Has immigration enriched the UK through greater cultural and culinary diversity?

[HonestFox]

When it has bought so many different cultures and food into the U.K. so why is there so much hatred towards it?

It's simply a question of numbers. The UK population has risen by over 10 million (equivalent of London plus Birmingham) in the last 25 years.

At the same time infrastructure hasn't kept pace. But to point this out will inevitably lead to accusations of racism when it has absolutely nothing to do with skin colour. The same result would occur if all ten million were white or brown or blue.

Regarding your point on the benefits of cultural diversity, if you take for example China, Japan or even Mexico none of them are particularly culturally diverse - but all of them seem to be doing just fine without diversity.

As a country we have needed and benefitted from immigration.

However immigrants , like local populations, are not just ‘good’. So as well an immigrants who have made a positive contribution there will be selfish , dangerous and cruel immigrants. Which will mean of course that there are negative aspects of immigration.

immigrants are just as flawed as the rest of us. So if we need immigration - we need to put up with flawed immigrants (flawed people just like the folk who already live here)

No

I think you’ve put your finger on most of the problem there; infrastructure hasn’t kept pace.

Let’s have houses/schools/GP surgeries/new reservoirs/grid connections/railway lines. I don’t think it’s racist to point out that we are crap at building anything and infrastructure/services are stretched.

Not all immigrants are equal.

For me it's the scale of immigration that's the problem. My home town has changed beyond recognition over the last 10 years so that I almost feel like a stranger in the place I grew up. Eventually those immigrants will assimilate and certainly their children will but it will take decades.

Absolutely! I have lived in monocultured towns and very diverse cities and much prefer the diverse areas. So much good food, interesting view points, open mindedness.
Our street is hugely diverse and love seeing all the different traditions. My kids have friends of many different faiths and none it has opened them to treating difference with respect.
Most of my mums carers are non British by birth, as are loads of the people I work with in a charity.

Mexico is a country with its native population almost entirely wiped out by immigrants!
China has taken over another country entirely for over 50 years.

Yes

This sounds like an essay question.

Immigration? Wot - like when we joined the Common Market?

Because I cannot tell you how unutterably drab Britain was before we consciously coupled with Europe and got decent coffee and warm duvets. England improved immeasurably when all those Europeans descended on us …

Yes.

But mass immigration from third world countries has also resulted in social divisions, ghettoisation of cities (eg Leicester, Bradford) and the introduction to the U.K. of backward, misogynistic & homophobic religious, social & cultural beliefs & practices. It has increased pressure on public services & housing. It has undermined the wages & conditions of working class British people while benefiting corporations & capitalists who get rich by exploiting limitless cheap migrant labour.

Overall, the downsides & tradeoffs greatly outweigh the benefits.

We have issues in areas which have gentrified with white British people moving in to replace white British people.

Which illustrates the underlying problem well.

In these cases it's a mobile affluent middle class which is uprooting a working class that has been connected to the area for generations.

It is about displacement of the working class in some areas and an abandonment of other working class in others. When you look at key words these themes pop up to do with abandonment by the establishment and the loss of community.

Agree I think the UK has .45 GP’s per 1000 people and France have 1.45 . Understand they have a very different health system to the UK but this is very concerning. We are stretched to our limits and more Immigration will not improve our Country until infrastructure to support this receives increased investment. Too many Governments have completely taken their eye their off the ball for too long.

@1dayatatime You need to do some reading on the history of China and Mexico. It’s incorrect that they are not ethnically diverse.

The issue isn't just people coming in to the UK. Immigration is going to be extremely important to us in the near future with a significantly declining birth rate combined with increasing longevity and people having children much later.

There's serious questions that need to be asked around government spending.

Most people who are concerned about Immigration are generally concerned about access to public services like healthcare, affordable housing etc. But we are in a position where we are struggling in these areas because of very intentional, historic and sustained government cuts with a view to lining the pockets of the wealthy, while encouraging privatisation of services. The UK government has not been working for the average citizens wellbeing for a long, long time and covid shone a massive spotlight on that when those services were put under sudden pressure and couldn't cope.

It's no surprise that the government's response was then to start encouraging media outlets to use incorrect terminology like "illegal Immigration " when talking about asylum seekers and scare mongering. It's a very classic red herring tactic. We don't need to be looking at newcoming communities for solution, we need to be demanding much better from our government and being more careful in who we vote for.

There are things the government could do such as caps on rent, caps on the number of properties people are able to own for personal use. Particularly in areas where people are being priced out altogether when in low income jobs. A higher prioritisation of supporting the public health system and the charity system which scaffolds it. Possibly at this point a partial privatisation of the NHS used means testing in order to generate more funds.

Of course it's important that we have some form of regulation on our borders, but it is perfectly legal to arrive at a country and make an application for asylum. It's a very basic human right and I certainly want nothing to do with a government that's happy to under cut human rights. What needs to be targeted is human trafficking, but without making victims of trafficking the example.

"Resulted in social divisions, ghettoisation of cities (eg Leicester, Bradford) and the introduction to the U.K. of backward, misogynistic & homophobic religious, social & cultural beliefs & practices"

We have ALL of those issues without Immigration.

Besides, most of the issues you mention while relating to Immigration are as a result of poor home office systems - specifically not allowing people to work while waiting on a claim for asylum to process. Integration doesn't happen when people can't work, can't practice speaking English or make connections with other people as easily. If people were alert allowed to work then they'd be paying into our economy via taxes and spending.

Also I work with lots of asylum seekers and the vast majority I've worked with have left their country of origin to escape the regimes and extremism you are attaching to them. Many with a view to create safe passage for female relatives as they are so much more vulnerable where they are.

I think you’ve put your finger on most of the problem there; infrastructure hasn’t kept pace

What would our healthcare infrastructure look like without immigrants?

This is it ^non existent...

People give off as well about pressure on jobs etc but the working immigrants I know are all either in skilled professions upholding the likes of the NHS or they're well educated people doing jobs no one here wants to do because their qualifications aren't transferable.

If someone has come here having secured a skilled role, they're paying huge amounts for a working visa and have no access to public funds. So they are paying more into our economy than they are taking out of it. This is the vast majority of Immigration.

Then you have asylum seekers who would love to be working but can't for god knows what reason for the years it takes for the home office to approve them. They're either declined- no recourses to public funds. Or approved because there has been clear evidence that their life would be in significant and immediate danger were they to be deported. I don't know a single person who falls into this category who didn't immediately take on employment as soon as they possibly could. Again, no interest in relying on public funds and paying tax.

So when we get down to it, the number of immigrants that are not contributing is either because the government is refusing to allow them to (not their fault) or they've absconded or outstayed a visa. And that's a very small percentage. Immigration is not the issue it's government policy. Any government official who uses the phrase "illegal immigrant" or "illegal immigration" is working to a very clear self serving agenda particularly when referencing small boats.

There is an infrastructure problem and, I'd suggest, a social policy problem. England - not the UK - has a high population density of approx 450 people per square km. That's more than Japan, less than the Netherlands.

While we have many underpopulated regions, these tend to be poorly connected to London and the rest of the UK (I live in one). Their populations are older and their economies declining.

These are, rightly, being targeted for new housing - against vigorous protest - but there's insufficient provision of medical services, schools, shops, social hubs and transport. There are no jobs, which is why younger people have been moving away for decades, and the lack of economic activity leaves regional authorities too poor to undertake increased service provision. Slow road and rail links discourage new enterprise, so there won't be new jobs for the new people.

This could all be sorted with centrally planned and funded policies. But we have become wary of government intervention. It'd be very hard to get the country's co-operation. Additionally, increased home ownership and other changes hamper social management. Back in the mid-20th century, the government (both parties) quietly operated housing policies designed to ensure that areas would be mixed. If they could even do that now without being hung out for discrimination, there isn't enough social housing to have a general effect.

I agree with comments above about shambolic immigration and asylum policies. I'm saying numbers and infrastructure are a problem, too, and this is (broadly) why.

No.

Are you genuinely suggesting that Britain wasn't homophobic or misogynistic prior to immigration? Get a grip and inform yourself. People were imprisoned for being gay, and a man could rape his wife until the 90s. Changes to our attitudes towards women and gay people have only changed relatively recently. Additionally, Farage has said that he wants to end gay marriage, so let's not pretend that those who "care" about immigration give a toss about LGB people.

Up to a point, yes. We're well past that point of enrichment now though.

You’re comparing someone wanting to end gay marriage (presumably in favour of civil partnerships) to views like gay people are an abomination and should be executed? Because that’s the difference we’re talking about here. We used to have anti-gay laws but have moved on.

If you think marital rape etc. Is bad then it’s a bit odd to defend it as long as it’s from a culture other than English. Next you’ll be telling us we used to have forced child marriage so really we’d be hypocrites to have an issue with these things.

I’m a biracial person who grew up in a very diverse part of London. Diversity can be great but can we do better please, than defending had things Vegas if ‘we used to do it too’

No. For many reasons, of which many of the big ones are structural – erosion of the common culture, constant downward pressure on wages (for the working classes only, naturally), the dishonesty in addressing the consequences.

But the one that annoys me the most is the idea that it has made us a more interesting place. That’s not how it works! A country is interesting when it’s a distilled essence of itself, and mutates from there into weird and charming subcultures which you simply couldn’t find in other places. It becomes considerably less interesting if it gets blanded out with little versions of the same things done much better in other countries.