To think Europen governments need to respond to immigration?

[Finlesswonder]

So the Netherlands is going to have a far right government.
Sweden has moved to the right.
Finland has shut its borders.
Countries that have traditionally been liberal are hardening and irrespective of the many issues listed its to do with immigration.

Ireland has seen violent protests last night following a series of stabbings.
In the UK we obviously had Brexit.

I think governments need to start responding to voters feelings on immigration as if they don't we will continue to see a general slide to the right in Europe, when actually these countries aren't right wing: it feels like a single issue is distorting the entire political landscape?

We have a FPTP system. Some voters are always ignored.

If we want more voters to be listened to, we need a proper democracy.

Let’s also not forget that a lot of forums (MN too) have users with strategic intentions (paid even?) so often the noise for one argument becomes very loud ie anti vaxxers, the Israel Palestine issue, Brexit. Regular posters could probably have reasonable debates and conversations but the extremists who push agendas will always go that extra mile and refuse engaging in any constructive dialogue.

How does the recent Polish election result fit into your scenario?

That is a shocking view from a teacher. They aren’t just innately scumbags who were born bad - our society has created them. They get to live there because it’s their home. North Dublin central is hardly fancy. Yes these lads have been let down by their own parents but they are brought up surrounded by addiction, violence and chaos and often their parents have too in an never ending cycle of poverty and social exclusion. We need more targeted funding towards young people in these communities. The cost of living crisis and the housing crisis have only fuelled their discontent. And now they blame immigrants for everything. Those lads are a product of their environment and a product of a government who needs to do so much more to tackle social inequality.

Immigrants use the NHS far less than the resident population, so their tax revenues are a net gain.

It is fine to talk about immigration but you have to start with facts and reality.

Your post is entirely fiction.

You can reduce migration - the increase has happened as a direct result of Government policy to liberalise migration after all.
But you will need to raise taxes to maintain public services.

*Midnightoncemore:

There is a difference between right wing and far right.

If you vote for a party that is racist, you are either also a racist or a fool.

If you vote regular right wing, that's different.*

It really does not help when anyone tries to encapsulate complex voting behaviour in a single one line that calls people names and focuses on an issue that is not even the main reason people voted for a party. It just smacks of sour grapes and an unwilligness to engage.

The real question is why do center and left wing parties not take people's concerns about lack of housing and healtchare seriously?

I hold my hand up to jamming my fingers in my ears

I think climate change is going to maje the situation worse in a fairly short timescale.

There's no fiction. Of course immigrants use the NHS... probably not as much as British people but that's probably because immigrants are younger and the biggest users of the NHS are the elderly. But of course immigrants use public services....schools, NHS etc. They also need a roof over their head. It's simple maths.

And what I really really hate about debating immigration is that if you express any concern you are immediately labelled as being anti immigration.

I am not anti immigration. We need it but there's a middle ground between zero immigration and hundreds of thousands every year.

You put your finger on the issue. Our legal migration is driven by the needs of business, not the general population. You could cut the legal migration rate by refusing dependents (huge figure) and getting rid of the study visa. Post Brexit these have ballooned in size. A lot of the university sector is totally dependent on overseas fees.

As for asylum the debate annoys me. The figures are small but the backlog never really gets addressed. The government talks big on it but spends money in bizarre ways. It uses commercial flights to deport, over which it had next to no legal control. Our immigration and asylum system is still full of legal problems which are, politely, only problems because the government want to do this cheaply. If the UK wants tighter borders it must pay a lot more for them. If it wants fewer migrants it is going to have to tell business and universities to look at their financial base. It means shutting down "English schools" where no one ever turns up, it means shutting down restaurants that use illegal labour and not giving little fines but ones that absolutely penalise the owner. All of this stuff is not done but it could be.

Truss wanted to lift many immigration caps to improve economic growth. Now, the labour shortage in UK remains high, especially social & health workers but science and finance too, jobs often met by imported skilled workers. UK Universities are kept afloat by overseas student fees. Political Fix podcast pointed out that when people are asked specifically which type of immigrants they don't want... the only specifics are irregular and bankers (both tiny % of total).

In meantime, many older adults living in big houses they needed when they had many children; now long grown up, still in their big houses, a practice defended robustly on a recent MN thread. So there's your choice. Let the old people stay in their big houses and their triple-lock pensions, while everyone gets under-staffed hospitals and care homes and patchy social-care, the financial sector which drives UK economy gets snubbed and economy gets throttled too, universities contract in size and run up huge debts. We get to have all that just so we can "keep immigration down". It's what voters want, I guess.

Braverman supported the Truss agenda.

That's what the government is mooting, especially for student visas.

I don’t get why the white British people who complain about the immigrants taking all the jobs can’t fill the vacancies for care homes and picking fruit etc?

But the Labour government not putting controls on immigration from former Eastern Bloc countries, when most other EU members did led to a huge number of Polish people migrating here- that, and the migrant crisis as a result of the war in Syria was the fuel for UKIP et Al campaigning to.leave the EU.

The mainstream right, the center and the mainstream left do take the issues seriously.

If you vote for a racist party (e.g. Wilders), either you support the racism (so you are also racist) or you overlook the racism (which I consider to be foolish).

I do not understand what is wrong with saying this - am I supposed to pretend racism is reasonable?

The issue of dependency and visas for students is ridiculous. All this means is that in practice, an Article 8 claim under the ECHR is built up over time (right to a private life). That then ends up with other legal processes if a student overstays with their family. Likewise spousal visas.

This government is hypocritical. It could change this if it wanted. But it does not.

Honestly it's like banging my head against a brick wall.

It wasn't Gillian Duffy's job to engage, she asked a question. It was Gordon Brown's job to engage, he didn't, he just insulted her.

What category of immigration do you want to cut?

I haven't said I wanted immigration cut, read my posts back.

What I am saying for the fourth time is, If politicians refuse to listen or engage, on any subject, people make their voices heard at the ballot box.

Some immigration numbers from the FT:

In the YE June 2023, the top five non-EU nationalities for immigration flows into the UK were: Indian (253,000), Nigerian (141,000),
Chinese (89,000), Pakistani (55,000) and
Ukrainian (35,000).

@CharlotteRumpling 'Some of this is already happening as the UK is now importing nurses from India and the Philippines to replace the Polish ones they threw out.'

That's completely inaccurate.

India and the Philippines have been the top sources for overseas nurses for decades. (I work in the sector). Nothing to do with Polish nurses at all. And no-one was 'thrown-out'. Anyone working here had the right to 'leave to remain'.

This would reduce the numbers, but cut the income the UK receives from this stream.

Those who come are not supported by the state other than schooling. They have health insurance.

They spend money here, supporting businesses and paying VAT.

Why do you want to reduce this income stream?

What matters to you - the number, or the economic cost/benefit?

This is post Brexit immigration:

Unless there is a substantial change in the policy of the UK you can expect these to grow. The UK is concluding trade deals with visa access; obviously the greater the economic disparity between countries then the more incentives to move. A post Brexit legacy.

A huge chunk of that is students. Plus Ukraine/HK. Plus health workers. Plus other workers replacing EU workers.

Which would you cut?

In 2010, a voter called Gillian Duffy asked Gordon Brown what he was going to do about immigration. He dismissed her as a ‘bigoted woman’. That superior attitude where politicians ignored voters’ concerns ultimately led to the rise of Boris Johnson 🤮 and Brexit 😭

Net immigration to the UK is too high. And the whole concept of freedom of movement within the EU has failed. It’s a huge problem and yes, when liberal politicians ignore voters’ concerns, the voters fire those politicians and replace them with incompetent liars.

I’m not saying I want to cut anything, I thought it would be useful to post some actual numbers. I’m married to an immigrant!