If there is a second referendum ...

kabayiri

kingstreet wrote: »

...
Regardless of who comes from the EU, the net 248,000 from the non-EU needs planning and similar management to infrastructure. Why is that never mentioned? It's always about immigration from the EU...

In 2010 the Tories stood on a manifesto commitment to manage migration. Undoubtedly, it helped them gain power.

I consider that a 'mention'.

Filo25

kabayiri wrote: »

In 2010 the Tories stood on a manifesto commitment to manage migration. Undoubtedly, it helped them gain power.

I consider that a 'mention'.

When you raise this, some will point out that control does not necessarily mean reduce.

In fact during the referendum campaign Priti Patel was out selling Brexit as a way of increasing non-EU immigration to the Indian community.

Clearly the immigration "target" is a joke, in that no major party has any serious interest in hitting it.

For all I think the anti-immigration message was a big part of the referendum result, I don't think the majority of the Hard Brexiteers particularly care about it, the ERG grouping as a whole has never been massively anti-immigration from what I have heard from most of them.

A_Pandiculation

kabayiri wrote: »

The forgotten masses just won't turn out.

At one time I might have agreed with you, except . . .

kabayiri wrote: »

In coming years, they will be easy fodder for new right wing parties.

. . . It probably won't take years. All it takes is one charismatic opportunist to clearly & concisely show how British democracy has become such a farce and issue a rallying call; it's worked in the recent past and things haven't improved.

kabayiri wrote: »

As France shows, it just takes a spark to unite what seem quite disparate groups.

Exactly! Just imagine the uproar if a secret illicit communique between Barnier & May surfaced for example. In fact if we don't leave the EU I don't think it will take even that.

The rise of UKIP came about through much less and only now some years later is much of the EU seeing similar rises in the popularity of populists. At this rate I give it five years before other EU countries either split the EU or leave it too.

Filo25

kabayiri wrote: »

Joined up government policy is what makes migration effects either negative or positive.

This is my point.

6+ years of austerity; council cut backs in some places of 30%+; whilst at the same time hundreds of thousands of new arrivals; and you think people won't notice?

Proper managed migration needs a massive upfront investment to ensure the resources are there.

And yet without that EU immigration, the public finances would have been even worse and austerity even deeper

andrewf75

Filo25 wrote: »

For all I think the anti-immigration message was a big part of the referendum result, I don't think the majority of the Hard Brexiteers particularly care about it, the ERG grouping as a whole has never been massively anti-immigration from what I have heard from most of them.

Of course they don’t. Reducing immigration is fundamentally incompatible with their free market, low regulation, business model.

Reducing immigration surely fits better with left wing economics.

kabayiri

Filo25 wrote: »

And yet without that EU immigration, the public finances would have been even worse and austerity even deeper

If the government of the day does not redirect all this supposed cheap migration windfall to the parts of the country hardest hit by change, then it is to be expected that resentment will follow.

I'm rather bored of the phrase 'Northern Powerhouse'. It's just an empty soundbite.

The point is that little has changed, and yet we are expecting to change to a Remain vote, and somehow feel this changes things.

kabayiri

andrewf75 wrote: »

Of course they don’t. Reducing immigration is fundamentally incompatible with their free market, low regulation, business model.

Reducing immigration surely fits better with left wing economics.

I'm adaptable.

I'd accept a policy of dropping NMW, and importing very very cheap labour from the poorest parts of the world.

As long as the benefits were spent in significantly upgrading infrastructure and R&D.

EE labour is getting a bit pricey for some things now.

lisyloo

[QUTOE]Regardless of who comes from the EU, the net 248,000 from the non-EU needs planning and similar management to infrastructure. Why is that never mentioned? It's always about immigration from the EU...[/QUOTE]


Because you need a valid reason to come from outside the EU so in general we don't object to that.

Here's an article about visas being refused for doctors


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/12/uk-visa-applications-doctors-thousands-refused-figures-show-nhs


Anyone can come from the EU, low skilled or even criminals.

lisyloo

The point is that little has changed, and yet we are expecting to change to a Remain vote, and somehow feel this changes things.

So are you saying you think that immigration is still a major issue?
I think people are now being made aware of all the areas it does affect e.g. fishing, farming, supply of medicines as examples and that immigratin is no longer hogging the lime light (however I don't live in an area blighted by immigration).

Filo25

kabayiri wrote: »

If the government of the day does not redirect all this supposed cheap migration windfall to the parts of the country hardest hit by change, then it is to be expected that resentment will follow.

I'm rather bored of the phrase 'Northern Powerhouse'. It's just an empty soundbite.

The point is that little has changed, and yet we are expecting to change to a Remain vote, and somehow feel this changes things.

Can I just say that if there was a second ref (unlikely) and remain won (probably 50:50), then it shouldn't be taken by anyone as a sign that all is well in the country and that there is some kind of mandate for things to carry on as they have been, a lot of people have had enough of how they perceive the country not to be run for their benefit.

The problem is I don't think the Tory party has any interest in doing that and while I won't deny the current Labour party would want to do it, I'm not sure they are likely to be competent enough to deliver it (plus any kind of radical change is difficult and expensive to deliver)