BS: UK immigration too high?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Oct 09 - 06:05 AM

I have alluded to family breakups and other factors, but this thread is discussing immigration, and so I have to post about those issues where immigration is a significant factor.
Do you deny that immigration is a factor at all in the housing crisis?
If it is , then it is not xenophobic for me to refer to it.
Please stop making that false accusation, attacking me personally instead of the argument.

Can you answer my argument?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 22 Oct 09 - 12:48 PM

I already have..... it is one of the factors in some areas....can you agree with that.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Oct 09 - 02:50 PM

Yes, thank you.
I have family in seaside towns in Cornwall so I know that housing in such towns as yours is a big issue for locals and not related to immigration.

My argument was that, especially in urban areas, the rapid rise in population has outstripped any possibilty of providing housing and many other services, and immigration has been the main driver of that rise.
There is also the issue of jobs and wages.

Can I invite people to say now where they stand, with a single sentence.
1 Immigration should rise.
2 The current rate is sustainable.
3 Immigration is too high.

For myself, I think it is too high because it is a significant cause of social, economic, and environmental problems.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Oct 09 - 07:21 PM

""Do you deny that immigration is a factor at all in the housing crisis?
If it is , then it is not xenophobic for me to refer to it.
Please stop making that false accusation, attacking me personally instead of the argument.

Can you answer my argument?""


You had better do some more homework, mate, because you are falling behind the plot.

Reported on BBC News yesterday, the latest from ONS (remember them? You consider their projections as gospel truth).

They said that immigration was under a measure of control, and had been falling (just as Royston and Richard said), and furthermore the major cause of population increase now, and likely to remain so, is THE BIRTHRATE, not immigration.

Check it out. These new figures are bang up to date, not two years out of date.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 22 Oct 09 - 07:31 PM

To be wholly accurate - the difference between the birthrate and the deathrate - which is EXACTLY why an injection to the working population is needed to fund the cost of the longer retirement period (or the period when the ageist employers will not hire despite eligibilty).

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 22 Oct 09 - 08:55 PM

The Guardian today carries a full report on the projections and what they are based on. The birth rate is apparently much higher among the recent immigration population who have a younger age profile and a higher fertility rate.

   But so what...lets talk aboput justice. If we want the benefits, whatever they are, of EU membership, then this is part of the package. Just as it is for friends and family of mine retiring to parts of Europe!

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 01:42 AM

Don, the latest ONS figures confirm everything I have said and more.
Here is an extract.
The population of the United Kingdom was 61,383,000 in mid-2008. This is an increase of 408,000 (0.7 per cent) on mid-2007 and is equivalent to an average increase of over 1,000 people a day.

Population growth has increased over recent decades; this latest increase compares with an average annual growth of 0.5 per cent since 2001; 0.3 per cent per year between 1991 and 2001; and 0.2 per cent between 1981 and 1991.

In the year to mid 2002, net migration accounted for over 70% of the total population change.

The number of births is increasing partly due to rising fertility among UK born women and partly because there are more women of childbearing ages due to inflows of female migrants to the UK.

In comparison, net migration contributed to 186,000 of population growth in the year to mid-2008, an increase of 26% on the mid 2002 figure of 148,000.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?ID=950

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 01:55 AM

Richard, why should we listen to your opinion on the complex economic issues of demography and migration?
Put up some authoritative opinions, and I will find an expert to contradict any that you find.
Do not state as fact that which is merely your uneducated guess.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 02:01 AM

Tug, you should have watched QT not for Griffin but because it is so rare to hear politicians discuss immigration.
Because of him they had to.
All the politicians agreed that immigration is much too high!
My views are mainstream, yours are extreme left fringe.
Towards the end a very articulate black man from the audience made all of the concerns about immigration that you have been branding racist and xenophobic. No one challenged him.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 03:25 AM

Yes.... I also picked up on the gentleman you mention Keith, the spokespersons for the main parties are weasels trapped by the PC claptrap they have been spouting for the last decade.

After so long spent demonising those who disagree with their disneyland view of society, they are terified to admit the very obvious truth.

When the hard questions are put to them by someone who cannot be bullied....like the black membere of the audiance on Question Time, they cower like rabbits in the headlights.

The Programme? I thought most here would have loved it.......A "How to" video for witch hunters!.....:0).........Ake

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 03:52 AM

Just so Akeneaton.
The real reason they all tried so hard to keep him off was so they could continue the conspiracy of silence.
He was no threat to them in debate, but he forced them to have the debate.
If BNP ever get a more articulate and charismatic leader we will be in big trouble.

Don, did you not wonder everyone else on your side kept very quiet about those latest figures.
I can not find where they say the government has immigration under control. You must have imagined that.
They do show that immigration will add just under 7 million people to the UK's population in the next 25 years – equivalent to seven cities the size of Birmingham.
90% of this growth will be in England.
Immigration will add almost one million to the UK's population between 2009/10 and 2013/14 alone.

No one has been able to provede housing and services for the rising population before, AND NOW IT IS RISING FASTER THAN EVER, mainly driven by immigration and babies born to immgrants.

All the problems I have referred to, and been villified for, are set to get worse and worse.

Now I invite people again to state where they stand on the question in the title.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 05:08 AM

Keith, stop fantasising about Enoch Powell's "Rivers of Blood" speech. "Babies born to immigrants" indeed!

The facts are that the excess of births over deaths contribute more to population growth than immigration, and that immigration is still falling. All political parties plan to be able to restrict it in some ways (that itself is new) and there is no reason (other than "It's happened before, so it will happen again) to believe that it must rise again.

A major part of the excess of births over deaths is typical longer lifespans. That necessitates funding elderly care (unless you plan a program of compulsory euthanasia too). That in turn necessitates a growth in the economic sector, and the growth needs to be greater than the growth in population because of the ageing trend. So immigration is necessary and control measures are in place or are being put in place. The points system that you deride can operate as a soft cap because it is always possible to regulate (almost instantly, by statutory instrument) the number of points needed to immigrate.

I'd probably want to adjust A8 policy and the Employed Workers' Directive too - but the former largely on humanitarian grounds to alleviate the situations that Pierre le Chapeau describes, although the more that is publicised, the less A8 workers will want to come here (and indeed many have gone home or are going home already).

What is necessary is an explosion in the building of social housing, and as Roosevelt taught us that and an infrastructure program will drive economic growth - and if correctly located, no-central economic growth. It's that or a Malthusian doctrine, or a "drawbridge" policy that will, as Europe demonstrated in the 20s produce a severe recession.

Net A8 migration is probably negative at present. Policies to control 3rd world migration are in place. Asylum claims are down. Asylum rejection rates are up. Asylum decision times are down. Removal rates are up (although a more effective tracking system and a workable detention or tracking policy for those awaiting visas would be more effective still. It is not correct to say that immigration is rising faster than ever. The population may well be, but immigration is not. If you want to know what a falling population will do to a country, study the economic effects of the pneumonic and bubonic plagues in this country.

What else do you want? Or is it still "No foreigners, and no children of foreigners"?

With respect the very articulate black gentleman on Question Time was in a lawyer's suit and sounded like a lawyer to me - but was not challenged perhaps because of the amazing bottle he had to be so "dog in a manger". I think he MUST have been a barrister. But I have answered his question above.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 06:00 AM

Richard please, I am not "fantasising".
The ONS quote is "The number of births is increasing partly due to rising fertility among UK born women and partly because there are more women of childbearing ages due to inflows of female migrants to the UK."
The latest ONS stats show that population is rising faster than ever.
Disagree? Go check.
Immigration comes second only to excess births, and immigrants account for most of that.
Disagree? Go check. And then come back and tell us what you find.

You sound as though you are in favour of the government controls, ineffective as they are.
Doesn't that mean you think immigration is too high?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 06:44 AM

Just to clarify, babies born to non UK born mothers account for about a quarter of all births.
Without that contribution, immigration would be the main cause of population growth.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 07:13 AM

""Just to clarify, babies born to non UK born mothers account for about a quarter of all births.
Without that contribution, immigration would be the main cause of population growth.""

You really love your circular arguments, don't you.

Without that contribution excess of births over deaths would reduce, but the only way that contribution could disappear is for the mothers and fathers to remain in their countries of origin, which would reduce immigration in the same proportion.

NO CHANGE THERE THEN, except that our NHS, our care services, our social services, and just about every other key area of employment would be massively understaffed.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 07:24 AM

Well, I am an immigrant, so I suppose my daughter is one of these "babies born to non-UK born mothers". Of course, she's white, and could pass for a "proper" English person, so maybe she is okay.

So tell me, are we part of the solution or part of the problem?

After all, I am now a single mother, as my British husband (of 15 years) and I divorced 3 years ago. When we were married, my family paid tax into one of the higher-earning tax brackets. Now I am a nasty single mum, but I still pay my taxes (at a somewhat lower rate), work full time, and contribute to society as best I can.

I know that I am not alone. The Eastern European immigrant community that I have come across in this area are nice, decent, hard-working people. They may be using public services like schools and the NHS, but from what I can tell they are also contributing to the local economy and paying their taxes. Yet this county has one of the highest concentrations of BNP membership, accoring to the recently-leaked list.

When I worked in Leicester, I remember visiting as part of my job certain estates where there were several generations of families who had never worked. These were white, "indigenous Britons" (to coin one of Mr Griffin's favourite phrases). There is a similar "no go" estate in our nearby market town. This sense of entitlement to benefits and a dedication to getting whatever they could for nothing, letting their kids run feral and taking no responsibility for themselves, their fertility or their circumstances, is endemic in certain areas. I would not be surprised to learn that there is a high instance ofBNP voting (for those who can be bothered to get off their arses and vote) in such places.

So tell me: who is really overstretching the system? Who is it that is taking but not putting back? If more of the indigenous underclass was made accountable and compelled to work for a living, do you think that maybe the system wouldn't be as overstretched as it is? DO you think maybe the people who don't actually contribute anything to the system are the ones who ought to be targeted, rather than hard-working immigrants who contribute to Britain's coffers and cultural life?


Maybe Keith A needs to find a new scapegoat.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 07:28 AM

I will state the argument simply and with no circularity Don T.
The population is growing faster now than at any time in the last 50 years.
We could not provide enough houses and services before, so what hope have we got now.
Unrest and support for the far right results from lack of low skilled jobs and low wages caused by importing cheap labour.

Reducing immigration would help, but please give your alternative solution.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 07:36 AM

Ruth, no mum is worth less than another.
No one is to blame and no particular group are causing problems or taking more than their share.
We need a young generation.
But our population is just rising too fast.

I am only arguing for a balance between immigration and emigration.

All the parties agree that immigration is too high.
I am just arguing with three people who refuse to see what is obvious to anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 08:08 AM

""I am only arguing for a balance between immigration and emigration.

All the parties agree that immigration is too high.
I am just arguing with three people who refuse to see what is obvious to anyone.""

And we are arguing with one person whose thinly disguised agenda would, if it were put into practice, do more damage to this country than two world wars.

The system is in place to control further immigration. It just isn't the system YOU want to see.

You rant about lack of housing, but somehow fail to notice that the Polish building workers currently in this country are among the hardest working, most conscientious tradesmen we have.

Let's see now. We don't have enough houses, right?

So let's send the people who want to immigrate into this country packing, yeah?

Hang on a minute, every Polish work gang of say eight men is building houses for huge numbers of British citizens. Even if each of those men takes up one house, he's going to contribute to the building of hundreds of others.

So, how does he rate as a drain on British resources?

1. He houses native citizens
2. He works for the hours he's paid for
3. He pays taxes, and National Insurance
4. He doesn't disappear for three days in the middle of a job

I'm beginning to think we should keep him, and send certain others packing

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 08:21 AM

Don T, who told you the system was in place to control further immigration?
Was it Phil Woolas, the immigration minister?
He did say "Today's projections show that population growth is starting to slow down, the impacts of the radical reforms we have made to the immigration system over the last two years are working," he said.

However, Guy Goodwin, ONS director of population statistics, said the change was due to a change in data analysis, not Government policy. "I would not call it a significant slowing up in any way," he said.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 08:32 AM

Don T could any kind of builder provide England with a complete city of Birmingham every four years for the next 25?
That's what we will need just to stop things getting worse than they are now.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 08:36 AM

My point, Keith, is that "too much immigration" is always going to be relative to the resources and econonomic production within a particular society. If more people are productive, there are more resources for everyone.

I would argue that tax-paying immigrants are not nearly as much of a drain on available resources as the indigenous Britons who do not work, and who live within the benefits sub-culture.

I know that this sounds incredibly reactionary, but I would really like to see this sector of society quantified in comparison to the "drain" on resources caused by immigration. I feel that it's easy to scapegoat the immigrant as the cause of Britain's problems, when in many cases, as highlighted by Don T, we are the solution.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 08:57 AM

Ruth,
"My point, Keith, is that "too much immigration" is always going to be relative to the resources and econonomic production within a particular society. If more people are productive, there are more resources for everyone."

I have argued that our very high population density and the serious concerns over immigration related issues are evidence that things have gone much too far.

"I would argue that tax-paying immigrants are not nearly as much of a drain on available resources as the indigenous Britons who do not work, and who live within the benefits sub-culture."

I absolutely agree Ruth.

"I know that this sounds incredibly reactionary, but I would really like to see this sector of society quantified in comparison to the "drain" on resources caused by immigration. I feel that it's easy to scapegoat the immigrant as the cause of Britain's problems, when in many cases, as highlighted by Don T, we are the solution."

I tend to agree with that, and certainly do not go in for scapegoating.
It is just a question of numbers.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 09:45 AM

""Don T could any kind of builder provide England with a complete city of Birmingham every four years for the next 25?
That's what we will need just to stop things getting worse than they are now.""

My point precisely! You are going to need those foreign workers, or you are going to be in a much BIGGER hole.

God, it's murder talking to the hard of understanding.

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 09:59 AM

Don T, we could import all the builders in the world, but then you would have to bring in builders from other worlds to build towns for them.
Don, seven new Birminghams in 25 years.
It is time to stop.

Can any of you produce one authoritative person who agrees with you that current immigration levels are sustainable?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 12:18 PM


Can any of you produce one authoritative person who agrees with you that current immigration levels are sustainable?

Who said that?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 01:01 PM

Very good Tug!
Be fair though, I have already given all 3 political parties as agreeing it is too high.
I can not think of any credible person who does not.
So, can you?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 01:51 PM

Some results from a YouGov opinion poll this year.

- 76% want to see net immigration cut from its present level of 237,000 a year to 50,000 or less a year. Of that 76%, 32% want to see a policy of "one in, one out" while 22% want to see no immigration at all.
The party affiliations are also of interest:
- A sharp cut in immigration (to 50,000 a year or less) was supported by 85% of Conservative, 70% of Labour[1] and 65% of Lib Dem voters.

I suggest that the only reason I am the only Mudcatter making this case is because of the nasty, abusive and insulting way that your side argues its case.
From the start you have made personal attacks instead of reasoned arguments. It is much easier to just say "racist" and "xenophobe".
Do you really believe that 76% of the population are racists?

Have you thought of anyone who does not think immigration is too high?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 08:15 PM

Of course present levels aren't sustainable, but that hasn't been the drift of the thread, which seems to be whether immigration is the prime cause for a whole set od social ills.

    Quite what kind of policy would need to be put in place has not really been dicussed either, given eu rules, economic need in the Uk etc, though there does seem to be some simploistic thinking about just pulling up the drawbridge, without any real consideration of how that would be done, and what wider, unforseen consequences this might have.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 23 Oct 09 - 08:20 PM

I suggest that the only reason I am the only Mudcatter making this case is because of the nasty, abusive and insulting way that your side argues its case.
From the start you have made personal attacks instead of reasoned arguments. It is much easier to just say "racist" and "xenophobe".

Look up 'ad hominem'.
I am not on a 'side'. I also never side with a majority ( e.g those who favour a return of capital punishment) just because they outnumber me.
You again run away from the argument.......given that we need to think casrefully about predsent levels of immigration ( as well as longevity and how it will be finances) can you please suggest concrete proposals that are not xenophobic?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 05:58 AM

"Of course present levels aren't sustainable"
Tug that is the first time you have even hinted at that.
Your previous;

the 'our overcrowded little island' argument is bankrupt at every level.

Our island is still not overrcrowded

immigration population who have a younger age profile and a higher fertility rate.
But so what.

Now we agree, so that is fine. End of our discussion.
What should be done? Almost all other countries apply limits to immigration.US style quota system.Australian points based system that, unlike ours, actually limits the numbers entering.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 08:21 AM

Keith, none of my posts suggest I am unaware of the PRESENT levels of immigration being sustainable. The figures that you partially report suggest the rate is declining and that there will be a return to a net outflow......this may happen without any government interference.


    I diverge from you on laying the blame for all our ills solely on immigration, for making unworkable suggestions for 'stopping them'.feeding xenophobia and others and missing all sorts of points in a selective manner. Our Island is not 'overcrowded',but we lack the resources to fill parts of it with new cities at the rate that current figures would suggest. Subtle difference, or don't you get it.
Almost all other countries apply limits to immigration.US style quota system.Australian points based system that, unlike ours, actually limits the numbers entering.
So do we, except that we have duties arisingv from our EU membership.Practical suggestions please!

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 09:24 AM

Tug, re your first paragraph, I have produced no figures that suggest the rate is declining and may reverse.
I would be fascinated to see any such.

Para2, not all our ills. I specified those ills due to a rapidly rising population. For many years now, immigration has been the main driver of that, and it is not xenophobic to state that.

para3, "so do we" No. Our points based system is not working to stem the flow.
Re EU. Most of our immigrants are not from EU.
We were one of the few EU countries that CHOSE to allow unrestricted access to the new accession countries.
We must live with EU migration unless we renegotiate membership, and could limit outside migration to compensate. That might be seen as xenophobic.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 12:44 PM

That was reported in the Guardian this week. The PRESENT figures give cause for concern, but we need to see the longer term trends.

Either to limit immigration ,or devote more resouces, may well be necessary. It is shameful that so many people are having to live in virtual shanty towns when they came here to work!!!

   Some kind of humane system is needed, a blanket halt to immigration, especially if based on racial grounds ( no, I am not accusing you of saying that) would be a slur on our reputation as a civilised couintry....especially as we expect to be eble to retire or relocate almost anywhere in the world.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: GUEST,Pierre Le Chapeau
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 03:47 PM

Hi Keith from Hertford . Firstly Iam a mudcat member.

Unless I misunderstand you why should my above posts be deleted there is nothing wrong with them I am not racist I speak from what I see and what I encounter all being now,t but the truth.

I agree with imigration to fill jobs.
But I do not agree with the fact that when the flood gates are opened and jobs are filled that thousands of poor homeless folk nationwide are left high and dry to rot on our streets.

Its disgusting.
Good luck to the polish workers.
My building where I work employs scores of cleaners from
South America good luck to them. if they can earn and have a better life over here good luck again.

Imigration leads to homelessness if it is not controled carefully and no goverment from any political party in this country clearly gives a toss about what I am referring to and that is the homeless.
The blinkered politican who says this and that but does now,t.


I put that to you and whoever else.
Kind regards Pierre

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 04:19 PM

The points based system can be tailored by adjusting the points threshold.

The legality of detaining pending asylum seekers and others needing but not having visas can be dealt with by primary and probably secondary legislation.

The period for asylum determinations is down.

The number of successful asylum applications is down.

Location of removees can be dealt with (eg anklets).

Log-in and log-out issues can be dealt with.

A8 immigration is now negative.

Japan has one of the most rapidly ageing populations (particularly Tokyo) and the UK one of the next. To support the pensions timebomb we NEED population growth. That or the demolition of capitalism. Or compulsory euthanasia and a Malthusian doctrine.

And the main cause of population growth is not immigration.   

Therefore the opposition to immigration, and Keith's basic premise, is at best xenophobia.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: GUEST,Pierre Le Chapeau.
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 04:38 PM

why is it that Polish builders with the same certified papers has our national builders are doing the same jobe has our national builders but getting paid a hell of a lot less. The fact that they would earn less in there home land but earn more over here is not the issue the fact they are doing the same job means they should earn the same wage. alot of building firms are owned by ex politicians who use this has a excuse to save them selves money that is racist.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 04:45 PM

On the Nationwide programme on RTE last night the highest number of migrants in Ireland came from England.
The English people who have migrated here have nothing but praise for their Irish neighbours.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 04:55 PM

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1023/nationwide_av.html?2632183,null,228

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 07:02 PM

From yahoo news

The survey in the News of the World found that almost two-thirds of voters feel the mainstream parties have no credible policies on immigration. But only 6% said the BNP had the best policies on the issue and just 10% agreed with the far-right party that there should be a halt to all future immigration.

   Perhaps I'm not in such a minority after all.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: GUEST,Pierre Le Chapeau
Date: 24 Oct 09 - 07:54 PM

Imigration has a lot to do with homelessness.

1)(The government has no idea how meny homeless folk there are in this country from overseas.

(2 above all how meny of these folk are illegal having out stayed there visa,s but not returned home and are living rough or paying to sleep in safe houses.

3) How many criminals fleeing there own judisal system have fled over here and started up over here. (a true fact.)

But for the majority of law abideing overseas folk what prospect is there for those with out work or shelter.
There is no Carrington House anymore(Thank God)
There is no Cardboard city.

There is
St Martins in the fields in London which is bursting at the seams and cant cope but manages to regardless.   

The one time hostals that we did have could just about cope with our homeless and lots have been closed down due to Government cutbacks

And now these folk intised here through prospects of jobs and pay and also to those who came thinking that the streets of London are paved with gold and have been left pennyless cannot now return home through being pennyless even if they want to.

Sad state of affairs.

Kind regards to all.
I,ll post no more.
Pierre Le Chapeau.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: GUEST,Keith A o Hertford
Date: 25 Oct 09 - 05:02 AM

Yes Tug, present figures certainly give cause for concern.
Future figures we do not know, but official projections based on the current official figures are for continued rapid rise in population.
And that is this month's figures and this month's projections.
Richard, birth rate has only just overtaken immigration as the main driver of population rise, because of the high birth rate of immigrants.

Government controls so far are utterly ineffective at controlling the spiralling population. I think it needs more than a tweak Richard.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Oct 09 - 05:27 AM

Keith here http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?ID=950 are figures apparently current to August 2009 from the ONS showing net migration still falling.

Those sucked into false predictions of prosperity (as in "The Grapes of Wrath") deserve our greatest sympathy, and for many reasons government (in its widest sense) needs to know who they are and where they are. Some may be illegal entrants, some may be overstayers, some may be failed asylum applicants, but not all are any such, I assert.

There is a case for removal of the above three categories (for they have been determined as not lawfully being here), and as I said long ago I believe it is possible for English law to make it clear that visa applicants can be detained during processing. That does not however enable full policing of removal.

Making rules about who is allowed to enter does not solve that puzzle.

Perhaps those who insist that population growth is ipso facto bad (a position I think irrational) or at present excessive (a position I think, allowing for projections, not justifiable) should set out: -

a) How they would reduce the excess of births over deaths, and
b) How they could find those unlawfully (now or in the future) here?
c) How they could prevent illegal entry?

There are no magic wands, and no government can be blamed for not achieving the impossible.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Oct 09 - 08:18 AM

Richard, net immigration is falling because of the recession.
It is due to people leaving.
Every recession has been the same, and the effect is always temporary.
Actual immigration is still rising.

The birth rate you brought up again is a red herring.
We have the birth rate we have.
If it rises, to control population we can only control entry.

If we really can not prevent and remove illegals, then again we can only control entry.

Most countries do manage better control of their borders than we seem able to..
I suspect our government lacks the will.
A supply of cheap labour suits them and suits the bosses.
The people who suffer the effects are just the urban working class.
If they complain they must be racist and can be ignored.
And their natural champions, the political Left, are complicit.
Shame on you.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Oct 09 - 11:58 AM

If you cannot control illegal immigration then you cannot control entry either.

Net immigration is falling. You can speculate why, and you can speculate when if ever that will reverse, but it is the present fact. You rule out, it seems, compulsory birth control (despite the fact that you several times refer to children of immigrants), so that makes it plain that the only thing you want to stop is immigration.

What do you mean that "most countries do manage better control of their borders"?
1. That fewer people arrive without going through immigration control at all?
2. That they receive fewer asylum applications?
3. That they reject more asylum applications?
4. That they do it faster?
5. That they more promptly or successfully deport failed asylum seekers?
6. That they are more effective at hunting down and deporting category 1 arrivals?

You say you want fewer immigrants. How do you plan to achieve that?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Oct 09 - 12:04 PM

The same way that USA and Autralia do.

Richard, you keep bringing up the birth rate.
I just said that it is not relevant.
As I said, we have the rate we have. We can only control immigration.
Are you saying that it is impossible to reduce it at all?
Maybe if the government actually tried?
Actually appeared to want to?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Oct 09 - 02:44 PM

Keith, check how many migrants walk across the borders of the US. I have a friend who walked or drove into the USA as he pleased for many years, and was running a haulage business there after being deported 7 (I think it was) times before one of the US agencies said "We are now deporting you again. If we find you here again illegally you are going to jail for a long time". He than married a native American woman and ran his haulage business for a number more years before a row with her led him to park one of his Kenwoods that was registered in her name in a parking lot at JFK and fly out for good, of his own free will.

Turning now to Australia:

You already ought to be able to figure out how the manipulation of number requirements in a points system can affect the number of those entitled to entry. It is immaterially different from a hard cap as used by Australia.

Try figuring out how (as Australia threatens) sinking ships can apply to trucks coming in on short-haul ro-ro ferries and to the Eurotunnel.

Is that what you want: to threaten to murder people before finding out whether they have legitimate claims to entry?


You want, it seems, no more immigrants.

We already have immigration control at all airports and ports. How many ships and planes do you want scouring the seas and skies for small boats and aircraft aircraft? Will you search every truck coming into the UK, and how will that affect international trade?

Now suppose those you find claim asylum. What will you do? Tag them all so they can be tracked? How much equipment will you need? Who will operate it? How will you stop the tags being cut off? How will you tag everyone already here?

What will you do about visa overstayers? Tag every tourist so that you can be sure they go home?

You are wrong to want a bar on immigration - but if you could impose one, how would you police it?

The present government has already got the period for determination of asylum claims down and the number of refusals up. Asylum is not an easy option, and the existing laws permit a bare and unpleasant subsistence to those who wait for a decision. By and large, visas if refused cannot be re-applied for while still in the UK.

You say the government should "actually try". Well, come on, what should they try? A perimeter fence and patrols with dogs and sub-machine guns?

The government knows perfectly well that jerks are going on about immigration. Don't you think they'd like to shut them all up?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Oct 09 - 03:52 PM

Richard, one thread at a time.
When you agree with Tug and me that the answer to the question, "UK immigration too high?" is yes, we will start one on how to reduce it.

So Richard, is it too high or not?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Oct 09 - 06:19 PM

No. It is below population growth, and falling.

And you can't say "too high" and purport to attribute blame for that alleged fact until you have an alternative. Looks like you haven't.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 25 Oct 09 - 06:24 PM

This thread goes Richard/Keith/Richard/Keith.... I suspect that the right honourable Richard lives in a white only enclave!