To be annoyed that immigration is the main issue for most people in EU debate?

[susanketty]

Whether you are 'in' or 'out', I'm getting tired of immigration being the main issue for people - sure, it will have an impact, but brexit is not going to solve any problems with immigration that people perceive, and immigration fears does not seem to be to me a good enough reason to vote out. And voting in is not going to necessarily lead to a rush of immigrants.

We are not in the Schengen area, we have border control, and EU immigrants make a net contribution to our economy. Brexiteers often say they would like a Norway-esque agreement, which seems to me like all the problems (i.e., free movement of people) with none of the advantages other than being in the trade area (which we are already).

I just think there is more to the debate than immigration and it seems to me like it's been pushed to the front of the agenda to push more people to vote out due to fear.

Ah Corbyn who has spent decades proclaiming he is out - has now turned in.

Do you believe that? Has he been out endlessly passionately campaigning?

Of course he is out! He is a man of steadfast principle but now he is leader of the opposition and he has had to say he is in.

Whirlwind "The idea we'd get a much better deal than other countries who aren't in the EU is really bizarre though. Why would that be the case? I haven't seen a single convincing reason why that would be."

Have you seen items in the shops from Vietnam, Cambodia, Israel, Sri Lanka, Africa. EU/UK does not have trading agreements with any of these countries!

We do not need a trade agreement with the rest of the world. We will for USA and the EU, but the world is our oyster. Did you know that currently EU has only 2 trade agreements under its belt?

USA is desperate for us to remain because of TTIP. There are rich pickings to be made from our various social services incl the NHS.

*There is major house building where I am , and huge protests about building on various types of land! Greenbelt, brown whatever you name it! Every week there are people with placards protesting!

So op, we push internally for more green belt, childrens playing fields to be eaten up, then what?

Where would you like it to end? Do you want any green space here?*

Of course I am not arguing for no green space, and that is clearly not what I proposed. I do think that the green belt is an overrated idea, but this is not really the point. We do need more house building, we don't need the right to buy etc, we do need smarter housing policies, but I don't think this should be rolled into immigration. Of course immigration is a factor is demand for housing, but there are other issues causing the lack of supply too.

susanketty I salute your efforts at being reasonable. It is highly commendable. I fear, however, those efforts are doomed.

I do think that the green belt is an overrated idea, but this is not really the point

Its very much the point, many people love our open spaces and open green spaces have a postive effect on our mental health and our air and goodness knows - its all obvious.

But you think they are over rated? I guess you wont be affected by the endless building on them then. So your lucky.

if 600,00 as a cautious estimate of people come to live here, where do you think they will live?

If we remain in the UK it will be endless building campaign that will never ever ever stop. Because immigration wont stop.

It's a perfectly fair question though - how much is enough/too much? In terms of house building, and indirectly therefore immigration - everyone needs somewhere to live.

Students for Britain have produced this very useful piece of info.

twitter.com/uniforbritain/status/733364429602033664/photo/1

I'm with TheCat

Especially after shakeeba tried to strawman me, we were talking about immigration not trade...

By the way, for those who ask why the UK should be any different - we do have high population density by EU standards, especially in England, and we are experiencing (whatever you think of it) a high level of EU immigration.

The Brexit side don't want zero immigration, they want controlled immigration. Invite those with the required skills.

Today's news story about the UK population potentially increasing by 5 million by 2030 scares me. Where will all the new houses be built? Where will the power stations be built - nuclear, coal, gas - will fracking licences be issued everywhere? Wind turbines marching across the landscape? Tidal boom across the Severn, along with the destruction of the estuary ecosystem? New reservoirs will mean valleys being flooded. New sewage farms and landfill - that'll be our valuable farmland, woodland and beauty spots destroyed, along with native habitats and species. If you objected to HS2, you'll be needed again to object to HS3 through to HS10 cutting through the countryside. New airports, new roads, the list goes on.

Those who are voting out, due to immigration concerns need to consider what good will we will receive from the French (once we are out).

At the moment, our border is at Calais. If the Frence decide not to allow us this in the future, our border will be Dover. Watch the jungle exist in Kent then.

For me, I would be more worried about the Tories slashing all the employment rights that the EU has enabled us to have over the years.

Welsh and Scottish voters need to carefully consider their choices, as they receive far more from the EU than they put in.

In my area, a large building wll be torn down and housing for the incoming built. We are told all the time, by all parties, that we are not building enough houses. For whom, though? The UK is not obliged to build for immigrants/migrants/refugees while British people rot on the waiting list or in poor private rentals.

This new building project near me will be given to the recently-arrived, with maybe two or three units going to token Brits. It's an absolute scandal.

With reference to green belts, I think that green spaces are needed, and important, but do we really need 'belts' that pushes all development into a defined area and don't allow cities/towns etc to naturally grow? This is part of the reason why house prices are so high. I think around 10-15% of Britain is a green belt. Housing development represents a drop of that, and why can't housing development also be considerate to green spaces and build these into housing areas? Surely people would enjoy them more in that way then just having huge unused green areas that activists try to protect at all costs then go home and complain about the lack of housing and house prices. I am not saying that the UK should be one huge housing estate, but is the green belt and restrictive housing policy really the best idea?

There was a man in the audience of QT last night. He said he was on the board of an NHS Trust as a lay member, I think. He is a Remainer and said that the huge debt that NHS is in has nothing to do with immigration!

This is a case of Emperor's new clothes. I have worked in the NHS and it is known by everyone - medical and administrative - that the increase in patients is to do with immigration, both EU and non-EU. It's to do with numbers, and the numbers have come from overseas. The birth rate of the British is low and has been for two decades. The maternity wing of my local is choc-a-bloc with EE women having their first or second children, as well as non-EU.

There is nothing mystical about why NHS is in the red, despite all the 'clever' reasons trotted out by politicians and those whose careers depend on being liars.

EU immigrants do not automatically go to the top of housing waiting lists -- council's have to give reasonable preference to applicants, and the applicants need to be eligible (this usually means living in the area for about 2-5 years, having 'worker status' etc).

At the moment, our border is at Calais. If the Frence decide not to allow us this in the future, our border will be Dover. Watch the jungle exist in Kent then.

Er...no. the jungle exists because France allows it to because they really want the people there to get their wish to travel to the UK so they are no longer a French problem. The French know those people are in France illegally, but they are trying to turn a blind eye. If the border moves, there won't be a jungle in Kent, because those people will either manage to gain entry (not sure why moving the border to our side makes that any more likely), or will remain stuck in France.

France wants us to stay in the EU and join schengen so they can send us everyone from the jungle.

YABU but, I totally agree with you

For me, I would be more worried about the Tories slashing all the employment rights that the EU has enabled us to have over the years.

And yet, our equal pay legislation pre-dates our membership, our maternity leave is more generous than that required by the EU.

Also, it's a slippery slope relying on the EU to overule your own government to get what you want - it is fine when the EU is giving you thkngs you want - but what about when they don't ? In a way, this argument about workers rights is making the case for why the EU is anti-democratic.

I think that most of the Brexit crowd are deluded and often ill-informed Really? Well, never mind, this country is a democracy and people are free to vote however they wish, and for whatever reason.

(By the way - can one be both deluded and well-informed?)

The people in Calais are living in deplorable conditions,but it is a battle of wills. None of them are eligible for asylum into UK - and they know it. They could have claimed it in France but there too they would be judged ineligible. It is a war of attrition with our government.

If the border is moved to Dover it will be very difficult of course, because I suspect the French will not be too dutiful in preventing lorry-hopping or indeed having them walk through the tunnel to reach the UK. We can do one of two things (i) pay the French to continue vigilance, or (ii) we return immediately, by vehicle, everyone found in lorries in Dover. No case to be heard, nothing. If you did not claim asylum in France, and before France, then we are not considering anything from you.

I do think that the green belt is an overrated idea
1 in 3 mouthfuls of food comes from bees.
If there's no open land, there's no bees. No bees no food.
Wildlife needs interconnecting corridors to exist. That's the reason we need to protect greenbelt, there's no point housing people who we can't feed

If we Brexit, no employment rights will be slashed, no gay rights will be affected.

I think someone here has already said that the EU really does not want us to Brexit, because France & Germany would have to stump up most of the contributions.

Have you seen inside the EU Parliament? It is like a city under roof. Everything is provided for the MEPs, commisioners and judges. There are rows of expensive retail outlets, salons, restaurants - everything.

Who said Green Belt was overrated? We need more green belt. Interestingly, the govt is granting permission to build on green belt yet there are loads of brownfield sites that could be used.

If you can recall any futuristic film you have seen can you remember how it looks. Every square foot of space is taken up with buildings; there are no parks, no lakes, no birds, insects, small wild animals, no domestic pets either. That is the future if we keep building and building for people who have not even contributed a penny to this country.

If there's no open land, there's no bees. No bees no food. You are right, Baboon.

We will be like China who has killed its bees with pesticide and the over-use of chemicals in manufacturing. We will all be called on to become tree-shakers like the Chinese- assuming there are any fruit trees left to pollinate.

*Who said Green Belt was overrated? We need more green belt. Interestingly, the govt is granting permission to build on green belt yet there are loads of brownfield sites that could be used.

If you can recall any futuristic film you have seen can you remember how it looks. Every square foot of space is taken up with buildings; there are no parks, no lakes, no birds, insects, small wild animals, no domestic pets either. That is the future if we keep building and building for people who have not even contributed a penny to this country.*

As usual, more slippery slope arguments, seems to be common on this forum. I am not arguing for every square foot to be built upon. I am not arguing for no wildlife. I am not arguing for building and building for people who have not even contributed a penny to this country (a typical Brexit view).

Brownfield sites can be used too, but they are usually more expensive. I am arguing for a more contemporary way of protecting green space than green belts, which often mean just more commuter towns (which, because they are so far away, require even more infrastructure, more roads, more trains etc). We are far from a concrete country (I think only around 10-15% of land is built on), but I think we need some more progressive policies to ease growing housing demand.