swept away and replaced by new, immigrant ones. Did anyone ask those communities if they wanted that? Did anyone represent their views? What about when it’s your community, or mine? Will it still be so benign, so a unremarkable? I wonder.
I don't fully understand what you are saying, this feels like very vague warnings. I've lived in several areas and communities with high immigration, and it was fine. Obviously people are represented, but its not a right we have to freeze all change in our own neighbourhoods. Where is this community which has been swept away?
Strange that you originally said there are concerns, yet now you’re asserting that these concerns are a figment of my imagination. They certainly aren’t that and communities have indeed been swept away. Go to Blackburn, Bradford, Stoke on Trent, Sheffield. Go to most of what were the working class areas of many northern and midland cities and you’ll see plenty of evidence of it. If you live in one of these places and are fine with it, then good for you, but it’s quite clear that many of the people who did live there and some who still have to are anything but. No doubt you’d call them all bigots and racists and feel a warm sense of moral superiority over them. I personally believe they have a right to be heard and have their grievances addressed instead of being treated as though they should just shut up and embrace someone else’s idea of what Britain should be. It’s usually someone who lives in London and or has enough money to insulate themselves from the reality of what their ideology produces.
>Aren’t the prime minister’s parents immigrants?
No-one hates immigrants more than other immigrants. I learned that when I spent a taxi ride listening to my self-described Persian driver rant about immigrants. Not to mention my wife's European-born grandmother and her children.
Immigration has very little to do with economic and social problems. In times of economic hardship, politicians find it convenient to whip up the masses to a lather by using a scapegoat to appeal to the myth of "the people can regain control." Foreign strangers are perfect targets for the scapegoat role; they're relatively powerless, and punters tend to find the unknown scary. False fear is a highly effective persuader, albeit contemptible.
> Immigration has very little to do with economic and social problems.
This is completely wrong - it underpins most major problems we're facing right now. You simply cannot have millions of people coming into the country and expect it to have no effect on the economic or society.
Not only that, but chickens are coming home to roost all across Europe. There is a reason ‘far right’ parties are getting in power. Europeans are tired of what immigrants are doing to their countries.
It's just the media selling column inches.
Racists love to bang on about immigration so the latest "shock horror" story appeals to them.
The rest of us love to be appalled at the dumb arsed racists banging on about immigrants being the roof of all our problems.
The real winners are the government who know that 99% of the responsibility for the countries woes are being deflected towards hate for foreigners rather than highlighting very obvious investment and policy failings in everything from health and education through to housing.
Very quickly...T
[Teacher vacancies have increased by 20% to 2,800 in November 2023 from 2,300](https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/school-workforce-in-england)
[We currently need 152,000 to fill care related roles in the UK](https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/insight-and-analysis/long-reads/social-care-360-workforce-carers)
You tried to find a plumber, electrician, builder recently ?
To some extent I agree, but the the real issue here is the lack of investment into infrastructure that would have allowed for growth - not the people coming here to work and fill positions that we can't (due to a lack of motivation, ability and training) using our own labour force. However you look at it, that's the fault of successive government policy.
Am I in the minority or are people just sick and tired about arguing against xenophobic racists who still think Brexit / xenophobia / right wing nationalism is a good idea?
This is not xenophobia or nationalism and that is your big mistake thinking that it is.
Most migrants settle in England, not Wales or Scotland. This is means we need build a city the size of Nottingham or Amsterdam every year in England to accommodate them. England is one of the densely populated countries in the world (discounting microstates). We cannot build this level of infrastructure every year, it is impossible.
Because if everyone woke up and realised wealth inequality was the biggest problem we would be going after the 1% the way we go after immigrants.
They always need to give me a "bad gu"
Its a sad situation. I think racism is a big part of it, but the issue with immigration is being allowed to fester by our governments.
What angers me is that immigration is something the government is able to directly reduce. Unlike waiting lists, interest rates, housing level etc which are not directly controlled, the government has the power to issue less visas. That the tory party continues to promise lower immigration, whilst choosing to do nothing is infuriating when the public has made it pretty clear that immigration is a problem it cares about.
I am not saying I support drastic measures to lower immigration, I would rather the governing parties actually set out how it is we benefit. And where immigration causes localised problems, detail how these can be addressed.
But I do worry that people who disapprove of high immigration have no-one sensible to vote for and end up going to Reform.
> Our demographics (more old people, low birth rate) require immigrants to fuel our economy
I know Denmark is a different country but many across Europe are facing the same problem here:
>In October the finance ministry, in its annual report on the issue, estimated that in 2018 immigrants from non-Western countries and their descendants drained from public finances a net 31bn kroner ($4.9bn), some 1.4% of gdp.
https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/12/18/why-have-danes-turned-against-immigration
In that article there is also a graph showing that migrants from the Middle East and Africa, on average, are a net drain on the public finances at all stages of life. We just so happen to have seen an increase of people from those places so I don't think it's a leap to assume it's also costing us more than it benefits us.
>Failures to create enough homes for these immigrants is causing pressures in the housing market
This would be physically impossible even without our restrictive planning laws. You *cannot* build enough houses to accommodate an annual inflow of 1.4 million people on top of existing population growth.
>"It's dem immigrants!" is a very easy thing to say and appease people's ego that the failings are not our failings, it's their failings
Our government's failing was to have this policy running for 25 years despite constant demands that it stops.
>Raging about immigrants is also a distraction from the other things, such as attempts to remove our rights by taking us out of the ECHR
Again, it's our government who caused this problem. You do not rely on some remote, faceless court in Europe for your rights.
I'm getting really bored of these strawmen arguments claiming that anyone who objects to this unprecedented level of migration must be some ignorant old racist who doesn't know anything. This country is literally crumbling under the pressure of demand and for some reason you're ideologically obsessed with piling in as many people as possible.
Because the net migration figure was 764,000 - an eye-watering number. Net migration during this Parliament has added 2 million people. (Around the population of West Yorkshire). 80% of the public want net migration below 100,000 a year. The Brexit vote hasn't led to a reduction.
Because immigration is currently at the highest level it has ever been, and significantly beyond what our country can cope with. It is causing problems with resources not having sufficient capacity to cope with the increased demand (housing being the obvious example of that), and there are huge cultural problems that derive from a lack of integration too. And rather unsurprisingly, people are upset about that. And the complete lack of any workable plan from politicians to be able to deal with it.
Over the last three years, three and a half million people migrated to the UK. Almost entirely *legal* migration. This has had and will have consequences. The consistent levels of net migration since the mid 1990s are historically *entirely unprecedented* for this island. We are living through a great experiment that will fundamentally change this country (and already has). Many worry that social cohesion, national unity and shared cultural values will become further undermined this century. Some link ultra high migration with the fact we can't catch up with the required level of house building - locking out young people from having reliable, affordable housing, making it less appealing to start a family. Those in power, whether politically or in a role of societal influence tend to be people who are insulated from the negative aspects of immigration. Immigration is a positive thing - if it happens at a sustainable level, with democratic approval. Immigrant groups should've been dispersed throughout the country and not allowed to form concentrated populations, as seen in many towns and cities across England and Wales.
>Immigrant groups should've been dispersed throughout the country and not allowed to form concentrated populations I'm not sure that's possible
Denmark's Social Democrats have started to clear out ethnic enclaves: **Denmark Aims a Wrecking Ball at ‘Non-Western’ Neighborhoods** https://archive.ph/2023.10.27-224108/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/26/world/europe/denmark-housing.html *The law mandates that in neighborhoods where at least half of the population is of non-Western origin or descent, and where at least two of the following characteristics exist — low income, low education, high unemployment or a high percentage of residents who have had criminal convictions — the share of social housing needs to be reduced to no more than 40 percent by 2030.* It's possible but it requires mainstream politicians to see the merit in doing so. The Danish Social Democrats have crushed the far right by tackling a problem most other European mainstream parties have totally ignored.
Demolishing social housing and building new social housing elsewhere sounds fairly impossible for us tbh. It's also not just about social housing (it may well not even be a majority)
First and foremost, wanting to control and/or reduce immigration isn't anti-immigration. Any modern country controls and manages their immigration levels - or they at least *should*. Even under a net-zero immigration policy, you could still have 500,000 immigrants enter the country every year as around 500,000 people emigrate from the UK most years. The problem is, the electorate has not voted for mass-migration and rapid demographic change - the Tories have campaigned multiple times on reducing immigration, but the figures have only gone up over the last 14 years. Net-migration figures used to be in the tens of thousands, which was manageable. However, the past few years has seen net migration figures of around 700,000 a year. This clearly isn't sustainable, not only from a practical point of view but also from a cultural point of view. It may not be a popular opinion, but bringing in huge numbers of people from countries whose values and culture directly conflict with our own isn't a good thing. For a country to be strong and socially cohesive, we all have to be singing from the same or similar hymn sheets. Different opinions are fine, but accepting people into the country who are vehemently against the most fundamental rights and values of Britain is insane to me. If the Palestinian people have a right to the land of Palestine and to protect their culture for example, then the British people have that same right.
[удалено]
You can read about British culture in books or read about it online. Or you can even experience it by going outside. However, some aspects of British culture that stand out are respect for social etiquette, our varied and wide-ranging accents, our music, our writers, our film-making, our sport (especially creating football in its modern form, which is the most popular sport in the world), and yes, even our food is a cultural product. As a nation, we have also accepted many different religions into our society and allow people to practice them freely. You can even look at specifc aspects of our culture through the individual countries that make up the United Kingdom - Morris dancing in England and Ceilidh dancing in Scotland, for example. Despite what you'll read in the media and online, the vast majority of British people are accepting of LGBT+ people - most British people have a "live and let live" attitude. Our laws are also a reflection of our culture - we have some of the most liberal laws in regards to abortion in Europe, we treat women as equal to men under the law, nor are women aren't treated as property within the law. Fair trials, individual liberty, equality between the sexes. We enjoy these fundamental civil rights that date back to the 13th Century in the Magna Carta, these rights and values are inherently a part of our culture as well. Those from abroad, or even those already here, who seek to oppose our fundamental rights, our cultural values, and our way of life, should not be welcomed or tolerated in my view.
Please don't start this again.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_the_United_Kingdom Probably a start
Because we have unbelievable immigration numbers & the response to any criticism of the issues with it is to call the criticism "far right". Like you have here. Far right like the criticism you always have and still do get from workers unions. It's not far right to say over a million immigrants a year has downsides, it's extreme to say otherwise. It's not far right to say foreign criminals should be deported or shouldn't be here in the first place, it's extreme to say otherwise. It's not far right to want to help genuine refugees instead of the asylum seeker claims we get, it's extreme to say otherwise. You should be asking about the extremists that do want those things and ask why it's such an issue and the media isn't even calling them extreme. You know the greens are open borders? An extreme idea and yet they get none of this attention on what is the most extreme opinion on immigration in mainstream politics.
Because the public surprisingly don’t actually support rapid and unsustainable demographic change that they’ve never once voted for. Add on to it that it means competing with the world for housing and wages whilst our already crumbling public services and infrastructure need to cope with the population of Glasgow being added to the country every single year. I wonder why anyone would ever be against it, they must just be racist!
They did vote for it, this is the result of Brexit and the Tories 'points system' in action.
The tories have ran on a platform of reducing migration in every election they’ve won since 2010. They’ve done the opposite every time and raised it, since 2019 it has accelerated that badly that people can no longer fall for their lies about it and they’re about to be annihilated because of it. We also have no points system, pretty much anyone who wants to come here can, be it through abusing “student” visas or as a “skilled” worker that pretty much encompasses every job under the sun.
Not true. We have never had a points based system. We have a flat wage cap with fast track visas for people working in specific areas that simultaneously allows them to bring dependents which defeats the point.
How many points do you need to come over in a rubber dingy?
Facile comment.
You should probably reread your own comment, then Google what facile means.
The demographic change is only unsustainable because for decades the government has ignored the desperate need to invest before sustainable growth is possible. Since Thatchers time, we have just expected factories, hospitals, schools and affordable homes to magically appear from nowhere via private investors or something... only unsurprisingly they haven't. The thing is that as a nation we need that demographic change to survive let alone prosper This is clearly illustrated by the decline we have suffered since Brexit.
No the demographic change is a bad thing in general, I do not support becoming a minority in my own country.
So I take it that you are a full blown Celt then with not a descendent of saxon/viking/french migrant, or any more recent migrants then? It's kinda a silly argument we could take back to the Beaker People no?
I think it’s even sillier to compare our current immigration model to invasions that happened over 1000 year ago and didn’t even come close in terms of scale. If you want to base your entire argument on pedantry and the fact that over a thousand years ago Britain was invaded by people from areas close to here therefore we should allow hundreds of thousands of people from every corner of the globe to arrive here annually then you can, I just think it’s a bad argument and it clearly isn’t convincing anyone. The scale of migration into the UK today is completely unprecedented, there is absolutely nothing in history to compare it to. The invasions you want to compare modern immigration to didn’t even come close in terms of scale. If you told someone not even 50 years ago that this would be happening theyd balk at you as a madman.
It's not that silly if you are talking hyperbolicly about becoming a minority in your own country though. My point is that most people in the UK were immigrants from somewhere else at some stage and imported their culture and customs with them when they came. How should you differentiate between an early migrant and a recent migrants? One generation? Ten? What makes that difference? Why is one acceptable and the other not to you?
It’s not hyperbole I can literally just [post this](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/Ethnic_demographics_of_England_from_1981_-_2021.gif/640px-Ethnic_demographics_of_England_from_1981_-_2021.gif) gif and immediately refute anything you’ve got to say. Immigration is only increasing, that change is only accelerating. You can deny it all you like but it’s the reality of what’s happening. In 20 years time under current trends this country will be unrecognisable. Most people weren’t immigrants from somewhere else. It’s a lie your side of the argument continually try to push to make the public receptive to mass immigration and net immigration of 700k+ people every year. It doesn’t work and goes down like a bag of cold sick. A few people having an Irish grandparent is in no way comparable to hundreds of thousands of people arriving annually from every corner of the globe with zero connection to the country. It’s also completely stupid to pretend that immigrants from over 1000 years ago like the invasions you want to compare to are in any way relevant to the modern situation. I can trace my family back in this country for hundreds if not thousands of years, my ancestors seen pretty much every single major event in this countries history and fought and died in nearly every one of its wars. The idea that someone 1 generation removed from the other side of the globe is “just as British as me” is a complete falsehood. I hold no ill will against them for it but it’s something that isn’t true. >why is one acceptable and not the other Because relatively small waves of migration from culturally similar countries hundreds of years ago integrated into wider British culture without clashing. It’s far easier to integrate and assimilate with these conditions. The numbers were also completely manageable and the native British population was never in any danger of becoming a minority/plurality in our own country. The immigration we have just now where people come in huge numbers from every corner of the globe with zero connection to the country means they’ve got absolutely zero incentive to integrate into wider British culture. Why would they need to when they self segregate into their own National communities as is visible in pretty much every single city in the country. Our current immigration system has led to completely parallel societies existing in this country and it’s getting worse not better.
73% ethnic white is still a massive majority. Still I guess if it bothers you that much it's your problem and not mine. I'm surprised though you don't class other European as migrants though and it's just the people clased as brown, black people or Asian you seem to object to. Are they really so bad? One of the reasons why they apparently don't integrate so well as self segregate as you put it is that many of the white population are racist and let's face it, who wants to live amongst people who hate them for the colour of their skin.
Yes but it’s not staying static at 73% it’s still decreasing that’s my entire point, I don’t understand how you can watch that and come away with that conclusion. You watched it go from 95% to 73% in the space of 40 years. Immigration is now higher than ever, what do you think that number will be in another 40 years? It’s got nothing to do with skin colour, call me a racist all you like it won’t change mine or anyone else’s beliefs. It doesn’t work for you anymore. Trying to reduce my argument down to race is completely dishonest. I’ve given you a detailed explanation as to why I wasn’t totally against small numbers of culturally similar immigrants arriving in small waves over a much larger period of time whilst being against hundreds of thousands of people arriving from completely different cultures from every corner of the globe. If you want to just scream racist at me go ahead but it clearly isn’t working for your side is it. No the reason they don’t need to integrate has nothing to do with racism, they don’t need to integrate because there is already huge populations of people from their culture arriving every year and they can continue to live amongst their communities with zero need to integrate. Again lazily attributing to racism is completely stupid, you are completely losing the battle on immigration and are still desperately throwing out arguments from years ago and relying on the racist card.
A 22% gain in nearly half a century? I'm honestly not sure that is very much really. My point about you reducing this down to skin colour comes from the fact that you used a comparison between white Europeans and "others". There are 2.2 million Eastern European nationals alone living in the UK at the moment who don't seem to figure in your biased - Is that because they are white? The reason I'm not at all worried by our so called migration issues is down to actual facts surrounding immigration itself. Have a read of this - [Net migration to the UK by the University of Oxford](https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/long-term-international-migration-flows-to-and-from-the-uk/). Understand the data and and take away this key finding "The UK has experienced broadly similar levels of migration compared to other high-income countries, on average, over the past few decades" Our issues are about they way our government has handled migration and our own infrastructure needs and not because brown and black people come here. Unfortunately this down to systemic governmental failings, lazy racists and their knee jerk reaction to those failings and the popularist politics that panders to it.
I am white, so very very white. My children are not white - they are also not immigrants. Please tell me how they are any less British than you.
I suppose because their other parent is not of recent British extraction, so they are exposed to both a British and non-British culture from their parents.
I do agree that, people complain about immigrants sucking up local facilities etc but never once consider why isn't the state building more in general. It seems like everyone has just accepted the neoliberal arguement that the state can't do anything anymore and these things are a zero sum game with everyone else.
This is my point entirely that many here seem to have missed. The issues we face as a by-product of immigration - legal or otherwise are a direct result of policy failings going back decades. Even when you consider we have no way of finding and removing the 80% of illegal migrants in the UK who came here legally first and overstayed their visas. That's a government failing in that they allowed it to happen in the first place. It is however in my opinion, to use the remaining 20% (boat people, refugees ect) wrong to use them as a scape goat via the media.
We do have a way of finding them. The government is simply too afraid to do so because of the reaction they’d get from the media that hates them. The means of doing so exist, the government just don’t have the will to do it. We shouldn’t have any negative by products of policy failings regarding immigration because we never once actually voted for mass immigration. The problem simply shouldn’t exist.
Housing is an issue because alot of properties are bought out by rich foreigners who put them on rent. If there were laws preventing such competition from abroad then maybe citizens would have a chance.
that is … not why there’s a housing shortage, unless you mean in Westminster and Chelsea.
It's not the only reason but it's a huge factor in it. This happens all over Britain, all of the time. My sister in law was an estate agent and frequently had companies buying up 10-20 properties in new developments at once. An ex's uni landlord was an Indian multi-millionaire who owned 50 properties in that city alone. My old landlords were from abroad and had many places to let with our agents. And as you say, a huge number of properties in London are owned by Chinese, Russian, Indian etc investors. This is all just anecdotal but it reflects a demonstrable trend across the whole sector. Sure there are greedy domestic owners, but the rising prevalence of foreign investment in our housing market is helping ramp up prices to an ever more unattainable height for the average buyer.
> It's not the only reason but it's a huge factor in it. Circa 1% of UK housing stock is owned by foreign owners. It is absolutely *not* a huge factor.
How do you know it’s 1%?
[From here:](https://www.ft.com/content/e36cec28-7acd-4154-b57d-923b5d1610da) > *"Close to 250,000 residential properties in England and Wales are registered to individuals based overseas,* ***amounting to roughly 1 per cent of total housing stock,*** *up from less than 88,000 homes in 2010, according to CFPD, which used freedom of information requests to HM Land Registry to collate the analysis."*
How many ‘rich foreigners’ are there?! Insane.
It's a dogma to avoid having to address the idea that immigration is at fault
Its not racism, its realism. The tories have overseen an absolutely gigantic increase in legal migration, especially since Brexit cut off a significant amount of workers from the EU. And this country cannot sustain it For the record I'm voting labour. I dont know what the solution is but something must be done.
The biggest problem with cutting migration to the bone is it doesn't really work, you just look at the care system in Japan to see the problem. Unless we can automate care work or substantially change how our economy works to allow for more people to shift from "bullshit jobs" to doing something actually useful then the only solution is to ship in cheap labour.
And immigration works? Have you seen the care worker shortages? Have you seen the visas issued? It makes the problem worse not better because it suppresses the wages and makes more leave the job for literally supermarkets.
You could just not supress the wages of care workers by bussing in cheap foreign labour. Pay a competitive salary and you'll get staff.
But where does that money come from? You'd need to do some hefty reshaping of the economy to do that (which would be my preferred solution but I don't see it advocated for, +£2 an hour isn't close to enough to plug the hole).
Knowing how much care actually costs paying care workers a fair wage would be a rise almost nominal compared to the amounts we're talking about. Frankly we shouldn't be running an economy that requires working British people to be undercut in order to function in the first place.
My mother in law’s care is £78k a year in a very average home. If they can’t afford to pay decent wages it’s either very bad management or excessive profit margins. I know where my money would be…..
That's how business works, charge more than it costs to provide a service. Adding a National Social Care service would probably count as a significant change to the UK economy.
I’ve been in business for 25 years and understand the principles involved, thanks. I also understand that when you have a captive customer base and no regulatory pressure on prices, you will get profiteering. At present, care business providers are raking it in. I have some as clients and know this to be a fact.
Great, so we just need to find £78k a year for the million or so people on social care, should be easy enough.
Believe it or not, there was a time in this country when long term care was free and only the wealthy used private care facilities. We could afford it then and, if it were provided for sensibly, we could afford it now. The greatest victory the Tories have had in the past 50 years is in convincing people, even Labour politicians, that only the private sector can provide healthcare efficiently.
I agree, and obviously my comment was flippant. I meant that the cost had to come from somewhere, be it paid for by the government or family. The times when care was free had a much, much higher ratio of working adults to elderly needing care. That is the biggest problem that immigration is being used to address. I would love it if there were other viable options to pursue, but until those are proven effective I'm dubious about advocating a large reduction in immigration and hoping these problems go away.
Who is “suppressing” the wages? Who do you feel should be paying the £50k/year for one care worker? Me? The government? You?
Personally I'd pay a higher rate of tax to make it happen (not rich, but a higher rate tax payer and homeowner so comfortably upper middle class).
> Who is “suppressing” the wages? Those in government who keep artificially increasing the supply of labour. Supply goes up, price goes down. Meanwhile, those same people are also limiting the supply of housing, forcing prices into ridiculous territory, inflicting pain on everyone.
Increasing the population by ~1% per year through immigration doesn't work unless we can build homes, roads, schools, hospitals, water/power infrastructure, and more at a similar rate (while also maintaining the existing stuff!)
because it changes the culture and value of people living here in ways that some don’t want, and because the economic effect depends on the characteristics of the immigrants (how educated, smart and hard working are they) and there is the perception that many are lazy and just come here to get handouts
Why would it be racist? What race, ethnicity or skin colour do you think immigrants have?
Could it be that the people who have been raising concerns about 3rd world immigration for years are correct? That a lot of these people are misogynist, violent, uneducated people with nothing to offer western society? There is plenty of evidence of this stuff. You’re just not seeing it because mainstream news won’t cover it and everyone else who shares stories about it gets written off as far right.
Probably because English people clocked on to the fact that they're going to become a minority in their own country very quickly at current rates of immigration. Every town and city will become a replica of Birmingham and no one really wants that because it's just grim. Those making the videos are just cashing in on this anxiety.
12 month old account with no other posts and no comments, posting about immigration during an election? Seems a bit suspect to me... In case you are being sincere, it is not a surge. People do not want Mass migration and that is what we have currently. 600,000 people in 2022 and 700,000 people in 2023. We built 231,000 houses in 2023 and 252,000 in 2022. Do the math there.
Mass migration is an issue. However, this was less of a problem during the 1980s, 90s, and early 2000s when governments were, on average, completing 150K homes annually. We must reduce the numbers to ensure sustainable growth for the UK. However, 10 years of stagnant house-building has severely strained this sustainable growth.
> However, this was less of a problem during the 1980s, 90s, and early 2000s when governments were, on average, completing 150K homes annually. And when net migration was a tiny percentage of what it is now...
Net migration in the last 2 years higher than every year in the 70s, 80s and 90s combined.
Yes it was less of a problem when immigration was near zero or even negative and we built less houses than we do now. Have you even seen how many houses have been built in the last few years? I see housing estates popping up all over the place.
We built 250k homes in 2022 and 220k homes in 2023. Migration was 750k in 2023 and 640k in 2022. It was average 55k a year during the 1980's. Think about that, we had 50% more people arrive in ONE year alone than we did during the entire decade of the 80's. We are building homes, we just have far too many people arriving.
If the public don’t want it, why did they keep voting for a party (the Tory party) that is such a high fan of immigration, and of halting wage growth for Brits?
Because the Tories promised to stop it and didn't. They lied.
Because Labour are also fans of mass migration. There's nobody to vote for.
Just vote for reform. They are the only party willing to deal with it.
I see REFORM are standing in most constituencies and there has often been an alternative, such as UKIP and Brexit Parties.
Is there a Russian angle to the post? Stir up anti immigration tensions to destabilise the UK?
> Is there a Russian angle to the post? > > Stir up anti immigration tensions to destabilise the UK? Another (more plausible) theory is that Russian propaganda is being used to encourage mass illegal migration to Europe, to destabilise the west.
I think you’re right but the logic here would mean the conservatives have been following a pro Russian agenda?
It would be more likely for pro-migration accounts to be Russian. Most of the UK population both severely underestimates migration rates, and yet still thinks it's too high. They wouldn't find anything other than broad agreement by being anti-migration. From Russia's perspective, pushing for mass migration both undermines cultural cohesion and social trust, it further taxes our already straining resources, and it fuels the rise of the far right as other parties refuse to deal with it.
I fully welcome sustainable migration and I am always sympathetic to those who come here in search of a better life. However, the numbers are simply too high. And whilst I hated and opposed Brexit with a passion, it happened in large part due to the public's concerns about the level of net migration. Brexit has now happened and yet the amount of people coming in has skyrocketed, I think the public are entitled to be quite pissed off. For sure, there's always going to be a noisy minority for whom it's always too much. People moaned like shit about the 100/200 thousand net figures during my childhood, and racism is definitely an element in some of the complaints. But the general anxiety about immigration mirrors a concern about lack of investment in housing, public services and efforts to integrate new comers. The general mood of the public is that the country isn't working, and rightly or wrongly many are concerned about the further strain the large influx of people will contribute to already floundering public services and infrastructure.
I can see both sides to this. With people moving out of the centres and the below replacement birth rate for fifty years, then without immigration, we were looking at dead cities. That is no good for local business or big player investors. On the other hand, all over Europe, from Hungary, to France and Ireland, high immigration is rejected on cultural grounds, yet the EU, NGO’s and UN continue to ensure it happens.
Because some / many (depending on where you live) believe that reducing immigration will make their lives better, whether you agree with the statement or not. There is also the issue of conflating legal visa driven migration, and asylum seekers, the language that conflates the two is really unhelpful.
legal visa immigration is the problem here. whilst the boats are an in issue we need to solve the numbers coming are miniscule compared to the chancers we allow in legally.
I agree, we need to tackle the root cause of why the country "needs" so much legal migration, but I am not convinced people are prepared to have an honest and balanced discussion about that, yet.
We are addicted to cheap migrant labour that certain industries can exploit. Farming, hospitality and care come to mind. Pay people enough and they will do these jobs. But these business either cannot or will not pay the wages needed to attract UK workers.
This is the part we need to come to terms with.
A very suspect account to stir up anti-immigration chatter. Check the account. No posts or comments apart from this one.
I agree that immigration has been an issue for the UK over the last 10 years. Prior to this, and during the Blair years, net migration was between 150K-250K, but it was less of an issue due to a more robust economy and greater spending on public services. However, I would argue, immigration is an issue to Britons, because it's been put in the agenda as an issue for Britons. Successive Tory governments, aided by the rattling voices of UKIP and Farage, have made immigration the scapegoat for many of the structural problems that face the UK. Whether it be the cost of living, access to services, quality of the NHS, economic growth, or unemployment, *the bain of immigration* has been an easy political message that sells newspapers, catches people's attention, and gives the presiding government unwarranted legitimacy. We can't avoid the reality that immigration is an issue in the UK. However, its inflation as the most damning cause of the UK's many problems is untrue and unfair.
It’s a cycle. Media reports on a thing, people care about a thing, media reports more about things people say they care about. Coincidentally, talking about immigration a lot is a great way for the government to avoid talking about how their terrible policies have absolutely fucked up Britain for 14 long years. They don’t even need to explicitly say “immigrants are why you can’t get a GP appointment”, they can just let the idea float in the ether.
So, just for clarity, you’re saying there’s no genuine basis for people being concerned about the level of immigration?
Not original poster, but of course there is are genuine concerns. But there are genuine concerns around dozens of policy areas. The question is why is immigration being presented as the most critical concern by the government, and the media. Over (for example), waiting lists, cost of living, mortgage rates, education standards etc.
Perhaps because, with the possible exception of the crisis in education, none of the others poses a potentially existential threat to our way of life.
I have never perceived immigration to be a threat to my way of life, what are you talking about? Spend a winter unable to afford to heat your home, or afford a good meal, that will really threaten your way of life.
Street crime. Not being able to leave your house without fear of being mugged, or if you’re a woman, being assaulted. This kind of thing is happening in areas with lots of certain types of migration and it will ruin your life pretty quickly.
Thanks, that is a powerful example. Although street crime is almost a policy area in itself that I haven't really heard talked about.
This is the reality of what is happening in Europe for many people. Here's a man talking about what life is like for his family [living in Sweden](https://x.com/AsianDawn4/status/1803935475641856106) post mass immigration. In Spain, a man was just [killed by 3 morrocans](https://okdiario.com/comunidad-valenciana/cientos-personas-piden-justicia-david-joven-asesinado-palos-unos-marroquies-gata-gorgos-13069431) with baseball bats after he confronted them about harassing women in his area. (I'm a brit living in Spain and stuff like this happens a lot here, sadly) This post from a [woman in Lyon](https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/french-woman-devastating-effects-mass-immigration-pleads-help) just went viral. She discusses how unsafe her neighbourhood is and how she basically lives in fear.
So, because you personally have never perceived it, it isn’t really an issue? I live in rural Norfolk and I’ve never experienced any significant impact from immigration, but I’m still able to understand that my experience isn’t the only one. I also travel extensively in the UK and visit places I lived in 20,30,40 years ago and see them changed beyond recognition by immigration. The people who live in these places are, largely speaking, those who voted Brexit and will vote Reform. If not in this election, the next. Just look at what is happening in France if you want to know where denial of the negative impact of immigration gets you eventually.
Fair enough, I don't want to deny the negative impacts of immigration, but calling it a unique threat to our way of life is hyperbole. I see it as potentially causing localised problems that our political parties absolutely need to acknowledge and address. Where I'd push back is that places looking different is not evidence of a threat to a way of life. People move, societies change, this does not mean a way of life is being destroyed. On the France point, I totally agree, it is ridiculous that there is not a mainstream party willing to represent a commonly held view that we need drastically lower net migration.
‘People move, societies change’ all sounds very benign when you say it quickly. Places looking different can, and often is, evidence not just of a threat to a way of life, but the demise of it. Entire working class communities have been swept away and replaced by new, immigrant ones. Did anyone ask those communities if they wanted that? Did anyone represent their views? What about when it’s your community, or mine? Will it still be so benign, so a unremarkable? I wonder.
I don't fully understand what you are saying, this feels like very vague warnings. I've lived in several areas and communities with high immigration, and it was fine. Obviously people are represented, but its not a right we have to freeze all change in our own neighbourhoods. Where is this community which has been swept away?
Strange that you originally said there are concerns, yet now you’re asserting that these concerns are a figment of my imagination. They certainly aren’t that and communities have indeed been swept away. Go to Blackburn, Bradford, Stoke on Trent, Sheffield. Go to most of what were the working class areas of many northern and midland cities and you’ll see plenty of evidence of it. If you live in one of these places and are fine with it, then good for you, but it’s quite clear that many of the people who did live there and some who still have to are anything but. No doubt you’d call them all bigots and racists and feel a warm sense of moral superiority over them. I personally believe they have a right to be heard and have their grievances addressed instead of being treated as though they should just shut up and embrace someone else’s idea of what Britain should be. It’s usually someone who lives in London and or has enough money to insulate themselves from the reality of what their ideology produces.
>Aren’t the prime minister’s parents immigrants? No-one hates immigrants more than other immigrants. I learned that when I spent a taxi ride listening to my self-described Persian driver rant about immigrants. Not to mention my wife's European-born grandmother and her children. Immigration has very little to do with economic and social problems. In times of economic hardship, politicians find it convenient to whip up the masses to a lather by using a scapegoat to appeal to the myth of "the people can regain control." Foreign strangers are perfect targets for the scapegoat role; they're relatively powerless, and punters tend to find the unknown scary. False fear is a highly effective persuader, albeit contemptible.
> Immigration has very little to do with economic and social problems. This is completely wrong - it underpins most major problems we're facing right now. You simply cannot have millions of people coming into the country and expect it to have no effect on the economic or society.
Reform aka Farage are running for election. Anti immigration is their platform. So they are pushing this as hard as they can.
So, just for clarity, you’re saying there’s no genuine basis for people being concerned about the level of immigration?
OP asked why so much *right now* this is why.
Noted.
Because it's an easy win for them. Other parties won't even admit to a connection between record immigration levels and a housing crisis.
Not only that, but chickens are coming home to roost all across Europe. There is a reason ‘far right’ parties are getting in power. Europeans are tired of what immigrants are doing to their countries.
It's just the media selling column inches. Racists love to bang on about immigration so the latest "shock horror" story appeals to them. The rest of us love to be appalled at the dumb arsed racists banging on about immigrants being the roof of all our problems. The real winners are the government who know that 99% of the responsibility for the countries woes are being deflected towards hate for foreigners rather than highlighting very obvious investment and policy failings in everything from health and education through to housing.
So, just for clarity, you’re saying there’s no genuine basis for people being concerned about the level of immigration?
No. I'm saying that we need immigration but more importantly we need to expand our infrastructure to allow for it.
Build over all our green spaces to become a suburb of Africa/Asia. Wow what a bright future we have ahead of us.
Very quickly...T [Teacher vacancies have increased by 20% to 2,800 in November 2023 from 2,300](https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/school-workforce-in-england) [We currently need 152,000 to fill care related roles in the UK](https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/insight-and-analysis/long-reads/social-care-360-workforce-carers) You tried to find a plumber, electrician, builder recently ?
Can you provide some actual EVIDENCE to support the ‘we need immigration’ assertion?
We need to build a Birmingham every few years? That’s comically naive.
I think you are a minority now mate. It is not racist to be concerned with the mass migration we are currently having.
To some extent I agree, but the the real issue here is the lack of investment into infrastructure that would have allowed for growth - not the people coming here to work and fill positions that we can't (due to a lack of motivation, ability and training) using our own labour force. However you look at it, that's the fault of successive government policy. Am I in the minority or are people just sick and tired about arguing against xenophobic racists who still think Brexit / xenophobia / right wing nationalism is a good idea?
This is not xenophobia or nationalism and that is your big mistake thinking that it is. Most migrants settle in England, not Wales or Scotland. This is means we need build a city the size of Nottingham or Amsterdam every year in England to accommodate them. England is one of the densely populated countries in the world (discounting microstates). We cannot build this level of infrastructure every year, it is impossible.
The ‘real issue’ is thousands of immigrants.
Because if everyone woke up and realised wealth inequality was the biggest problem we would be going after the 1% the way we go after immigrants. They always need to give me a "bad gu"
It’s a proxy for trying to make you vote conservative- much of the press is owned by big donors
Its a sad situation. I think racism is a big part of it, but the issue with immigration is being allowed to fester by our governments. What angers me is that immigration is something the government is able to directly reduce. Unlike waiting lists, interest rates, housing level etc which are not directly controlled, the government has the power to issue less visas. That the tory party continues to promise lower immigration, whilst choosing to do nothing is infuriating when the public has made it pretty clear that immigration is a problem it cares about. I am not saying I support drastic measures to lower immigration, I would rather the governing parties actually set out how it is we benefit. And where immigration causes localised problems, detail how these can be addressed. But I do worry that people who disapprove of high immigration have no-one sensible to vote for and end up going to Reform.
[удалено]
> Our demographics (more old people, low birth rate) require immigrants to fuel our economy I know Denmark is a different country but many across Europe are facing the same problem here: >In October the finance ministry, in its annual report on the issue, estimated that in 2018 immigrants from non-Western countries and their descendants drained from public finances a net 31bn kroner ($4.9bn), some 1.4% of gdp. https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/12/18/why-have-danes-turned-against-immigration In that article there is also a graph showing that migrants from the Middle East and Africa, on average, are a net drain on the public finances at all stages of life. We just so happen to have seen an increase of people from those places so I don't think it's a leap to assume it's also costing us more than it benefits us. >Failures to create enough homes for these immigrants is causing pressures in the housing market This would be physically impossible even without our restrictive planning laws. You *cannot* build enough houses to accommodate an annual inflow of 1.4 million people on top of existing population growth. >"It's dem immigrants!" is a very easy thing to say and appease people's ego that the failings are not our failings, it's their failings Our government's failing was to have this policy running for 25 years despite constant demands that it stops. >Raging about immigrants is also a distraction from the other things, such as attempts to remove our rights by taking us out of the ECHR Again, it's our government who caused this problem. You do not rely on some remote, faceless court in Europe for your rights. I'm getting really bored of these strawmen arguments claiming that anyone who objects to this unprecedented level of migration must be some ignorant old racist who doesn't know anything. This country is literally crumbling under the pressure of demand and for some reason you're ideologically obsessed with piling in as many people as possible.