E-Petition on overcrowding hits 100K

StevieJ

misskool wrote: »

Can I just point out that non-EU immigrants have no access to benefits? They get NHS for now (but there is a consultation in place that every non-EU immigrant will have to pay for private medical insurance) and they get child tax credits (if they have a child born in the UK, not otherwise) and that's about it.

Many of the non-EU immigrants I know are high value workers and pay income tax and NI which they will never derive a benefit from. Of course, my view is biased in that I am rather a middle class non-EU immigrant with a similar social group.

It really isn't that easy to come and work in the UK as an economic migrant, many of the routes are now closed.

I was actually going to make a post about the ignorance of the vast majority of the population re immigration, and the need for some kind of official summary document giving the facts, then I thought, maybe the govt are quite happy with the status quo and immigrants taking some of the flack that should be aimed at them Thanks misskool your post shows that a public info doc wouldn't need be a text the length of War and Peace

CLAPTON

julieq wrote: »

It's like a pack of baying dogs here sometimes.

There are plenty of studies on the pattern of EU immigration and the flow in and out of workers, and in particular the A8 countries. Most workers stay in the country for short periods of time. Some stay longer, true, but that's on the basis of having built a life here. The total numbers are small as a comparison to the UK workforce anyway, and the demographics are different in that an A8 or EU immigrant is far more likely to be working. There is a net benefit in taxation.

Now you may not like that, but that's the way the data points. Anyone here can look at the ONS data, the data provided by the healthcare authorities, studies by universities and so on, this is such a big subject that most of it is online and searchable.

Jimmy, you're what? A builder? I can find you 20 crap English or UK builders for every bad Polish or A8 builder you can point at, if not more. The reason foreign nationals are employed as a rule is that they do the job well and usually cost less. Again that is a hard message to swallow for many of the hard core brits, but ultimately the test is in who gets the job. Again, this gives the country a net benefit. It makes life difficult for some of the people who aren't prepared to work as hard, but do you know what? I don't really care about them. I have to compete against others internationally for my wages, and I don't see why a hod carrier or plasterer doesn't have to. In most parts of the country there are less than 50 per 1000 workers from non UK origins. It's hardly an immigrant flood.

As far as non EU nationals goes, the level of scrutiny is I can assure you intensive and ridiculous. Virtually no-one on this board born in the UK would pass the citizenship test, and it's a costly process to settle here long term. A great deal of the migration is for education anyway, is short term, and subsidises our universities. It's a benefit, not a cost.

I'm fighting an uphill battle here, I know, because the erroneous beliefs around immigration are hammered in and reinforced day in day out by newspaper headlines and unscrupulous politicians. It's always nice to have someone else to blame for your troubles (if there is one theme from the bearish side it is that, someone is always doing them down in some way and eroding their quality of life). Well I'm sorry, it's a competitive world now, and you're in global competition with a lot of other people after a slice of prosperity - the true 99% in other words.

If you win your battle, what you'll find is that you're locked into a future of diminishing pensions and poverty while the rest of the world just decide to get on with things without us. It is a GOOD THING that people want to work and maybe settle here.

many of us think the quality of life is important and not merely the economics of immigration

at the moment we have a population of 62m and will proberly have 70 million people within 10-15 years

that implies a very significant house building program, more roads and transport links and significant impact on the green belt etc

even if (and it is an if) the increase in population raised per capita income a little some of us don't think that is worthwhile the downside.

StevieJ

Going4TheDream wrote: »

Yes true to a point, but that is by looking at immigration selectively by nationality and not as a whole group of nationalities together?

(dont get the bit about the Welsh.... am I being dim?)

There are a lot of people speaking Polish but traditionally there have been a lot people from across the border speaking Welsh when in my City so the Polish gibberish gets lost in the Welsh gibberish, on a side note if you catch the Welsh on their own turf invariably they are speaking English

leveller2911

julieq wrote: »

It's like a pack of baying dogs here sometimes.

There are plenty of studies on the pattern of EU immigration and the flow in and out of workers, and in particular the A8 countries. Most workers stay in the country for short periods of time. Some stay longer, true, but that's on the basis of having built a life here. The total numbers are small as a comparison to the UK workforce anyway, and the demographics are different in that an A8 or EU immigrant is far more likely to be working. There is a net benefit in taxation.

Now you may not like that, but that's the way the data points.



Its not conclusive evidence though is it, to get accurate data you need decades not 6 years.

You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is anti immigration which is not true.

Going4TheDream

StevieJ wrote: »

I was actually going to make a post about the ignorance of the vast majority of the population re immigration, and the need for some kind of official summary document giving the facts, then I thought, maybe the govt are quite happy with the status quo and immigrants taking some of the flack that should be aimed at them Thanks misskool your post shows that a public info doc wouldn't need be a text the length of War and Peace

I am not sure all people are totally ignorant on immigration and it would be naive to suggest they are? The numbers of people who enter on Tier 1 visas for example is restricted and is very low, we have to accept that people who can relocate due to birth rights, marriage, common wealth rights etc and may well be matched by the number of people who leave the UK under similar circumstances , I think it is mass EU immigration that is the issue for many.

I dont believe it was envisaged the number of EU migrants would be as high as its transpired to be (even by the governments)

It was stated by Liam Byrne, the then Immigration minister in 2008 that the pressure on schools, housing, jobs, health care and such like services has been hard hit in many areas that have seen a large influx into them.

I don't believe that to be ignorance...


edit - I have just read Claptons post and perhaps this sums up the feeling?

olly300

leveller2911 wrote: »

julieq wrote: »

Immigration has a demonstrable net benefit to the economy. Immigrants from the EU tend to work, they pay tax and NI, and they go home generally before old age which is where the bulk of spending for health and pension kicks in.


What is profoundly depressing about this sort of debate is that these received opinions dominate over factual evidence


Considering the fact that EU border controls were only taken down in 2005-6 can you please show evidence to back up your statement..

I actually worked with nationals from the EU before 2005. So even though the border controls came down then there were a lot of people around from the old EU countries as well as Poland and Hungary who were in their 20s and 30s.

The older group of people I've met and worked with who are Eastern European tend to have been people who came after WW2 with their parents. As they were children their home is here so they don't have anywhere else to retire to.

BTW there is an article in The Guardian stating that the number of people from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa on the Working Holiday Visa scheme has decreased greatly due to:
1. The fact it's impossible to get an employer to sponsor you after you worked your 2 years here,
2. If you are in certain Health professions the entry requirements for non-EU nationals means you have to take further exams and there isn't enough time in the 2 years,
3. The exchange rate means it's not worth Australians and New Zealanders taking menial jobs so people coming are older and better skilled,
4. The Australian economy is much better so if they come here they may as well come on holiday.

You can read it here - http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/nov/11/australia-new-zealand-ditch-uk-workplace

StevieJ

Going4TheDream wrote: »

I am not sure all people are totally ignorant on immigration and it would be naive to suggest they are? The numbers of people who enter on Tier 1 visas for example is restricted and is very low, we have to accept that people who can relocate due to birth rights, marriage, common wealth rights etc and may well be matched by the number of people who leave the UK under similar circumstances , I think it is mass EU immigration that is the issue for many.

I dont believe it was envisaged the number of EU migrants would be as high as its transpired to be (even by the governments)

It was stated by Liam Byrne, the then Immigration minister in 2008 that the pressure on schools, housing, jobs, health care and such like services has been hard hit in many areas that have seen a large influx into them.

I don't believe that to be ignorance...


edit - I have just read Claptons post and perhaps this sums up the feeling?

Ignorance or not I think I would prefer some public information from the Govt for the masses rather than education by the Express,Telegraph and Mail and oh yes and opposition point scoring

i8change

Originally Posted by julieq
Immigration has a demonstrable net benefit to the economy.

According to the House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs: "Immigration has very small impacts on GDP per capita, whether these impacts are positive or negative." and "forecasts that 20 years hence house prices would be over 10% higher, if current rates of net immigration persist, than if there were zero net immigration."

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/82/8211.htm#a33

Impacts on the labour market and macro-economy

212. GDP—which measures the total output created by immigrants and residents in the UK—is an irrelevant and misleading measure for the economic impacts of immigration on the resident population. The total size of an economy is not an indicator of prosperity or of residents' living standards (para 49)

213. GDP per capita is a better measure than GDP because it takes account of the fact that immigration increases not only GDP but also population. However, even GDP per capita is an imperfect criterion for measuring the economic impacts of immigration on the resident population because it includes the per capita income of immigrants (para 50).

214. Rather than referring to total GDP when discussing the economic impacts of immigration, the Government should focus on the per capita income (as a measure of the standard of living) of the resident population (para 51).

215. The overall conclusion from existing evidence is that immigration has very small impacts on GDP per capita, whether these impacts are positive or negative. This conclusion is in line with findings of studies of the economic impacts of immigration in other countries including the US. The Government should initiate research in this area, in view of the paucity of evidence for the UK (para 66).

Rising population density: Impacts on housing and wider welfare issues

235. Given the difficulties of meeting the demands for housing, the Government should assess the impact of immigration on Britain's housing provision (para 164).

236. Immigration is one of many factors contributing to more demand for housing and higher house prices. We note the forecasts that 20 years hence house prices would be over 10% higher, if current rates of net immigration persist, than if there were zero net immigration. Housing matters alone should not dictate immigration policy but they should be an important consideration when assessing the economic impacts of immigration on the resident population in the UK (para 172).

237. Given the evidence that some immigrants have moved into properties suffering from a poor state of repair and/or overcrowding, the Government should assess whether its housing standards are being compromised and whether more inspections are necessary (para175).

238. The present and likely future scale of homelessness among A8 and non-EU immigrants should be thoroughly assessed as a first step to determining the implications of recent immigration for social housing provision (para 180)

239. In addition to its direct impact on the housing market, rising population density creates wider welfare issues and consequences for the living standards of UK residents. These wider welfare issues are potentially significant but in practice difficult to measure and, in part, highly subjective. They do, however, involve economic impacts on, for example, the cost and speed of implementation of public infrastructure projects. It is therefore important to include them in the debate about the economic impacts of immigration. Yet the Government appears not to have considered these issues at all. These wide-ranging impacts should be assessed urgently and the conclusions reflected in public policy as appropriate (para 185).

leveller2911

StevieJ wrote: »

Ignorance or not I think I would prefer some public information from the Govt for the masses rather than education by the Express,Telegraph and Mail and oh yes and opposition point scoring

I totally agree, but can we actually believe the Government, they too have their own agenda. All Politicians have their own opinions and like I said before it will take decades before we have accurate data by which time it will be impossible to adjust if its found to be detrimental to the UK..

Damned if we do damned if we don't..

Going4TheDream

StevieJ wrote: »

Ignorance or not I think I would prefer some public information from the Govt for the masses rather than education by the Express,Telegraph and Mail and oh yes and opposition point scoring

His party was in power when he said this......

Perhaps its as good to read a 'wide' range of publications of all persuasions ... you only have to look at unemployment figures by recent governments of all flavours over the years and the way that they have been conveniently 'massaged'

I cant help but feel this would perhaps not be any different?

After all as any good accountant/statistician knows you can make figures show what you want them to show with a little creativity