To think we NEED immigration

[ReallyTired]

Our population is increasing because people are living longer. Our birth rate is very low and our population would plummet without migration in ten years time. Our death rate is increasing as the baby boomers get older. We need enough people to financially support all the extra pensioners who are too old to work.

The problem our country has is that far too many people want to live near London. The U.K. has space, but not in the south east. We need to encourage more people to move to less densely populated parts of Wales, Scotland, north west, north east England. We need to encourage more employment in these areas.

Dutch - we do have a Points Based System, and have had for many years. It doesn't, though, cover family migration or EU migration, both of which are sizable contributors to net migration

Of course we need migration, but IMO targeted migration to ensure it benefits both the country overall (GDP plus cultural diversity) as well as the local areas where impact currently can be devastating (Dover, parts of Lincolnshire, etc)

LMAO at the "US controls immigration, why don't we" chorus. Illegal immigration is significant, but because their border guards are brusque and legal routes are limited, it gives the overall impression of tight control

Points system doesn't cover university students; they are the big contributors to net non-EU migration. With a sleight of hand, could recategorise the students & our net non-EU migration will be slashed. I don't know why it hasn't happened yet.

We want the best people, regardless of where they come from.

That's very unethical . It means the rich countries brain drain the best from middle+poor countries. We should train up (& pay to train up) our own people, even if we end up with slightly less able doctors-scientists-engineers, etc. working here long term. Rather than use low-middle income countries as cheap training centres. ARGH.

It is utterly stupid categorising university students as migrants. International students should be made welcome.

lljkk - That's what I was thinking about the student numbers and mentioned it in another tread earlier.
I would say that your idea that we cherry pick the best brains from middle+poor countries being unethical is funny though as that's exactly what we have been doing in the EU with all the people who are coming here at the moment.
I completely agree that we need to have much more home grown trained people but it doesn't just stop with doctors etc. I would like loads more investment made in companies taking on apprentices from school leavers etc. and not simply shipping in ready trained personnel from eastern Europe. There are tails of companies not advertising jobs in the UK but going straight to eastern countries and advertising there. I have no evidence per say but anecdotal evidence of our local bus company who are said to have done that as it was cheaper than having to train anyone up!
I don't think though we should have a moratorium on people coming from abroad to fill the posts but I do think we should make it much more advantageous to employ UK citizens first.

Actually the best thing the UK isn't the points based system but targeted regional/rural migration.

That is - you get to come on the basis of skills or plans to open a business if you undertake to live in a rural/regional area that is in desperate need of said skills or investment for a minimum period of time, eg 5 years.

But successive governments persist in treating all parts of the country as if they're identical.

I would say that your idea that we cherry pick the best brains from middle+poor countries being unethical is funny though as that's exactly what we have been doing in the EU with all the people who are coming here at the moment.

This is what we were doing before the EU with Commonwealth citizens, which was arguably worse, because their countries were even poorer than EU countries.

I'm migrating to Australia in 2018 with my family on a skilled visa. Nothing ironic about it. Our decision is partly to do with Brexit but because I'm worried about the economy and just the general racist sentiment bubbling away in the UK. I feel quite removed from my fellow countrymen. I'm in Scotland too and was anti independence which is now looking more real so that forms part of our decision to go too. We might come back. But for now it feels like the right thing to do.

Do any of the people who advocate an Australian points system actually know anything about it? Like for instance 300000 people enter Australia each year on other types of visas. The points system is there to incentivise job seekers not control immigration. That Australia has a specific target for humanitarian migrants and took ten times as many as the UKs 3000 last year?

www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/346

University students are already part of the Points Based System (Tier 4)

But Tier 4 also includes all sorts of other long term students, including children at boarding school and FE students, plus their dependents

Lots of interesting stats on student migration here. Anyone who says "students shouldn't count towards net migration calculations" should note that 17% of students are still in the UK after 5 years

lljkk As I said on the other thread I think it suited TM to keep students in the figures for immigration because it was an area in which she could achieve a significant reduction in non EU migration at a time when other controls were getting to the point where it became in humane - separating families etc. The clamping down on all those institutions that had been able to recruit overseas students who then dissapeared into the black economy via the claim they were educational under the botched liberalisation of the higher education sector gave her an easy hit. The fact that making overseas students a target for control instead of encouraging them to come has already hit the ability of genuine universities to compete globally even pre Brexit was not an issue for her then and is unlikely to start being when controlling immigration is even more of an issue than they self destructively had already made it

It would be easier to have a sensible debate about immigration if the people who are against it were in possession of some basic facts.

For example, in Australia, only a minority (rather a small minority, IIRC) enter through the points system. And proportionately, and despite its reputation for hard-line migration control, Australia accepts far more immigrants and also many more refugees than the UK.

Regarding the birth rate, the UK's has risen but is still below replacement level, and that's without accounting for the distorting effect of the baby boomers, ie that the death rate is set to rise disproportionately in the next few years. Policies that limit state support to two children will probably cut the birth rate among low and middle earners anyway in due course (one of the reasons that France has a much higher birth rate than other EU countries is its family-friendly tax and benefits system, which reward large families rather than penalising them).

" there have been many reports of immigrants coming to this country claiming umpteen amounts of benefits and working cash in hand "

Really have there?
Have you got a link to any of those then?

Heather you are going to Australia because the racism here worries you?
Really?

I am so pro-immigration - especially as an immigrant myself and the granddaughter of immigrants.

However it needs to be a fairer system.

I feel discriminated against for falling in love with a non-EU citizen, having to jump through bureaucratic hoops and pay a fortune for the privilege of living together in the UK, whereas a Spanish couple for example with no links to the UK can just waltz in and set up home.

Ha I picked up on that Ada. Even my Australian in laws admit a massive issue with racism there.

All discussion of controlled immigration from the EU is a moot point unless you are willing for the UK to leave the single market, with all the economic consequences that would bring. You would have to be very strongly anti-immigration to actually wish for that. I remain to be convinced as to why controlling the freedom of movement is more important than the economic well-being of my children (for example, I saw it suggested on another thread that leaving the single market would reduce our GDP to levels similar to Portugal - don't know what this is based on) but I am open to hearing some explanations.

Australia accepts far more immigrants and also many more refugees than the UK.

Australia is over 30 times larger than the UK.
In 2014, Australia had a population of 23.2 million; UK had 63.2 million.
Unsurprising really that Australia can absorb a higher number of immigrants & refugees than the UK.

I remain to be convinced as to why controlling the freedom of movement is more important than the economic well-being of my children

If your children grew up only able to access unskilled work in one of the high immigrant areas (outwith the major cities), then you would see first hand how freedom of movement would directly impact their economic well-being.

Immigration is great - so long as there are brakes & controls available if necessary and policies in place to support increases in infrastructure & support.
This didn't happen because 'immigration is good (fingers in ears - la la la la la) if you don't agree you're a bigoted racist - (wilfully ignoring people's concerns -la la la la)' etc etc.

It's not just the UK that has a problem with freedom of movement either, hence the rise of the far right across the EU.
If the EU grand masters have any sense and don't want to see their project implode, they should use Brexit as an opportunity to address the whole freedom of movement cock-up & sort it out properly.

^Australia is over 30 times larger than the UK.
In 2014, Australia had a population of 23.2 million; UK had 63.2 million.^
Unsurprising really that Australia can absorb a higher number of immigrants & refugees than the UK.

dies laughing

You might want to check on a map to get an idea of the habitable area of Australia before making yourself look silly quoting utterly irrelevant facts. And after that look at issues like water scarcity.

If your children grew up only able to access unskilled work in one of the high immigrant areas (outwith the major cities), then you would see first hand how freedom of movement would directly impact their economic well-being.

How will that be improved by restricting immigration to the skilled? Surely that will continue to push people towards unskilled jobs (although there would be less competition for unskilled jobs with fewer unskilled immigrants).

Even my Australian in laws admit a massive issue with racism there.

I'd agree with that, and I don't know why the 'even' is necessary, most Australians would agree with that.

I don't think it's necessarily greater than in the UK, I just think racist or xenophobic Australians are more open about it than racist or xenophobic British people have been until very recently.

True, probably wasn't necessary but they are massively patriotic toward Australia - mainly as they emigrated there from SA and for the longest time, wanted to prove that they had found "Utopia" after leaving apartheid SA.

They would never hear anything said against Aus because it had taken them in, they had built a life so much better than anything they could have had in SA etc. Only recently - ironically after expatting for a bit - can they see many issues with their adopted homeland.

The link to government stats on international students I shared upthread showed an increase of 7% for Russell Group universities

Regardless of migration targets, surely tackling colleges that are little more than a front for illegal immigration is a good thing?

*dies laughing

You might want to check on a map to get an idea of the habitable area of Australia before making yourself look silly quoting utterly irrelevant facts.*

Quick google:
Australia: 768 685km2 is habitable
UK: 243 610km2 total area

When you've stopped dying laughing you'll realise that the apparently habitable area of Australia is over 3 times larger than the total area of the UK.
Australia has a third of the population of UK.

And after that look at issues like water scarcity.

Just did.
From the BBC website, as part of an article on Australia's long running water crisis battle:
"...Over the past decade, Perth's population has grown by more than a third, yet last year demand for water was down by 8% compared with 2003..."
Also had info re the other initiatives to do with drought avoidance.

A lot of what is "habitable" in Australia couldn't support the density of population that the temperate UK can support.

Population density comparisons are pretty meaningless without some geographical context.

But regardless of that, Australia is a young country that relies on immigration for economic growth. It is difficult to use it as a model for UK immigation, for a number of reasons, including its geographical isolation.

Yes, no one's saying that Australia isn't bigger than the UK. But your '30 times' line was ridiculous and I suspect you knew it. And as Mistigri says, habitable is relative (as it is in the UK of course). Where I grew up is habitable (obviously) but unable to support more than one or two families per 30,000 acres if the country's agriculture industries are to continue.

And why do you think water consumption has decreased despite population growth? Because of incredibly strict laws and incentives around water consumption because it is scarce and precious. These days you can't build or renovate a house in most places without including a couple of massive rainwater tanks. Until you've lived through a ten year drought you can't really understand the impact of water scarcity even in a heavily urbanised and developed country.

Yes Australia in general wants and needs immigration, particularly in regional and rural areas, though that idea is not uncontroversial (linked to water scarcity and agricultural productivity). It does very well out of encouraging the brain drain from Britain. I often wonder why British people aren't more worried about the number of skilled, clever people it pays to educate who go and live elsewhere.

But so does Britain need immigration, at least for the next 50 years or so until the demographic bulge of the baby boom works its way through. What's your alternative proposal to fund the required level of pension and health spending?
.