To think that net immigration…

[Libertass]

Of 745,000 people a year isn’t what the 17 million people who voted for Brexit in 2016 thought they were voting for?

YABU = Yes, this is what Leave supporters voted for.

YANBI = No, they didn’t vote for this.

jgw1
I assume you are not familiar with the concept of collective cabinet responsibility?

I am - Keir Starmer should take full responsibility for but Jeremy Corbyn.

Presumably that means Badenoch, Cleverly, Braverman, Mordaunt, Berry, Clarke, Rees Mogg all take full responsibility for Truss and Johnson.

Perhaps - but none of the people you listed are in the running to be prime minister next year. I have no regrets that Boris Johnson became prime minister - we're you hoping for Jeremy Corbyn instead?

Are you sure none of them are hoping to lead their party?

I expect all of them would prefer to be in government next year rather than leading the opposition.

However, in my view, it is the incompetence and ideological stance of our current government that is the main problem here, and not net migration per se

Absolutely!
They don't seem to have any coherent policies, Cleverly now say "Rwanda isn't the be all and end all in regard to stopping small boats"

But statements from the Sunak/Braverman say the exact opposite.

Something is seriously wrong with migration at the moment, we have huge skills shortages, yet record high migration, 3x higher than in 2010.

Wales and Scotland aren't separate countries, they couldn't for example, introduce a sugar tax as people would just drive to England, they'd need to become independent countries, with their own border/custom controls, which i assume you re not in favour off?

I sometimes wonder whether people use the Wales Scot argument just to rubbish the opposition, either that or they don't realise we are still the United Kingdom.

Actually Wales have introduced some food measures that do not align, I doubt people will drive that far anyway.

Scotland has higher taxes generally

Looking at stats they are more unhealthy, more obese, and with higher per head funding.

Sometimes I wonder if people ignore the reality because it doesn’t fit their version of the opposition will be so wonderful

Given that funding in Wales and Scotland is linked to that in England by the Barnett formula, the devolved governments have little they can do if the government in Westminister decides as it has done consistently over the past 13 years to cut spending on public services.

Or a wall, maybe, American style.

Funding is higher per had. Sadly it doesn’t help with health enough. Still higher obesity

Hopefully we won’t emulate after next GE

Oh yeh that’s it that’s why they’re struggling more with health, no wall

Come on, at least come up with your own original slurs pls!!! :)

Point here is that without its own independent border immigration training taxation and industrial strategies (all then effect its public health policies) Wales just isn't an independent country, nothing to do with the opposition, simple fact.

Wales is a fairly small country, people in Cardiff/Newport are very close to Bristol, significant tax differences on eg food would lead people to travel and/or a black market, common sense really.

I doubt very much Labour will do much more on public health, there is no longer the money, the resolution foundation talked about how the Tories NI cuts & inflation will lead to huge real terms cuts in departmental funding, whoever gets in next year.

Its a 2 or 3% difference, NHS Wales say this is due to how data collected from GP practices, no idea if true but the trend across the UK is UP, as it has been for many years.

Unfortunately, will put pressure on the NHS for decades to come, needs addressing.

Data on obesity is a slur? True it’s not original I didn’t come up with figures on how many are.

I know people want to not have facts, but obesity is an issue.

We’ll see which way it goes. Given the pressure lack of health puts on all, and that it’s higher there, maybe we’ll see a reduction on a change of gov, or we’ll get closer to S and W

Well, as we both agree obesity is a huge strain on NHS, why are UK rates so high? why after 13 years isn't it being addressed and will industry pressure stop action on booze, sugar & processed foods?

We shouldn't have a Health Sec with very close family links into the sugar industry, regardless of the colour of the govt.

Obesity isn’t down to a sugar tax or similar. It can just be a tax on the poor as wealthier can just choose better more expensive food. And making people pay more doesn’t really stop the behaviour, it just makes them poorer, more stressed and more likely to want unhealthy food.

Education and health, both devolved, and overall lifestyle are bigger factors. So what are S and W doing that they have higher rates?

Ooo you’re hard

let’s see how hilarious it is when the far right are voted in - because that’s where it’s heading

Because the approach has to be targeted.

Look at this first. Quite a blunt instrument.

https://digital.nhs.uk/news/2022/health-survey-for-england-2021

Now compare with this.

https://digital.nhs.uk/news/2022/new-analysis-of-health-behaviours-by-ethnicity-published-by-nhs-digital#:~:text=Chinese%20women%20(22%25)%20and,obese%20did%20not%20vary%20greatly.

It gives you more detailed information.

Just targeting obesity doesn't make sense, just as it doesn't make sense to target drinking across the whole population.

I agree but on the other hand so many of England/UK's existing towns are ghost towns and dilapidated, particularly on the coast and have been neglected since the collapse of old industry. The concentration of people in England is so centralised, particularly in the south east because everything has revolved around London for so long and with house prices/COL in London in particularly, many Londoners move out to the suburbs. A lot of places in England have seen population declines over the last century or post-war. Germany for example has a much more balanced economy over regions and distribution of their population.

Why don't we properly rebuild these places before building new towns or concreting over the rest of our green land for soulless housing estates in areas with poor infrastructure.

😂😂😂

We so need a like button on here!!!

Well, it is ONE of the measures the WHO is recommending to tackle obesity.

Anyway, its a thread about mass open border migration we have got (According to Richard Tice) not obesity, as interesting a discussion topic it is.

You did quote my short initial post on obesity btw

mass open border migration

I’d split high net migration based on working visas from mass migration due to climate pressures so it’s interesting to see this phrase

What are your preferred approaches to net migration, ie what number would you feel comfortable with and ditto irregular migration - how would you deal with that?

"It's 745,000 people.
It's nearly the equivalent of a city the size of Leeds being added to the UK population each and every single year FFS."

No it isn't, because the population growth of the UK is not only impacted by the rates of immigration and emigration. Birth rates and death rates are also part of the calculation.

Over the last 5 years, the population of the UK has barely increased. Annual net growth rates are about 250,000 a year. Without the net immigration, the size of the population of the UK would be falling, with serious consequences for the economy and welfare of the country. An annual growth rate of just 0.3% represents an almost stagnant population.

Immigration is needed as the UK has an aging population. The immediate post-war cohort born around 1945 is reaching 80 years old and has not worked for the last 15 years or more. The second wave of post-war baby boomers, born around when rationing finally ended in 1954, is now approaching 70 and likewise no longer working. Immigration has been needed to fill the vacancies left when these people stopped working, and because the UK birth rate has not provided sufficient people for the job market. As these cohorts grow older somebody has to care for these people, or has to be working in order to pay the taxes and national insurance contributions to pay for their care and to pay for all of the other things that taxes pay for (education, healthcare, roads and infrastructure, policing, local government and services etc.).

Immigrants contribute more to the economy than they take out because they tend to be younger and healthier than the general population. They are also a more flexible and mobile workforce, thousands coming to the UK for seasonal jobs in hospitality, food production and agriculture - jobs that British workers don't want to do (and are actually penalised for taking due to the poor design and mismanagement of the UK benefits system) or cannot easily do due to family commitments and location. Overseas students are big business - without them, many university courses would no longer be viable.

As for the current increase in immigration, this was an entirely predictable consequence of Brexit. Having told millions of young, industrious EU citizens to bugger off back where they came from, how else was the UK going to find their replacements other than by importing labour from elsewhere? The UK economy was never going to survive the sudden loss of so many workers.

Let the population fall then for once