Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think it's time to leave the ECHR?

798 replies

Sausagenbacon · 16/07/2026 20:05

www.thejc.com/news/uk/gazan-family-refugee-status-asylum-rejection-gwsq2c8b

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
EasternStandard · 17/07/2026 14:11

inkognitha · 17/07/2026 13:36

The difference is, in the last decade or so, the rise of right wing populism

It's not right wing that rose first ... look at the numbers, they explain a lot

It took 50y for the number of foreigners to double between 1951 to 2001, starting from very low, barely registering.

It only took 10y after 2001 to double again, with 10m ppl, which makes a big, noticeable impact for a country of 60 millions.

Source:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_immigration_to_Great_Britain

Blair’s strategy of rub their noses in diversity was so ridiculously wrong footed. The electorate does get a vote when politicians do this.

Daafdjdnd · 17/07/2026 14:13

BoredZelda · 17/07/2026 14:03

Like, for example, coming here, having children on the NHS, sending children to state schools, using public services etc? That kind of cost to the public purse?

And having a high paying job where the parents can meet their own bills without needing any benefits at all?

Limecar · 17/07/2026 14:15

British GDP per capita has grown significantly over the past 50 years, transitioning from approximately $10,032 in 1980 to record highs approaching $61,000 in 2026. However, when adjusted for inflation and changes in living costs, real growth has noticeably stagnated, with the UK facing a historic period of relative output stagnation per head since 2022.

Over the last half-century, the UK economy has evolved heavily from an industrial base toward a service-oriented economy. This structural change and subsequent economic events have shaped the country's GDP per capita:

1976–1989:
The mid-1970s saw inflation and economic strain. However, the subsequent adoption of North Sea oil and market reforms in the 1980s propelled average per-person output, with nominal GDP per capita leaping from around $10,000 in 1980 to over $19,000 by 1990.1990–2007: A period of steady, robust growth followed, with average economic output expanding rapidly across the 1990s and 2000s, driven by the expansion of London's financial sector and the digital economy.

2008–2021 (The Crises):

The 2008 Global Financial Crisis caused an unprecedented halt in real income growth. Nominal metrics showed volatility due to currency fluctuations, but recovery was generally sluggish. The COVID-19 pandemic caused another sharp downturn in 2020.

2022–2026 (Stagnation):

Real GDP per capita has struggled to surpass its early 2022 levels. High inflation, shifting trade dynamics, and a rising population have led to a sustained period where real GDP per person has shrunk or stagnated.

Current State:

As of 2026, the nominal GDP per capita sits at roughly $61,000 (£47,500), though relative macroeconomic decline and slow post-pandemic recovery have widened the gap in living standards compared to peers like the United States.

Historically, basic economic theory dictates that a country’s real wages should rise in tandem with its productivity and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. In the United Kingdom, however, this long-term relationship has severely fractured over the past two decades.While the nation has achieved general economic expansion, the average worker has barely seen their purchasing power improve, creating a widely discussed economic decoupling.

Understanding the 50-Year Split

The modern dynamics of UK wages and GDP growth can be split cleanly into two distinct eras:

Pre-2007 (The Alignment Era)
Post-2007 (The Great Stagnation)
GDP & Wages rose ~33% per decade GDP grew marginally; wages flatlined

1970–2007 (The Alignment Era): For nearly 40 years, real average weekly earnings grew predictably by roughly 33% each decade. If GDP per head expanded due to better technology or efficiency, pay packets rose similarly.

2008–2026 (The Great Stagnation): Following the 2008 financial crisis, the trajectory flatlined. Analysis by the Resolution Foundation notes that average real wages remain essentially unchanged from 2007 levels, representing a vast gap compared to historical trends.

The Two Pillars of DecouplingTwo main factors explain why British economic growth is no longer reliably feeding into workers' bank accounts:

  1. The Productivity Collapse

Wages cannot sustainably rise without an increase in output per hour worked. The UK has experienced a near-total collapse in productivity growth since 2008. While GDP has risen broadly due to a growing adult population and more total hours worked, the actual efficiency per worker has stalled, making meaningful pay hikes unaffordable for businesses.

  1. Rising Hidden Employment Costs

Even when companies spend more on compensation, less of it takes the form of take-home pay. A major portion of corporate expenditure has been redirected into mandatory non-wage costs, specifically employer pension contributions and payroll taxes.

Current 2026 Real Wage Pressures

The post-pandemic inflation shock has intensified this divergence. While nominal wage percentages appear high, they are heavily eroded by high cost-of-living metrics:

Public vs. Private Split: Public sector wages have seen temporary boosts from independent pay review bodies. Conversely, data shows that real wages in the private sector have actually been falling back down since late 2025.

Marginal Growth: Real average earnings are currently expanding at a nearly invisible rate of 0.1% to 0.2% once adjusted for underlying inflation.

The Sole Exception: The Minimum Wage

The only major segment to outpace national GDP growth is the UK’s lowest-paid workforce. Due to aggressive raises via the National Living Wage, the number of officially "low-paid" workers dropped from 20% to just 3% by recent counts. The minimum wage worker has seen a real-terms pay increase of over 35% across the last decade, compressed entirely against the stagnation of middle-income earners.

KateSixer · 17/07/2026 14:18

This topic is about the ECHR. We all instinctively know what human rights are

But the convention and associated legislation has been hijacked by lawyers and lots and lots of things have been mandated in the name of human rights that most of us never even imagined.

It is this mission creep that is so objectionable. A great example of this is asylum seekers. They should claim asylum in the first safe country they reach. Instead they cross most of Europe and come in boats to here. Admirable at one level but they are economic migrants not asylum seekers.

inkognitha · 17/07/2026 14:18

BoredZelda · 17/07/2026 14:01

You don’t think that change might have also been driven by the number of people who travel out of the U.K. for work? I have several cousins who are “foreign born” living in the U.K. because three of my uncles worked in the Middle East for long periods in the 80s. Of course the number who work temporarily abroad got bigger after 2004. That’s just counting.

None of that suggests we have an immigration problem. Our GDP in 1951 was 40 billion. It is now 4.26 trillion, the biggest rise was between 1998 and 2005. You think immigrants might have had something to do with that?

That we live in a more global world than we did in 1951 isn’t exactly news.

So 5 millions of people in 10y, 1m in 2021 only, it's all cousins coming back from Daddy's posting in Singapore or Dubai? No more evidence needed?

Right.

BoredZelda · 17/07/2026 14:19

EasternStandard · 17/07/2026 13:47

It’s really not. Sell in the outcome of what you’re after. Which is presumably not open borders nor no asylum arrivals.

I want to understand what you’re aiming for in terms of numbers and how you’d achieve that?

I’m referring to the asylum process not work visas, at what number do you feel comfortable, how many people seeking asylum should we take?

Oh right, you’re talking about the “non deserving” immigrants. Well, if all of them were keen to work in the construction industry, I’d say at least 300,000 asylum seekers too.

You can keep flogging this dead horse, there is no magic number. I was happy to see quarter of a million Ukrainian refugees arrive here in the past few years, I didn’t think “oh my god how can we afford this”. Maybe if we stop fucking about with Putin, the war will end and some can go back home where they’d rather be. I’m appalled at the conditions Gazans are facing right now and when I look out at what we all have here, I think even if it did affect my life a little bit, I’d happily take any who want to come here (which is actually a very low number) but if we took 260,000 Ukrainians, 40% of whom have since left, presumably we have capacity to take a similar number of Gazans. The likelihood of that many wanting to come here is low, given the statistics, but if they did, we’ve already shown we can cope with it, no?

Again, what’s your number?

AffableApple · 17/07/2026 14:20

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 16/07/2026 20:54

Killing myself laughing at the barefaced nonsense suggestion that politicians with a vested interest in extricating the UK from ECHR would just immediately set about replicating everything in UK Law anyway.

Anyone who believes this utter shite must have a zip up the back of their heads.

This

Daafdjdnd · 17/07/2026 14:21

When we came we had to find and manage and pay for our own accommodation. It didn't get handed to us on a silver platter.

DuncinToffee · 17/07/2026 14:23

KateSixer · 17/07/2026 14:18

This topic is about the ECHR. We all instinctively know what human rights are

But the convention and associated legislation has been hijacked by lawyers and lots and lots of things have been mandated in the name of human rights that most of us never even imagined.

It is this mission creep that is so objectionable. A great example of this is asylum seekers. They should claim asylum in the first safe country they reach. Instead they cross most of Europe and come in boats to here. Admirable at one level but they are economic migrants not asylum seekers.

You are wrong claiming they should seek asylum in the first safe country they reach.

Most do though.

Refugees are also protected under the 1951 Refugee Convention, leaving the ECHR would not change that.

EasternStandard · 17/07/2026 14:24

BoredZelda · 17/07/2026 14:19

Oh right, you’re talking about the “non deserving” immigrants. Well, if all of them were keen to work in the construction industry, I’d say at least 300,000 asylum seekers too.

You can keep flogging this dead horse, there is no magic number. I was happy to see quarter of a million Ukrainian refugees arrive here in the past few years, I didn’t think “oh my god how can we afford this”. Maybe if we stop fucking about with Putin, the war will end and some can go back home where they’d rather be. I’m appalled at the conditions Gazans are facing right now and when I look out at what we all have here, I think even if it did affect my life a little bit, I’d happily take any who want to come here (which is actually a very low number) but if we took 260,000 Ukrainians, 40% of whom have since left, presumably we have capacity to take a similar number of Gazans. The likelihood of that many wanting to come here is low, given the statistics, but if they did, we’ve already shown we can cope with it, no?

Again, what’s your number?

Ok so 260,000 Gazans? Your words in air quotes btw not mine.

I don’t think the electorate will go for that. And Ukrainians were housed in people’s homes, do you want the same for people from Gaza?

I’m not at 260,000 Gazans no. I don’t think the gov are nor the electorate. Overall you could probably sell in 50k from all countries, but maybe it would need a poll to ask.

To add each horrific crime makes the number drop. If Labour said we’re taking 260,000 Gazans I think they’d face pretty big problems electorally.

DuncinToffee · 17/07/2026 14:24

Daafdjdnd · 17/07/2026 14:21

When we came we had to find and manage and pay for our own accommodation. It didn't get handed to us on a silver platter.

Who do receive silver platters?

Please give an example

DillyDillie · 17/07/2026 14:26

BoredZelda · 17/07/2026 14:04

What gives you hope that this government (or any other) would do differently if they pulled out of ECHR?

@BoredZelda The legislation exists, not much else to do.
But cannot see the Labour and Left campaigning for it they hate British people so much, Their Chagos plan will cost us money. Now they are dreaming up plans for "Slavery Reparations". Total nonsense imo.

Daafdjdnd · 17/07/2026 14:27

DuncinToffee · 17/07/2026 14:24

Who do receive silver platters?

Please give an example

The 16 out of the 18 coming over will have the taxpayer fund their accommodation

DuncinToffee · 17/07/2026 14:33

Daafdjdnd · 17/07/2026 14:27

The 16 out of the 18 coming over will have the taxpayer fund their accommodation

Is that your silver platter evidence?

16 refugees being offered housing?

BoredZelda · 17/07/2026 14:37

inkognitha · 17/07/2026 14:18

So 5 millions of people in 10y, 1m in 2021 only, it's all cousins coming back from Daddy's posting in Singapore or Dubai? No more evidence needed?

Right.

Ooh, thanks for reminding me, my cousin also has 2 of her 3 kids born in Singapore from when they lived there a few years back. Those numbers are higher than you think thanks to our “Great British Value” of stomping around the world and planting a flag to claim nations as our own.

Anyway, I digress. I’m not sure what your numbers have to do with refugees, but to address them directly for what they are, the largest increase in the number of “foreign born” people come from the Eurozone, Ireland alone accounts for about half a million of them, Poland and Romania are the 2nd and 4th largest group. It stands to reason that the number increased exponentially after 2001 because from 2004 we had free movement within the Eurozone. Nearly 2 million Brits left work live/work in the EU at the same time. That little issue has been “solved” thanks to Brexit, so now we only have to sort out those pesky Indian and Bangladesh nationals who are here. Because they largely make up the rest of the numbers. Then you can be happy that the Little Britain you came for will finally be yours and no more of those awful immigrants will be here to bother you.

Oh, and, having lived in the UK for 52 years, I can promise you that far right wing attitudes are not new, have always been here, the only difference now is, they feel way more emboldened.

LuckyHazelFox · 17/07/2026 14:40

'Far' right wing attitudes are that emboldened that nobody's listening to their views.yeah, really empowering.

DuncinToffee · 17/07/2026 14:45

The Far Right are an increasing terrorism risk to the UK

Yes, their views are more emboldened now.

LuckyHazelFox · 17/07/2026 14:45

DuncinToffee · 17/07/2026 14:45

The Far Right are an increasing terrorism risk to the UK

Yes, their views are more emboldened now.

As are the hard left.

Limecar · 17/07/2026 14:47

BoredZelda · 17/07/2026 14:37

Ooh, thanks for reminding me, my cousin also has 2 of her 3 kids born in Singapore from when they lived there a few years back. Those numbers are higher than you think thanks to our “Great British Value” of stomping around the world and planting a flag to claim nations as our own.

Anyway, I digress. I’m not sure what your numbers have to do with refugees, but to address them directly for what they are, the largest increase in the number of “foreign born” people come from the Eurozone, Ireland alone accounts for about half a million of them, Poland and Romania are the 2nd and 4th largest group. It stands to reason that the number increased exponentially after 2001 because from 2004 we had free movement within the Eurozone. Nearly 2 million Brits left work live/work in the EU at the same time. That little issue has been “solved” thanks to Brexit, so now we only have to sort out those pesky Indian and Bangladesh nationals who are here. Because they largely make up the rest of the numbers. Then you can be happy that the Little Britain you came for will finally be yours and no more of those awful immigrants will be here to bother you.

Oh, and, having lived in the UK for 52 years, I can promise you that far right wing attitudes are not new, have always been here, the only difference now is, they feel way more emboldened.

On the theme of "stomping around the world planting your flag."

Over 40% of babies born in England and Wales have at least one foreign-born parent, a record high. Recent Office for National Statistics (ONS) data shows this equates to more than 235,000 newborns annually. Meanwhile, over one in three live births is to a foreign-born mother.
The significant share of births to migrant parents is driven by the growing number of young adult migrants arriving in the UK.
The primary countries of origin for these foreign-born mothers include:

  • India (the largest contingent, with over 27,000 births)
  • Pakistan
  • Nigeria
  • Romania
Regionally, these numbers vary considerably. In some areas of London and other major cities, foreign-born women account for over half of all deliveries, with a few local boroughs seeing foreign-born parents involved in up to 80% of births. For detailed statistics and regional breakdowns, you can access the full reports from the Office for National Statistics or the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford.

The last time the United Kingdom officially planted a national flag to claim territory in a foreign country or unclaimed land was during the height of the British Empire in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

While British explorers, such as Captain Robert Falcon Scott, planted flags during polar expeditions in the early 1900s, this was for exploration rather than permanent territorial expansion.
The most notable formal expansion was the annexation of Rockall in the North Atlantic in 1955 (incorporated into the UK in 1972), and the establishment of the British Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Islands) in 1965. Since then, decolonization and international law have ended the practice of territorial claiming by planting flags.

Births by parents’ country of birth, England and Wales - Office for National Statistics

Annual statistics on live births including countries of birth for non-UK-born mothers and fathers.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/bulletins/parentscountryofbirthenglandandwales/2023

BoredZelda · 17/07/2026 14:49

EasternStandard · 17/07/2026 14:24

Ok so 260,000 Gazans? Your words in air quotes btw not mine.

I don’t think the electorate will go for that. And Ukrainians were housed in people’s homes, do you want the same for people from Gaza?

I’m not at 260,000 Gazans no. I don’t think the gov are nor the electorate. Overall you could probably sell in 50k from all countries, but maybe it would need a poll to ask.

To add each horrific crime makes the number drop. If Labour said we’re taking 260,000 Gazans I think they’d face pretty big problems electorally.

Edited

Fewer than half were housed in people’s homes, the rest were housed by the government. A significant number of those home sponsorships failed early on, leaving thousands homeless. Many have also since come to an end and are then housed by local authorities as private rentals are out of reach. We had about 1,700 living on a cruise ship in Scotland for months at the government’s expense. It was quite unpleasant by all accounts. Wherever they were housed, they (and their hosts) received money from the government. People seemed happy to do it. Why do you think they won’t with Gazans? I mean, I know why they won’t, but what’s the given story we are supposed to believe? I also wonder why we don’t have a similar scheme to house homeless families in the UK but I guess when it comes to “lookin after ar own” people have limits.

Ok, so you’re at 50k. How many do you think the ECHR is forcing the UK to take?

DuncinToffee · 17/07/2026 14:50

LuckyHazelFox · 17/07/2026 14:45

As are the hard left.

Not according to Counter Terrorism policing.

BoredZelda · 17/07/2026 14:51

Limecar · 17/07/2026 14:47

On the theme of "stomping around the world planting your flag."

Over 40% of babies born in England and Wales have at least one foreign-born parent, a record high. Recent Office for National Statistics (ONS) data shows this equates to more than 235,000 newborns annually. Meanwhile, over one in three live births is to a foreign-born mother.
The significant share of births to migrant parents is driven by the growing number of young adult migrants arriving in the UK.
The primary countries of origin for these foreign-born mothers include:

  • India (the largest contingent, with over 27,000 births)
  • Pakistan
  • Nigeria
  • Romania
Regionally, these numbers vary considerably. In some areas of London and other major cities, foreign-born women account for over half of all deliveries, with a few local boroughs seeing foreign-born parents involved in up to 80% of births. For detailed statistics and regional breakdowns, you can access the full reports from the Office for National Statistics or the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford.

The last time the United Kingdom officially planted a national flag to claim territory in a foreign country or unclaimed land was during the height of the British Empire in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

While British explorers, such as Captain Robert Falcon Scott, planted flags during polar expeditions in the early 1900s, this was for exploration rather than permanent territorial expansion.
The most notable formal expansion was the annexation of Rockall in the North Atlantic in 1955 (incorporated into the UK in 1972), and the establishment of the British Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Islands) in 1965. Since then, decolonization and international law have ended the practice of territorial claiming by planting flags.

Do you think the planting of the flags we did back in the day has no bearing at all on the political and economic instability of many of those nations?

LuckyHazelFox · 17/07/2026 14:51

DuncinToffee · 17/07/2026 14:50

Not according to Counter Terrorism policing.

Yes I was forgetting extreme Islamism is right up there.

EasternStandard · 17/07/2026 14:56

BoredZelda · 17/07/2026 14:49

Fewer than half were housed in people’s homes, the rest were housed by the government. A significant number of those home sponsorships failed early on, leaving thousands homeless. Many have also since come to an end and are then housed by local authorities as private rentals are out of reach. We had about 1,700 living on a cruise ship in Scotland for months at the government’s expense. It was quite unpleasant by all accounts. Wherever they were housed, they (and their hosts) received money from the government. People seemed happy to do it. Why do you think they won’t with Gazans? I mean, I know why they won’t, but what’s the given story we are supposed to believe? I also wonder why we don’t have a similar scheme to house homeless families in the UK but I guess when it comes to “lookin after ar own” people have limits.

Ok, so you’re at 50k. How many do you think the ECHR is forcing the UK to take?

The other significant factor with the Ukrainian scheme is it wasn’t asylum granted it was humanitarian visas.

This means the stay can be limited in time and the people vetted before arrival.

If any gov were to introduce a humanitarian scheme as a way to fulfil some appetite in the electorate to help I think it would be more accepted. You can vet and choose who comes, and control numbers.

Australia does this. But it would involve a big change in laws including the ECHR which Australia didn’t face.

DuncinToffee · 17/07/2026 14:57

LuckyHazelFox · 17/07/2026 14:51

Yes I was forgetting extreme Islamism is right up there.

That is not the hard left.

Swipe left for the next trending thread