Changes to immigration rules announced by Starmer

Starmer’s ease at 180 degrees from dog whistle to strangers does leave him open to attack

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14705013/crimes-Britain-criminals-Starmer-deportation.html#

I know mn is more Labour so there’s a lot of he’s great no matter what. It’ll be interesting to see how this backlash affects polls.

Always helps to read the post doesn't it?

which is why i said this...

All the above ignores the fact that we should want caring empathetic people looking after our elderly, someone who comes here having previously done the work or wants to do it, is more likely to be such a person

Personally, i wouldn't want my Dad cared for by someone who hasn't worked for years, possibly has all or some MH issues, drug abuse, limited education, hates their job and their clients but has been forced to work in 'care.

The Indian CW who look after my neighbour are lovely, she had to repeated visits by the Crisis team, staffed by fully trained OTs, Nurses, Physios before the "Foreigners" came here to look after her, no British people could be found.

And can vet.

Boriswave is in the dictionary now and has been used in a Times editorial. Quite clever spin by labour to pin blame on him, in case he tries to make a comeback

At least we know who they are.

If it's a terrible job, why do you think a moderate pay increase will make much difference to local recruitment?
Realistically, businesses rarely voluntarily hurt their bottom line, so more likely standards will fall and costs will go up for service users and the taxpayer.

The wages are NMW yet the care homes are raking in enormous profits. The owners are making a mint. There is plenty of flex for them to make a more moderate profit but pay their workers more, then they would have to go to extraordinary lengths to recruit only from groups of people far away who don't know what a terrible job it is.

It's the tens of thousands a year breaking into the country in boats and getting kept at our expense.

That's a drop in the ocean a lot just get on a plane and never go home.

@bombastixagree with this. It’s also the same with Brexit - the government could have sent home people who didn’t contribute because freedom of movement is not actually freedom of settlement whatever happens it is freedom to work. And incorporated elements of contribution into some of our welfare systems. But they didn’t.

@simonjt@swimsong
yes I understand that. But it isn’t real growth, because it doesn’t measure the costs down the line, so it doesn’t actually raise GDP per capita. The government currently uses a series of very broken calculations on “growth” as do most of the academics who support the immigration contributor thesis. Because they assume a person who uses almost no services and goes back home. To be blunt, you could contribute a few thousand a year to GDP by turning up with £20k in your pocket, living with relatives and not working at all, provided that the treasury doesn’t cost in the expenses properly and just looks at a four year period. Which means s what they do. This is not to say that lots of immigrants don’t contribute or contribute to GDP per capita, but our system is so lax that the average immigrant doesn’t make the country wealthier. 2.5bn is actuslly a pretty small return for letting nearly 1m people recently and at least 500k for a long time into the country.

and of course it is very helpful for university funding!

and of course it is the illegal migration that is the issue
the 17 year old men

it is the care homes that are most concerning, very short sighted, even in the nhs we get nurses from abroad, let alone care homes where there is less pay

It isn’t taxation, its growth in GDP.

The 2.5 billion is GDP growth, not the sum of the tax & NI they pay in.

It’s all over Twitter and the dark corners of the web, I’m told… Along with the use of the word “import” when it comes to people…Which as a foreigner I find really offensive. Have to step away from this thread, too many falsehoods

Maybe. I suppose that frustration will help Reform. Especially now there’s the ok to discuss how bad it is.

Labour can’t rely on harking back to the last lot.

The point is that this stuff is not rocket science. You can cap visas, set rules for settlement routes, introduce capital and income requirements, criminal deportation, academic qualifications…

it’s just we didn’t actually do it. We just had a government that said it would get tough really soon. I mean who can take that seriously.

This white paper has a few things in it which could have happened at any time in the last five years. Some of them could have happened a decade ago.

We need it now though not in 4 years. This white paper doesn't even touch the sides of what's needed after destructive immifration policies of the last 20 years

@bombastix I totally agree - much much pickier is what people want

Why not? You’ve got supporters on the thread already. Reform will have an easy sell.

@Portakalkedi - those are all good points re regulation of migration but we’ve had 14 years of laissez faire migration policy and apparently saying you need actual criteria and be useful is unfair. Obviously it’s reasonable; if Brexit means anything then it means you can make actual rules.

I think net zero should be the aim. Have heavy restrictions for 3-5 years on people coming in while we're still reeling from the Boris Wave. Focus on the 8 million inactive adults of working age.

We also have to do something about the boats.