Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

11 million immigrants since 2000. When I

789 replies

Uggbootsforever · 04/10/2025 08:40

Sorry, it’s another immigration one.

I always see immigration discussed in terms of race, religion, who may or may not be a good fit for the UK, whether it’s by small boats - to be honest, this is not the biggest worry for me.

The biggest worry is the sheer increase in our population and how many people this country can reasonably accommodate. We are now 8th in Europe for population density - only behind Belgium and the Netherlands, and a handful of places like Vatican City and the Channel Islands. At present we have net migration of around 500,000 a year.

I’m worried that the key issues of overpopulation are being overlooked to make this conversation all about race. What about our pollution levels, wildlife habitats, flood risk, food security, infrastructure? Will this eventually be a polluted city state country? It seems to be heading that way.

Posters always say we need immigration, but we have already welcome 11 million since 2000. If that still isn’t enough; what is? Or do we just keep going?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
newbluesofa · 04/10/2025 13:56

BadWoIf · 04/10/2025 13:51

What a picture of utopia you paint!

What's your point here?

In other posts I've said how it's just a theoretical argument because we don't have good infrastructure. My point is, the real issue isn't the number of immigrants it's whether we have the right infrastructure in place to support the number. If we did, it wouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, the government have not cared to put any good infrastructure in place, so that's why we're at this point

newbluesofa · 04/10/2025 13:54

Uggbootsforever · 04/10/2025 13:49

England is still mostly green. Cities are very busy but if you fly over the country it's mostly green.

Oh, that’s ok then - if you can spot a few fields from an aeroplane then obviously we can’t have food insecurity and pollution. All good man.

You've deliberately ignored the actual point I was making which is, ironically, about fearmongering. Literally my next sentence was 'I'm not saying we should build on it, we need it for food production'

I notice you ignored my question - if we had appropriate infrastructure in place, what would be the reason to reduce immigration? I don't expect you'll answer as you're clearly not here for an actual good faith discussion as evidenced by your response here

Muffinmam · 04/10/2025 13:54

We are seeing this in my country (Australia). My own family is mixed race. I chose a school with mixed race kids because I want my child to fit it and not encounter racism.

I knew we increased immigration. But in a very short period of time (I’m talking a year) the children from a nearby highschool appear to be 90% immigrants.

My concern is how rapidly this has occurred. Yet we have a major skills shortage. So I am wondering who they are bringing in?

I get that a lot of our nurses are from Africa and India and hairdressers from Ireland (and they are ALL absolutely brilliant! - the skill level is far superior to Australian trained nurses). But we have a major skills shortage in the building sector meaning we don’t have the housing (or the infrastructure) to accommodate additional people.

We have entire suburbs where immigrants tend to buy (and often the public schools there perform incredibly well).

But we have had rapid immigration from countries where the people do not assimilate and who have dangerous views on women. Young girls (primary school age) have been openly leered at in the streets and sexual assaults on women are committed by some of these men who think that women are there to please them.

That’s all I have to say.

I’m happy to discuss; but I would like to state that this is my very small city.

nomas · 04/10/2025 13:52

EasternStandard · 04/10/2025 13:50

So you’re moving on from 2.5m at least, which was incorrect.

No need for mnhq to step in as some pp have asked for re the op. Numbers can be discussed without deletion.

So you’re sticking to your lie of 11m. Quelle surprise!

BadWoIf · 04/10/2025 13:51

newbluesofa · 04/10/2025 13:20

Well yes, as long as we have sufficient infrastructure in place (which we currently don't) then why not? If we 'run out of room' that would mean we can't provide sufficient infrastructure so then would need to reduce immigration. If we had sufficient infrastructure then what would be the reason to reduce immigration? You sound very panicked here whats going on?

What a picture of utopia you paint!

EasternStandard · 04/10/2025 13:50

nomas · 04/10/2025 13:34

I had posted 2.5m on a different thread related to 2012 to 2021.

Someone else posted a chart, which shows 6.6m between 2000-2025.

Not sure where you got 8m from.

So you’re moving on from 2.5m at least, which was incorrect.

No need for mnhq to step in as some pp have asked for re the op. Numbers can be discussed without deletion.

Uggbootsforever · 04/10/2025 13:49

England is still mostly green. Cities are very busy but if you fly over the country it's mostly green.

Oh, that’s ok then - if you can spot a few fields from an aeroplane then obviously we can’t have food insecurity and pollution. All good man.

OP posts:
nomas · 04/10/2025 13:49

Jade3450 · 04/10/2025 13:43

Gosh I can’t believe you’re still trying to make out you’re right, even though your 2.5m was completely and utterly fabricated.

11 million might not be quite the full picture, but as a pp mentioned, it’s frustratingly (and suspiciously) difficult to get the actual numbers. Whether it’s 7, 8 or 11 million, it’s still a huge amount. And this is only legal and/or documented immigrants remember, not people who go under the radar.

What’s really concerning is your attempt to totally derail the thread by niggling about numbers and gaslighting people into thinking the OP and others are racist misinformants when it’s you doing the misinforming.

What is your agenda I wonder?

I’ve already explained that the figure of 2.5m was taken from a different thread and I posted the google data from that thread.

At least I’m willing to re-look at data.

You just blindly kept expecting us to believe your completely and utterly fabricated number of 11m. On what planet is 6.6m close to 11m?

The fact that you think that calling out people on their lies that almost DOUBLES the actual net migration figure is ‘niggling’ shows your true agenda.

And who did I call racist? Or is that another of your complete and utter fabrications?

Bumblebee72 · 04/10/2025 13:46

Jade3450 · 04/10/2025 13:43

Gosh I can’t believe you’re still trying to make out you’re right, even though your 2.5m was completely and utterly fabricated.

11 million might not be quite the full picture, but as a pp mentioned, it’s frustratingly (and suspiciously) difficult to get the actual numbers. Whether it’s 7, 8 or 11 million, it’s still a huge amount. And this is only legal and/or documented immigrants remember, not people who go under the radar.

What’s really concerning is your attempt to totally derail the thread by niggling about numbers and gaslighting people into thinking the OP and others are racist misinformants when it’s you doing the misinforming.

What is your agenda I wonder?

It wasn't fabricated. It was the correct data but fundamentally misinterpreted.

newbluesofa · 04/10/2025 13:45

TheHillOfDreams · 04/10/2025 13:32

What counts as "running out of room"?
The entire UK concreted over?

It's interesting to consider where the tipping point is. Being unable to be self-sufficient growing food seems an important metric, but one we passed a long time ago!

So at what point is it too much? Hopefully long before there are no green spaces left.

Well this is where the fearmongering comes into it, implying that we'll have to concrete over the whole country to accommodate 11 million immigrants

England is still mostly green. Cities are very busy but if you fly over the country it's mostly green. I'm not saying we should build over it, we need it for food production, but I see people spread this image of a concrete country and it's just wrong.

I don't know what would be the measure of 'running out of room'. It's all a theoretical argument though as I stated as long as we have appropriate infrastructure it's ok, but we don't because the government do not care to build it. That is the real issue though - immigration wouldn't be such a problem if the government would actually manage the country properly!

suburburban · 04/10/2025 13:45

whoamI00 · 04/10/2025 13:16

Don’t you think that an increased population without immigration would have a similar impact on pollution, wildlife habitats, and other environmental issues?

No

Jade3450 · 04/10/2025 13:44

newbluesofa · 04/10/2025 13:40

I have reported it for misinformation and I think others have as well, I think MN should have taken it down by now. There's enough fearmongering and misinformation going on already

But it’s not completely wrong, and in fact nearer the truth than some of the other posts on the thread.

OP and others have provided plenty of links.

Jade3450 · 04/10/2025 13:43

nomas · 04/10/2025 13:34

I had posted 2.5m on a different thread related to 2012 to 2021.

Someone else posted a chart, which shows 6.6m between 2000-2025.

Not sure where you got 8m from.

Gosh I can’t believe you’re still trying to make out you’re right, even though your 2.5m was completely and utterly fabricated.

11 million might not be quite the full picture, but as a pp mentioned, it’s frustratingly (and suspiciously) difficult to get the actual numbers. Whether it’s 7, 8 or 11 million, it’s still a huge amount. And this is only legal and/or documented immigrants remember, not people who go under the radar.

What’s really concerning is your attempt to totally derail the thread by niggling about numbers and gaslighting people into thinking the OP and others are racist misinformants when it’s you doing the misinforming.

What is your agenda I wonder?

newbluesofa · 04/10/2025 13:40

Myrtletown · 04/10/2025 13:15

I really think @Mumsnet should monitor and edit posts such as this. The title is blatant misinformation with no stat to back it up. It’s fine if op wants to discuss immigration and how she’s come to this (imagined) number but it’s NOT fine to title a thread with misinformation and fake news, as some will just see that and take it as fact.

MN has a responsibility here as do all major internet sites and companies.

I have reported it for misinformation and I think others have as well, I think MN should have taken it down by now. There's enough fearmongering and misinformation going on already

IceBrownie · 04/10/2025 13:40

Quoting:

Who Really Costs Britain?

Every time the asylum debate comes up someone shares a meme saying asylum hotels are bankrupting the country. The figure usually quoted is £45 per year. It looks simple but it hides the truth. When you look at the actual numbers, asylum is one of the smallest costs in Britain. The real drains on our money are elsewhere.

The Home Office spent £3.1 billion on hotels for asylum seekers in 2023–24. That works out at £46 per person in the UK or about £86 per taxpayer. If you add all asylum support the total rises to £4.7 billion. That is £70 per person or about £130 per taxpayer.

Benefit fraud and error cost £9.5 billion in 2023–24. That is £142 per person or about £260 per taxpayer. Much of this is not fraud but mistakes or official error. Some is recovered later.

The tax gap which means avoidance, evasion, non-payment and error was £46.8 billion. That is £699 per person or about £1,300 per taxpayer.

Bank bailouts and corporate subsidies are another hidden cost. They add up to £50–60 billion a year. That is £750–£900 per person or about £1,600 per taxpayer.

Military operations overseas cost between £5–15 billion each year. That is £75–£225 per person or about £150–£400 per taxpayer.

Foreign criminals in UK prisons cost around £600 million per year. That is £9 per person or about £20 per taxpayer. This does not include court costs or deportation costs.

Financial crime enforcement costs £1–2 billion per year. That is £15–£30 per person or about £30–£60 per taxpayer. The real cost of financial crime is far higher.

Billionaires who are not taxed on their wealth and big companies that use loopholes cost Britain another £15–25 billion every year. That is £225–£375 per person or about £500–£830 per taxpayer.

HS2 has already cost about £27 billion. That is £403 per person or about £900 per taxpayer so far. If it reaches £80 billion the final bill will be £1,190 per person or over £2,300 per taxpayer.

The bailout of energy companies and support for bills during the crisis has cost £78 billion over two years. That is nearly £600 per person per year or about £1,200 per taxpayer. The collapse of Bulb alone added another £3 billion which is £45 per person or about £90 per taxpayer. Fossil fuel subsidies add around £17.5 billion a year. That is £260 per person or about £550 per taxpayer.

The Ministry of Justice and police budgets together cost over £30 billion a year. That is £450 per person or about £830 per taxpayer. A huge share of that goes on petty crimes that clog up courts and prisons at high cost to the public.

So let’s put this side by side.
Asylum seekers: £46–£70 per person
Benefit fraud and error: £142 per person
Tax avoidance and evasion: £699 per person
Bank bailouts and subsidies: £750–£900 per person
Military overseas ops: £75–£225 per person
Foreign criminals in prison: £9 per person
Financial crime enforcement: £15–£30 per person
Billionaire and corporate loopholes: £225–£375 per person
HS2: £403 so far and possibly £1,190 each
Energy bailouts and subsidies: £600–£850 per person each year
Criminal justice system: £450 per person

It is obvious what costs Britain the most. Asylum seekers are not even close. The idea that they are draining the country falls apart the moment you see the numbers. The biggest costs come from corporate bailouts, billionaire tax reliefs, tax avoidance, subsidies, failed megaprojects and the justice system itself.

So the next time someone waves a meme about asylum hotels remember the truth. You are paying more for failed energy companies, HS2, bank bailouts, corporate subsidies and tax avoidance than you will ever pay for asylum seekers. If you want to save money start at the top not the bottom.

Bumblebee72 · 04/10/2025 13:39

nomas · 04/10/2025 13:34

I had posted 2.5m on a different thread related to 2012 to 2021.

Someone else posted a chart, which shows 6.6m between 2000-2025.

Not sure where you got 8m from.

So 7-8 is a big fat lie but you now accept 6.6m is ok but posted 2.5 anyway to obfuscate and said then repeated claimed it was closer to 6.6 you know accept?

Do you understand how numbers work?

ForCraftyWriter · 04/10/2025 13:35

I completely agree.

The migrant crossings on boats are a drop in the ocean compared with the actual net migration figures. But it suits Farage/Tommy Robinson etc to bang the drums about “illegal migrants” and inflame hatred and tensions.

The much bigger and more pressing issue is high levels of net immigration and whether this has an overall net benefit or harm for the country.
I would assume net harm but without figures and facts I recognise that’s just my perception.

Interesting that levels are I think lower under labour government than conservative, but now’s the time the right wing supporters are choosing to make a fuss about it.

nomas · 04/10/2025 13:34

Bumblebee72 · 04/10/2025 13:29

My post from before: "Even in your own post you state the increase in 9 years from 2012 to 2021 was 2.5m. Even a simple extrapolation of that period support net immigration over the period from 2000 to 2025 would near to 6m, and we know there was a spike in 2022/2023."

So you stand by the net immigration from 2000-2012 was zero and the net mitigation from 2022 to 2025 was zero?

Edited

I had posted 2.5m on a different thread related to 2012 to 2021.

Someone else posted a chart, which shows 6.6m between 2000-2025.

Not sure where you got 8m from.

Bumblebee72 · 04/10/2025 13:34

TheHillOfDreams · 04/10/2025 13:32

What counts as "running out of room"?
The entire UK concreted over?

It's interesting to consider where the tipping point is. Being unable to be self-sufficient growing food seems an important metric, but one we passed a long time ago!

So at what point is it too much? Hopefully long before there are no green spaces left.

We could build a second tier of council housing on stilts on top of the current tier of council housing. That could double the amount of social housing available!

TheHillOfDreams · 04/10/2025 13:32

newbluesofa · 04/10/2025 13:20

Well yes, as long as we have sufficient infrastructure in place (which we currently don't) then why not? If we 'run out of room' that would mean we can't provide sufficient infrastructure so then would need to reduce immigration. If we had sufficient infrastructure then what would be the reason to reduce immigration? You sound very panicked here whats going on?

What counts as "running out of room"?
The entire UK concreted over?

It's interesting to consider where the tipping point is. Being unable to be self-sufficient growing food seems an important metric, but one we passed a long time ago!

So at what point is it too much? Hopefully long before there are no green spaces left.

Bumblebee72 · 04/10/2025 13:29

nomas · 04/10/2025 13:25

But it isn’t.

My post from before: "Even in your own post you state the increase in 9 years from 2012 to 2021 was 2.5m. Even a simple extrapolation of that period support net immigration over the period from 2000 to 2025 would near to 6m, and we know there was a spike in 2022/2023."

So you stand by the net immigration from 2000-2012 was zero and the net mitigation from 2022 to 2025 was zero?

nomas · 04/10/2025 13:25

EasternStandard · 04/10/2025 13:24

I said the post you’re replying to. Ie @Bumblebee72figure was closer than yours

But it isn’t.

nomas · 04/10/2025 13:25

Repeated post, deleted.

EasternStandard · 04/10/2025 13:24

nomas · 04/10/2025 13:24

You’re wrong that OP’s number is closer to correct.

I said the post you’re replying to. Ie @Bumblebee72figure was closer than yours

nomas · 04/10/2025 13:24

EasternStandard · 04/10/2025 13:19

It’s wrong

You’re wrong that OP’s number is closer to correct.

Swipe left for the next trending thread