Changes to immigration rules announced by Starmer

[OneAmberFinch]

Full white paper here is extensive and announces changes to all avenues of migration - basically their approach to resolving the issues of massively increased migration from 2019-2023/4.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6821aec3f16c0654b19060ac/restoring-control-over-the-immigration-system-white-paper.pdf

And Starmer's commentary on the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ce810e3z6dkt

Handful of headline changes: default timeline to get ILR to go to 10 years instead of 5; abolishing new care worker visas; raising skills threshold for Skilled Workers back up to graduate level; increasing minimum grades required for student visas; various bits and pieces around English language requirements among several other policies

Lorry numbers? really? as soon as the Govt put in place the £2000 fine per migrants, numbers crashed.

Rwanda was never a workable solution, that country atm is at near war & if it was such a deterrent, why didn't Sunak enact it? and win the GE?
Even his HS at the time called the scheme Bat shit.

However, at least Philp is injecting some honesty into the debate, even if you refuse to accept it.

Economic Growth up 0.7% though i suspect you'll base that on measures Labour inherited 😂

Fm. The numbers are below. They are in the public domain. I know it’s hard to look at figures and actually compute but there you go.

Over 100k in early 2000s all recorded.

It won’t help you and Labour when numbers keep going up over summer. That’s all in the public domain too. Good luck with that.

You re confusing attempted crossings with actual crossings, also why are so rude in your responses, trying to goad a reaction?

Also, we don't actually know the numbers as successful ones, by default, weren't known about....

As i said, numbers of attempted crossing sank when fines introduced.

Why is what happened 20 years ago relevant to you?

At least Philp isn't being quite so partisan, i'll take his word on this.

Yes crossings are weather dependent, so numbers coming here will increase.

Ditto to your posts.

The DA numbers are below and in public domain. They are not hidden. Bizarre you would not go with verifiable figures.

If numbers keep going up as they are smash the gangs isn’t really working is it.

We are going around in circles here.

Fact remains that Philp agrees with my take, not yours, so i'll leave that with you.

That’s fine if you want to believe Philp go for it, I doubt you would at any other time. And you’re avoiding verifiable figures to do so.

In the end that kind of misleading stuff will aid Reform as voters switch so keep going I guess.

If people think voting Reform will stop immigration (or get net zero immigration) I have some beans to sell.

Philps confirmed there were no plans, agreements, research on immigration when the UK left the EU

It’s odd how people champion a fall from say 700k to 300k but net migration of zero is another similar drop.

It’s not zero movement maybe that’s the confusion, just lower again. If Labour have now decided to sell in lower immigration figures as good not bad that helps Reform too.

Plus it’s so fickle, one minute it’s all dog whistle culture wars now it’s island of strangers.

Lol even i'm not that influential!

We covered this on another thread, i'll take Philp's work on the issues they created.

People are voting reform for a variety of reasons - lack of trust, WFA, Expenses and of course no progress on x channel migration.

As i've said before, unless you are a Reform supporter, they will damage both parties but ts the Tories who will suffer the most, i'd be concerned about that too.

The Cons are now down to just 18% in the latest Voting intention poll by YouGov, Lab 23% and Reform on 29%

Badenoch is shockingly bad.

You post about Tories in nearly every post. Why are you now concerned about them?

@OneAmberFinch

"Blaming this on Brexit is giving the Boris Johnson government a pass that it doesn't deserve"

I think a large number of people don't distinguish between illegal and legal migration. Also that there are massively more legal migrants than illegals.

The Johnson and Sunak Governments were trying to deter illegal migration with measures such as the Rwanda scheme. However at the same time they oversaw record legal migration levels because importing cheap labour means that employers such as care homes can continue to make large profits by not having to pay UK nationals higher wages and better conditions to do the job.

This is what I don't understand from the left wing posters that are against the recently announced restrictions on legal migration for day care homes.

It doesn't make sense- why do they want to defend the profitability of large corporations owning care homes and not increase wages and conditions for UK nationals.

The solution to the rise in asylum migration is going to involve withdrawing from or severely limiting the applicability of refugee conventions, and then increasing deportation rates and imprisoning non-compliers. All this arguing about whether they should be returned to Rwanda or Bulgaria is rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic. The Dublin Agreement was not and will never be the solution and it's a bit tedious hearing it constantly brought up - purely as some kind of Brexit gotcha.

As long as we continue to have (and slavishly, blindly follow with no thought to practicalities and funding) a rule that says anyone can breach our borders and stay indefinitely as long as they say a few magic words, all this is pointless.

With that said, fixing "legal" migration and the ILR timebomb is arguably both more time-sensitive and more straightforward to address, so I disagree with criticism that they should "fix illegal migration first". And I'm not a Labour voter.

Exactly and getting a care home job was a scam, they’d stay a week and leave for something else. They get social housing too and don’t get sent home.

Agree with your first points.

On the second I find it incredible that those campaigning for immigration is good no matter what are now turning on a dime to follow a party, not you but generally.

I suppose the downside for Labour might be now they’ve convinced people we should avoid being an island of strangers and immigration isn’t this great thing Reform can sell in zero net migration more easily.

It’s just shaving another 300k off the figures after all.

I agree that Reform will be able to sell zero net migration in 5 years, so as a skilled worker who has paid some £ 300,000 in taxes plus exorbitant family visa fees over 5 years, I won't be staying in the mistaken hope that I can get citizenship in 10 years. Relying on Reform would be a fool's errand. I am just glad I didnt buy a house and have no DC in education here, unlike some of my co-workers who are trapped here because they put down roots.

I will wait for the supposed rules for earning settlement, but in the meantime both DH and I are exploring options in Europe and Asia.

As is your choice, it doesn’t sound like you had any intention to stay here anyway. I am not sure why you are here in that case?

I did intend to stay. Is paying visa fees and surcharges and tax not an indication of that? Or is coming over illegally and applying for a council house a better indication of wanting to be British? Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

But I won't build a house on quicksand. As is my choice.

I think it’s tricky, and you won’t be alone in rethinking. But it may well continue to get harder as you say.

Good for you. Maybe you might eventually get citizenship in the UK if you can find Home Office officials who understand the law (good luck with that) and pay enough hundreds of thousands of £, all for the privilege of collecting the winter fuel payment for pensioners which was your endgame all along.... but it no longer exists for anyone because of government mismanagement and corruption... haha, gotcha, you benefit-chasing furriner.

2040 will be interesting economically here.

Immigration of over 1 million per year is a massive problem (net 700k)

Housing: Demand for homes increases sharply, putting pressure on the already limited housing supply, contributing to higher rents and house prices, and creating a need for more affordable and social housing.

Healthcare: The NHS faces increased demand for services, including GP appointments, A&E visits, and hospital care, leading to longer waiting times and greater strain on staff and resources. We then try to invest more and more with the money going into a black hole because the NHS is constantly playing catch up.

Education: Schools must accommodate more students, particularly in areas with high immigration, which can strain classroom sizes, teacher availability, and language support services.

Transport: Public transport systems experience higher usage, leading to congestion, overcrowding, and a need for expanded infrastructure such as roads, buses, and rail lines.

Utilities and Public Services: Greater demand for water, energy, waste management, and emergency services, requiring investment and upgrades to existing systems.

Employment and Economy: While immigration can contribute positively to the labour force and tax base, sudden surges may outpace job creation and lead to competition for lower-skilled jobs.

Immigration can divide communities and lead to erosion of local culture.

Imagine a having to build a city the size of Birmingham each year, it's not possible!!!

It needs to be brought down to around 20k

As is my choice when I choose to insist our government tightens immigration restrictions. For every one like you, we have thousands that contribute nothing, and are taking advantage of the goodwill this country has shown historically.

I would take Europe out of your shortlist, as this will happen/is happening all over the continent.

I hope you are awarded something more long term in the meantime. I like to think the contributors here already will be able to stay.

Where are you going to @GlutesthatSalute? Do stay on MN and keep us informed. Other experiences and opinions help to keep the discussions balanced.

jasflowers
Aside, its hilarious that tory supporters on here claim Rwanda, taking a few 100 per year, would be a "deterrent" but deporting back to France etc by the 1000s would not be.....v strange logic.

I've found some stats for France - the UK was a member of the Dublin Regulation until 31 December 2020:

Transfers of asylum seekers from the UK to France under the Dublin Regulation:
2017 - 10
2018 - 51
2019 - 53
2020 - 25

Transfers of asylum seekers to the UK from France under the Dublin Regulation:
2017 - 91
2018 - 92
2019 - 90
2020 - 219

@Clavinova Have you looked at the numbers of x channel boats pre Brexit? how many come from France to the UK? a lot more than a few 100.

Do you think Philps is incompetent and should resign? he was a senior HO minister and is now shadow home sec after all but apparently doesn't know what he is talking about.

Oh give over!