11 million immigrants since 2000. When I

[Uggbootsforever]

Sorry, it’s another immigration one.

I always see immigration discussed in terms of race, religion, who may or may not be a good fit for the UK, whether it’s by small boats - to be honest, this is not the biggest worry for me.

The biggest worry is the sheer increase in our population and how many people this country can reasonably accommodate. We are now 8th in Europe for population density - only behind Belgium and the Netherlands, and a handful of places like Vatican City and the Channel Islands. At present we have net migration of around 500,000 a year.

I’m worried that the key issues of overpopulation are being overlooked to make this conversation all about race. What about our pollution levels, wildlife habitats, flood risk, food security, infrastructure? Will this eventually be a polluted city state country? It seems to be heading that way.

Posters always say we need immigration, but we have already welcome 11 million since 2000. If that still isn’t enough; what is? Or do we just keep going?

As I don't think water shortages are caused by immigration but I do mitgration will be caused by water shortage. The world is warming and people will be pushed north.

I will never vote Reform. I hike, and all my walking friends are saying the same, we have never seen them so low for so long.

Well we haven’t opened a new reservoir since 1992. Maybe our governments should have factored that into good governance.

That said Spring 2025 was the driest in over a century I believe.

And? Still doesn’t mean the Reform councillor was right (he wasn’t). Genuinely, what is your point? You think migrants have guzzled all your water?

11m immigrants since 2000.

Source: “Dude, Trust Me”.

Read the thread before embarrassing yourself with unfunny jokes

I’m not voting Reform either as I don’t trust them.

Your previous link says;

'In practice, few people were returned under Dublin when the UK was still a member – an average of 560 a year between 2008 and 2020.'

Small boats came to the uk from France, so they could automatically be returned to France. No questions asked.

Not true at all - Lord [Neil] Kinnock is probably thinking of a bilateral agreement we had with France in the mid-1990s, which lapsed in 1997 when the EU-wide Dublin Regulation first came into force.

10,000 people came by small boat whilst we were still members of the Dublin agreement - we were full members right up until the end of 2020. We sent around 130 asylum seekers back to France during that period (2018 - 2020) - France sent more to us in return.

Republic of Ireland are still members;

August 2024
Ireland applied to send more than 2,750 asylum applicants back to the EU country where they first arrived or sought international protection, but has been able to return only 31, the Department of Justice has said.

The department admitted the system for inter-country transfers was not "fit for purpose" and that what is known as the Dublin Regulation had significant problems and was ineffective.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ireland-applied-to-return-2758-asylum-seekers-in-the-past-four-years-but-only-31-were-sent-back/a593136726.html

But you peddled your own lie: that immigration was only 2.5 million since 2025. Being generous, you interpreted the data wrong.

You seemed to think 2.5m was ok, but 11m would be ludicrous. Is 6.6m ok? Or 8m? I wonder where your line is?

This thread is like leftist bingo “good people think like me” “ people who don’t think like me are thick” “ people who don’t think like me have been manipulated whereas clever me has done lots of research”. “ you’re just a hateful bigot -you should be kind and lovely like me” all muttered without any acknowledgment,or recognition, of the irony

I added up the confirmed, official source data up thread and did my workings out for everyone to see with indisputable facts taken from ONS, and the absolute minimum number is 7 million, and this does not include illegal immigrants or people who have overstayed visas. So I think 8-10 million is a good conservative estimate.

All the denialists have done on here is tantrum and try to obfuscate at every opportunity I suspect because even they are slightly horrified at the numbers but need to stick to the party line.

Where that poster got 2.5 million from I have no clue! Pulled from his or her arse presumably

We’re still in that left narrative that means any mention of incoming issues is met with snark and insult. It’s madness. People are unable to discuss numbers. Or what the next few decades should or will look like.

@Uggbootsforever I agree with you on your actual OP. I don't know why some people cannot stick to objectivity. The fact is that we're overcrowded in this country. It doesn't matter by how much - be it by 1million, 2 million 6million or 11million. The numbers argument is oddly trying to take away from the real topic. Why are we allowing more people in to stay ontop of each other when there's very little to no space for those already here?

To put it simply, if we were overcrowded in a house, letting more people in to live with us would be seen as complete madness! It wouldn't be allowed. It's that simple.

Stopping immigration temporarily atleast to sort out our overcrowding issues and access to housing and public services is the only logical solution. Take your ideas of who's coming in and from which countries aside, it doesn't matter. Whether they're coming from Australia or HongKong or the US or India or Morroco or Rwanda, it doesn't fucking matter. We're full! Wait till we sort ourselves out, then they can start coming in again.

But that won't happen, will it? Don't think so. Possibly unless Reform gets in, which would be a shame because we refused to face reality.

But that is the finance industry creating wealth not your average Londoner - and then gov mon ey is poured into museums ,theatres, astounding travel infrastructure (compared to everywhere else) ,they are planning huge social housing increase in the millions - pouring all of the money into London perpetuates more wealth -while the rest get peanuts (oh yeah hs2 to Birmingham -thers a lot of Britain north of Birmingham. )

Then in 30 years they’ll be blaming the government retrospectively for allowing this to happen because blaming the immigrants is racist. Only, at the time they didn’t want the government to take action, because they called that racist too.

'Every fact that doesn't agree with me is misinformation'

I’m glad we can agree your thread title is incorrect, not easy to admit you were wrong OP so well done

The more they snark and insult anyone questioning their narrative, the more they alienate everyone around them. I used to be solidly on the left, but it was exactly this kind of behaviour - and the left's uncritical embrace of mass formation psychoses like transgenderism - that made me start exploring what the other side was saying. Only to find it made a lot more sense.

This thread is about overpopulation being driven largely by immigration, not whether immigration is good or bad other than in the context of provision of services and infrastructure.

You’ll hear very few people criticise any immigrant who comes here not only to better their own situation, but who also contributes to this country financially (and more importantly is not a financial drain).

So you'd agree that an immigrant who has never worked, has several children and lives on benefits IS the bad guy? The difference is, we can do something about reducing the drain costs of the immigrant, less so the person who was born here, but even that is being addressed to some degree.

How much do you think it was incorrect by, just out of interest?

Spot on.

I’ve seen very little evidence of anyone on this thread being racist or evenly blanket ‘anti-immigration’. It is purely about overpopulation and the problems that come (and might come) with that.

The OP’s point was that that increase in population is being driven largely by immigration. That is a fact.

And yet some posters are so blinkered, so unwilling to accept real data or entertain a take that is in any way ‘other’ than their own, and so convinced of their moral high ground that they’ll ignore even the most reasoned and factual argument. It’s confirmation bias at its worst.

Can you fix the problem if you don't know the size of the problem (ie people arriving daily). Much more difficult to hit a moving target I would say.

If you live in a 2 bed house with 6 kids and you are struggling for space and to feed/clothe them do you say lets adopt another bunch of kids while we try to sort out the issue of not enough space and not enough money for food/clothes?
Or do you stick to what you have and try and figure it out.

One seems utterly bonkers and one seems just so logical I can't imagine anyone considering the adoption option. Yet isn't that what we (the UK) are doing.

Whether we like it or not we have become a very entitled country. Benefits used to be literally for those on the breadline. Now they are a lifestyle choice for many and people are outraged at the idea of paying for their own children and supporting themselves.

The NHS was a lovely idea and built on good principles of a healthy population is a productive population. However we can't afford it (debt increasing each month) and there is lots of wastage due to people not turning up for appointments etc

At the moment the goverment borrows more each month just to pay the bills.
It should be trying to lower the debt each month not borrowing more.
The higher the debt, the higher the interest we pay each month and the less we have for important public services.

I would rather have a health service with quick appointments and very little waiting time and have to pay something towards it. At the moment it is nigh on impossible to get a GP appointment but you can get a private GP appointment the next day. I bet more people would take care of their health and weight if they had to pay for the consequences of it.

Sadly the idea of just taxing people more isn't going to work. The country can only get out of this by growth which seems to be impossible.

Most of our 'growth' seems to be house price values increasing which is not real.

From reading mumsnet it's pretty clear that everyone is looking out for themselves (which is entirely normal of course)

So if you get lots of benefits - you don't want benefits to be cut by the goverment

If you get no benefits and are working and paying tax then you are sick of paying for everyone and want benefits slashed.

If you have come across to the UK in the last 20-30 years you probably support continued immigration.

If you haven't you are probably against it.

If you are at the doctors, hospitals alot and think nothing of missing appointments then you probably want the NHS kept at all cost.

If you look after your health and use the doctors rarely then you probably support paying for what you use.

Whilst most of the country was working nobody minded supporting the genuine man who has lost his job or taken ill health or the pensioner who had worked all their life. Now we have people with no intention of working, aren't actually sick and we have too many pensioners v working people. This isn't the fault of the pensioners. Old, infirm people can't work. Young work avoiders can work. Very different.

There is a reason they have made the budget late this year. They are flapping around trying to figure out how to solve a problem without upsetting anyone which is impossible so they may as well rip the band aid off and get on with it.

This is why I cannot stand partisanship. Many people can't see beyond their bandwagon and party line! So close-minded.