I cannot begin to understand the Government's handling of immigration.
The focus is all pointing in the wrong direction.
"Illegal" immigrants arriving by boat only represents about 5% of the people coming in to the country. And yet seems to represent 95% of the Government's attention.
There are 2 obvious things that need looking at far more closely:-
1. "Legal" immigration. By that I don't mean the temporary spikes of people from Ukraine and Hong Kong. I mean the hundreds of thousands who come here to study
2. Emigration figures. Because, rather obviously, net migration is people in minus people out. And there appears to be no focus on people out. For example:-
(1) The massive increase in people not being processed. The "hotel bills" are because we are not processing people. Giving money to Rwanda for political rhetoric, rather than spending money processing applicants, either saying yes and letting people contribute, or saying no and removing people.
(2) The people coming in via education routes. We only get given the people coming in-surely the vast majority should be leaving after their course ends, so the net effect should be small. Because we do not have hundreds of new Universities springing up. It's just new students replacing former students
""Illegal" immigrants arriving by boat only represents about 5% of the people coming in to the country. And yet seems to represent 95% of the Government's attention."
And it's represents 100% at the racists attention.
I cannot begin to understand the Government's handling of immigration.
The focus is all pointing in the wrong direction.
"Illegal" immigrants arriving by boat only represents about 5% of the people coming in to the country. And yet seems to represent 95% of the Government's attention.
There are 2 obvious things that need looking at far more closely:-
1. "Legal" immigration. By that I don't mean the temporary spikes of people from Ukraine and Hong Kong. I mean the hundreds of thousands who come here to study
2. Emigration figures. Because, rather obviously, net migration is people in minus people out. And there appears to be no focus on people out. For example:-
(1) The massive increase in people not being processed. The "hotel bills" are because we are not processing people. Giving money to Rwanda for political rhetoric, rather than spending money processing applicants, either saying yes and letting people contribute, or saying no and removing people.
(2) The people coming in via education routes. We only get given the people coming in-surely the vast majority should be leaving after their course ends, so the net effect should be small. Because we do not have hundreds of new Universities springing up. It's just new students replacing former students
Sunak is just trying to appease the right wing of his party. I dont even know why overseas students are included, as apparently long term monitoring shows that 98% return home at the end of their studies. They dont include seasonal workers on temporary workers in the figures, so why include students? Allowing their dependants in is another matter. Why would we allow 159,000 of their dependants in?
The Tories seem to be saying that we need more to fill the record vacancies, but they want to cut down on the total. Whichever way you look at it, when we had freedom of movement, we were able to fill the majority of vacancies, and there seemed to be more control than there is today. The Tories have bowed to pressure from farmers, and increased the number of visas available for farmworkers this year.
""Illegal" immigrants arriving by boat only represents about 5% of the people coming in to the country. And yet seems to represent 95% of the Government's attention."
And it's represents 100% at the racists attention.
Agreed. But it is also a class thing. Because some migration accords with the way wealthy people do things.
Rishi Sunak, Suella Braverman and Robert Jenrick all have 1 thing in common. They all studied abroad as emigrants. Harvard, Sorbonne and Pennsylvania respectively.
So-"legal" migration is giving money to Universities. Indeed, Rishi Sunak had at one stage chosen to be an American citizen, something he only changed after he had entered UK politics.
"Illegal" migration is when you give your cash to a gangmaster out of desperation and fear, rather than the Rich route.
""Illegal" immigrants arriving by boat only represents about 5% of the people coming in to the country. And yet seems to represent 95% of the Government's attention."
And it's represents 100% at the racists attention.
I wouldnt disagree. Although illegal immigration is a problem. There are many things that the average voter would prefer to spend the 6 or 7 million pounds per day on rather than hotel bills for illegal immigrants. On top of this there is the money spent on benefits that they receive. Some people estimate that 100 million people have been displaced. It would be foolish to think that we could take them all.
I dont consider myself a raving xenophobe, or a racist, but surely we have to put a figure on the number we are prepared to accept.
The current system is really stupid. Why on earth would we insist on applications only being considered from those on British soil, and then moan when they arrive? If we sent them all back, then the small boats would stop. If we then set up legal routes, with applications being considered from elsewhere, the problem would be solved. We should definitely accept our fair share. There surely has to be some control?
The time taken to process applications is a massive problem.
""Illegal" immigrants arriving by boat only represents about 5% of the people coming in to the country. And yet seems to represent 95% of the Government's attention."
And it's represents 100% at the racists attention.
If we set up an immigration policy today, we surely wouldnt kick it off by saying that the people traffickers can send us as many as they want, and we will pay them benefits, put them up in hotels, and give them 3 meals per day.
""Illegal" immigrants arriving by boat only represents about 5% of the people coming in to the country. And yet seems to represent 95% of the Government's attention."
And it's represents 100% at the racists attention.
I wouldnt disagree. Although illegal immigration is a problem. There are many things that the average voter would prefer to spend the 6 or 7 million pounds per day on rather than hotel bills for illegal immigrants. On top of this there is the money spent on benefits that they receive. Some people estimate that 100 million people have been displaced. It would be foolish to think that we could take them all.
I dont consider myself a raving xenophobe, or a racist, but surely we have to put a figure on the number we are prepared to accept.
The current system is really stupid. Why on earth would we insist on applications only being considered from those on British soil, and then moan when they arrive? If we sent them all back, then the small boats would stop. If we then set up legal routes, with applications being considered from elsewhere, the problem would be solved. We should definitely accept our fair share. There surely has to be some control?
The time taken to process applications is a massive problem.
Theo Paphitis made a very good point in relation to this on last night's Question Time.
He said we need to stop treating all immigration as though all are identical. They are not. We need to put different sets of immigrants in different pots.
Because-for example-we are not in control of World events that lead to temporary pressures. And we are not in control of what jobs need filling, and how urgently/whether solutions should be temporary or permanent visas. Again, education has its own criteria.
His takedown of the Tory Minister trying to blame Labour for the current mess was worth a watch.
"There are many things that the average voter would prefer to spend the 6 or 7 million pounds per day on rather than hotel bills for illegal immigrants."
Well if we were to process the asylum applications more quickly & efficiently it would not be 5 or 7 milly per day.
""Illegal" immigrants arriving by boat only represents about 5% of the people coming in to the country. And yet seems to represent 95% of the Government's attention."
And it's represents 100% at the racists attention.
I wouldnt disagree. Although illegal immigration is a problem. There are many things that the average voter would prefer to spend the 6 or 7 million pounds per day on rather than hotel bills for illegal immigrants. On top of this there is the money spent on benefits that they receive. Some people estimate that 100 million people have been displaced. It would be foolish to think that we could take them all.
I dont consider myself a raving xenophobe, or a racist, but surely we have to put a figure on the number we are prepared to accept.
The current system is really stupid. Why on earth would we insist on applications only being considered from those on British soil, and then moan when they arrive? If we sent them all back, then the small boats would stop. If we then set up legal routes, with applications being considered from elsewhere, the problem would be solved. We should definitely accept our fair share. There surely has to be some control?
The time taken to process applications is a massive problem.
Theo Paphitis made a very good point in relation to this on last night's Question Time.
He said we need to stop treating all immigration as though all are identical. They are not. We need to put different sets of immigrants in different pots.
Because-for example-we are not in control of World events that lead to temporary pressures. And we are not in control of what jobs need filling, and how urgently/whether solutions should be temporary or permanent visas. Again, education has its own criteria.
His takedown of the Tory Minister trying to blame Labour for the current mess was worth a watch.
I will have a look. One thing that I dont think you can argue with is that we do need a coherent immigration policy.
"There are many things that the average voter would prefer to spend the 6 or 7 million pounds per day on rather than hotel bills for illegal immigrants."
Well if we were to process the asylum applications more quickly & efficiently it would not be 5 or 7 milly per day.
Agreed. Although we are currently in the hands of the people traffickers, and the number of small boats they decide to send over.
Returning to spouses/children of people coming here to study.
It is a recent problem.
In 2019 spouses/kids numbered 16,000. In 2022-136,000.
While the Govt was too busy swapping PMs and Home Secretaries to notice/act.
I think it has gone up to 159,000 this year. Clearly a problem. Although one that should be easy to solve. If you stopped dependants, and didnt include students the figures would be seen in a completely different light.
Returning to spouses/children of people coming here to study.
It is a recent problem.
In 2019 spouses/kids numbered 16,000. In 2022-136,000.
While the Govt was too busy swapping PMs and Home Secretaries to notice/act.
I think it has gone up to 159,000 this year. Clearly a problem. Although one that should be easy to solve. If you stopped dependants, and didnt include students the figures would be seen in a completely different light.
Stopping dependants is impossible. Although reducing them to previous levels should not be.
Have to include students. Simply because they are migrating to this country. If course, it should not matter overmuch if 98% were indeed leaving at the end of their studies. But that figure is not true. If it was, people leaving this country every year would be much higher.
Returning to spouses/children of people coming here to study.
It is a recent problem.
In 2019 spouses/kids numbered 16,000. In 2022-136,000.
While the Govt was too busy swapping PMs and Home Secretaries to notice/act.
I think it has gone up to 159,000 this year. Clearly a problem. Although one that should be easy to solve. If you stopped dependants, and didnt include students the figures would be seen in a completely different light.
Stopping dependants is impossible. Although reducing them to previous levels should not be.
Have to include students. Simply because they are migrating to this country. If course, it should not matter overmuch if 98% were indeed leaving at the end of their studies. But that figure is not true. If it was, people leaving this country every year would be much higher.
I dont understand it. If the overwhelming majority return home at the end of their studies, the the number that arrived this year would be offset by those that arrived 3 years ago, and were returning home this year. That is providing you accept a similar number each year.
"There are many things that the average voter would prefer to spend the 6 or 7 million pounds per day on rather than hotel bills for illegal immigrants."
Well if we were to process the asylum applications more quickly & efficiently it would not be 5 or 7 milly per day.
I believe 170,000 at the moment. A figure that increases on a daily basis.
Returning to spouses/children of people coming here to study.
It is a recent problem.
In 2019 spouses/kids numbered 16,000. In 2022-136,000.
While the Govt was too busy swapping PMs and Home Secretaries to notice/act.
I think it has gone up to 159,000 this year. Clearly a problem. Although one that should be easy to solve. If you stopped dependants, and didnt include students the figures would be seen in a completely different light.
Stopping dependants is impossible. Although reducing them to previous levels should not be.
Have to include students. Simply because they are migrating to this country. If course, it should not matter overmuch if 98% were indeed leaving at the end of their studies. But that figure is not true. If it was, people leaving this country every year would be much higher.
This is funny.
This Morning’s stand-ins make mincemeat of Rish!’s record
Comments
The focus is all pointing in the wrong direction.
"Illegal" immigrants arriving by boat only represents about 5% of the people coming in to the country. And yet seems to represent 95% of the Government's attention.
There are 2 obvious things that need looking at far more closely:-
1. "Legal" immigration. By that I don't mean the temporary spikes of people from Ukraine and Hong Kong. I mean the hundreds of thousands who come here to study
2. Emigration figures. Because, rather obviously, net migration is people in minus people out. And there appears to be no focus on people out. For example:-
(1) The massive increase in people not being processed. The "hotel bills" are because we are not processing people. Giving money to Rwanda for political rhetoric, rather than spending money processing applicants, either saying yes and letting people contribute, or saying no and removing people.
(2) The people coming in via education routes. We only get given the people coming in-surely the vast majority should be leaving after their course ends, so the net effect should be small. Because we do not have hundreds of new Universities springing up. It's just new students replacing former students
@Essexphil
""Illegal" immigrants arriving by boat only represents about 5% of the people coming in to the country. And yet seems to represent 95% of the Government's attention."
And it's represents 100% at the racists attention.
I dont even know why overseas students are included, as apparently long term monitoring shows that 98% return home at the end of their studies.
They dont include seasonal workers on temporary workers in the figures, so why include students?
Allowing their dependants in is another matter.
Why would we allow 159,000 of their dependants in?
The Tories seem to be saying that we need more to fill the record vacancies, but they want to cut down on the total.
Whichever way you look at it, when we had freedom of movement, we were able to fill the majority of vacancies, and there seemed to be more control than there is today.
The Tories have bowed to pressure from farmers, and increased the number of visas available for farmworkers this year.
Rishi Sunak, Suella Braverman and Robert Jenrick all have 1 thing in common. They all studied abroad as emigrants. Harvard, Sorbonne and Pennsylvania respectively.
So-"legal" migration is giving money to Universities. Indeed, Rishi Sunak had at one stage chosen to be an American citizen, something he only changed after he had entered UK politics.
"Illegal" migration is when you give your cash to a gangmaster out of desperation and fear, rather than the Rich route.
Although illegal immigration is a problem.
There are many things that the average voter would prefer to spend the 6 or 7 million pounds per day on rather than hotel bills for illegal immigrants.
On top of this there is the money spent on benefits that they receive.
Some people estimate that 100 million people have been displaced.
It would be foolish to think that we could take them all.
I dont consider myself a raving xenophobe, or a racist, but surely we have to put a figure on the number we are prepared to accept.
The current system is really stupid.
Why on earth would we insist on applications only being considered from those on British soil, and then moan when they arrive?
If we sent them all back, then the small boats would stop.
If we then set up legal routes, with applications being considered from elsewhere, the problem would be solved.
We should definitely accept our fair share.
There surely has to be some control?
The time taken to process applications is a massive problem.
He said we need to stop treating all immigration as though all are identical. They are not. We need to put different sets of immigrants in different pots.
Because-for example-we are not in control of World events that lead to temporary pressures. And we are not in control of what jobs need filling, and how urgently/whether solutions should be temporary or permanent visas. Again, education has its own criteria.
His takedown of the Tory Minister trying to blame Labour for the current mess was worth a watch.
"There are many things that the average voter would prefer to spend the 6 or 7 million pounds per day on rather than hotel bills for illegal immigrants."
Well if we were to process the asylum applications more quickly & efficiently it would not be 5 or 7 milly per day.
One thing that I dont think you can argue with is that we do need a coherent immigration policy.
Although we are currently in the hands of the people traffickers, and the number of small boats they decide to send over.
It is a recent problem.
In 2019 spouses/kids numbered 16,000. In 2022-136,000.
While the Govt was too busy swapping PMs and Home Secretaries to notice/act.
Clearly a problem.
Although one that should be easy to solve.
If you stopped dependants, and didnt include students the figures would be seen in a completely different light.
Have to include students. Simply because they are migrating to this country. If course, it should not matter overmuch if 98% were indeed leaving at the end of their studies. But that figure is not true. If it was, people leaving this country every year would be much higher.
If the overwhelming majority return home at the end of their studies, the the number that arrived this year would be offset by those that arrived 3 years ago, and were returning home this year.
That is providing you accept a similar number each year.
A figure that increases on a daily basis.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/brexiteer-mps-pile-pressure-on-rishi-sunak-over-rising-uk-migration-control-meant-cutting-numbers/ar-AA1bGOgW?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=52bf3cf014174bc496e02f34916187f6&ei=33
This Morning’s stand-ins make mincemeat of Rish!’s record
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/morning-stand-ins-mincemeat-rish-165324127.html