| Reform Policy 11:04 - May 6 with 6809 views | EdwardStone |
Now that they have got their hands on the levers of power, Farage has passed an edict...
Council workers must be present in the office, no more working from Dubai
Oops.....no more working from Mar a Lago
Oops.... no more working from home
In other news..... Reform are seeking some new admin staff, hours split between office and wfh
" Do as I say, not as I do "
|  | | |  |
| Reform Policy on 17:45 - May 7 with 922 views | lowhouseblue |
| Reform Policy on 17:29 - May 7 by DanTheMan |
We probably could have done if we raised taxes significantly.
- Need some way to pay high enough wages to get people into jobs that are low pay but very hard work e.g. certain types of nurses
- Need some way to continue paying for the growing demographic divide without adding more workers. Any solution that is non-immigration would require a good 20+ year lead time because we have to actually make the people. Getting people to have more children is very difficult to do via policy.
- A very big chunk of those immigrants are students (and their dependents). We could fund our universities more to make up for the loss of income on that front, think in total it's something like £20 billion.
- Basically would have had to stick two fingers up at Ukraine and Hong Kong refugees. They are a one-off event but it still counts.
That's the genuine answer.
I wonder how many people would be OK with the above. |
ukraine and hong kong are part of it but i don't think explain the scale or timing of the rise. given the hong kong migrants in particular tend to be highly educated you's expect it reduce the need elsewhere. and students don't affect the net migration number (a similar number leave at the end of courses as arrive at the start).
the need for people to do jobs that aren't filled domestically seems entirely right - but why didn't we just bring in enough people to compensate for the eu people who were leaving? i can see the economic case for even an extra 200,000+ people a year - but 800,000 as a genuine policy choice still seems difficult to explain. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Reform Policy on 17:50 - May 7 with 889 views | lowhouseblue |
| Reform Policy on 17:32 - May 7 by DJR |
I think it is was because Johnson didn't have objections to immigration so long as it was immigration he approved of and was within a controlled system.
I came across this from an article on the Queen Mary University website.
"Boris Johnson’s first significant move on immigration policy came in his first 24 hours as Prime Minister, dropping the government’s flagship target to reduce net migration to the “tens of thousands”. Theresa May had championed the target for a decade as Home Secretary and then Prime Minister – yet she left office with net migration at 272,000. Though considered totemic in Westminster, the net migration target sank without trace. Few mourned a pledge that had proved impossible to keep.
Downing Street explained that Johnson did not want “to play a numbers game” on immigration. Ditching this one-size-fits-all target freed a new Prime Minister to argue for some flows of migration to rise as others fell. Johnson frequently declared that he wanted Britain to be “a giant magnet” for scientists from around the world, while arguing for reductions in low-skilled migration from the EU. The government significantly liberalised the rules on enabling more overseas students to work in the UK after graduation.
The Conservative manifesto in 2019 reflected Johnson’s self-image as a “balancer” on immigration. Its narrative was of a “balanced package of measures that is fair, firm and compassionate”, consciously cycling through the themes of “control” offered by an Australian-style points-based system; of “contribution” as ‘Global Britain’ welcomed skills that are needed; and “compassion” in protecting refugees, securing the status of Europeans in Britain, and acknowledging the shame of the Windrush scandal."
I might add that I am not sure his dropping of the target got much publicity. [Post edited 7 May 17:36]
|
boris not seeing the consequences of his decisions seems an entirely plausible explanation. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Reform Policy on 17:50 - May 7 with 896 views | DanTheMan |
| Reform Policy on 17:45 - May 7 by lowhouseblue |
ukraine and hong kong are part of it but i don't think explain the scale or timing of the rise. given the hong kong migrants in particular tend to be highly educated you's expect it reduce the need elsewhere. and students don't affect the net migration number (a similar number leave at the end of courses as arrive at the start).
the need for people to do jobs that aren't filled domestically seems entirely right - but why didn't we just bring in enough people to compensate for the eu people who were leaving? i can see the economic case for even an extra 200,000+ people a year - but 800,000 as a genuine policy choice still seems difficult to explain. |
"and students don't affect the net migration number (a similar number leave at the end of courses as arrive at the start)."
I don't think that's correct.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/inter
Scroll down to figure 3.
And I quote:
The increase in work-related immigration was related to the post-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic economic recovery, the expansion of the Health and Care Worker visa, large increases in the number of work dependants and declines in EU+ immigration. The increase in study-related immigration was largely driven by rises in the number of study visas granted to main applicants for master's level courses, and an increase in study dependants.
EDIT: I see DJR has pointed out much the same as well. [Post edited 7 May 17:51]
|  |
| |
| Reform Policy on 18:20 - May 7 with 823 views | lowhouseblue |
| Reform Policy on 17:50 - May 7 by DanTheMan |
"and students don't affect the net migration number (a similar number leave at the end of courses as arrive at the start)."
I don't think that's correct.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/inter
Scroll down to figure 3.
And I quote:
The increase in work-related immigration was related to the post-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic economic recovery, the expansion of the Health and Care Worker visa, large increases in the number of work dependants and declines in EU+ immigration. The increase in study-related immigration was largely driven by rises in the number of study visas granted to main applicants for master's level courses, and an increase in study dependants.
EDIT: I see DJR has pointed out much the same as well. [Post edited 7 May 17:51]
|
"The increase in study-related immigration was largely driven by rises in the number of study visas granted to main applicants for master's level courses, and an increase in study dependants."
immigration yes, but not net immigration. that quote doesn't relate to net immigration. lots of masters don't even last a year and students might have graduated and come off student visas before they count as 'long-term'. you would get a one off rise in net immigration if, say, the number of student dependents doubled, but at the net level, and over the four years that total net immigration has been very high, that wouldn't persist and would drop out of the number when you reached a new equilibrium number of students. in fact, post 2023, when student arrivals start to fall, net student immigration would then be negative (departures then exceeding arrivals). | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Reform Policy on 18:39 - May 7 with 784 views | DanTheMan |
| Reform Policy on 18:20 - May 7 by lowhouseblue |
"The increase in study-related immigration was largely driven by rises in the number of study visas granted to main applicants for master's level courses, and an increase in study dependants."
immigration yes, but not net immigration. that quote doesn't relate to net immigration. lots of masters don't even last a year and students might have graduated and come off student visas before they count as 'long-term'. you would get a one off rise in net immigration if, say, the number of student dependents doubled, but at the net level, and over the four years that total net immigration has been very high, that wouldn't persist and would drop out of the number when you reached a new equilibrium number of students. in fact, post 2023, when student arrivals start to fall, net student immigration would then be negative (departures then exceeding arrivals). |
So you don't figure those figures you're citing include the massive increase in international students we've seen?
Do you have any breakdown to support that, I fail to see how that's possible? Especially when the graphs correlate almost exactly. [Post edited 7 May 18:42]
| |
| |
| Reform Policy on 18:56 - May 7 with 769 views | BlueBadger |
| Reform Policy on 17:19 - May 7 by Plums |
On the face of it, it's moronic but it perversely seems to be working for them. How many people in deprived parts of the country that received large chunks of EU funding voted for Brexit?
Keeping those areas 'left behind' keeps them angry and when they're angry, they vote for Reform, it's quite a simple formula. It's toxic but effective. |
As we've seen in the US, people will apparently tolerate a whole load of sh*t being fed to them if the 'correct' people are being hurt. [Post edited 8 May 13:11]
|  |
| |
| Reform Policy on 19:44 - May 7 with 690 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Reform Policy on 18:39 - May 7 by DanTheMan |
So you don't figure those figures you're citing include the massive increase in international students we've seen?
Do you have any breakdown to support that, I fail to see how that's possible? Especially when the graphs correlate almost exactly. [Post edited 7 May 18:42]
|
Yes, you’re right. But it’s a massive increase we *used* to see. The numbers have plummeted over the last 18 months thanks to the xenophobic foreign policy we’ve had under the Tories and now Labour. And we’ve lost god knows how many jobs as a result. Unis a couple of years ago employed about 400k staff across the UK, but every one I know has gone through a 10-20% minimum salary cutting programme since then, so we could be looking a 40-80k roles across the UK lost because the Daily Mail (and friends) has made people frightened of foreigners.
It’s another example in a long list where we’ve made ourselves poorer and less influential because we’ve listened to bad faith actors who’ve weaponised immigration. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Reform Policy on 19:47 - May 7 with 675 views | Herbivore |
| Reform Policy on 19:44 - May 7 by Swansea_Blue |
Yes, you’re right. But it’s a massive increase we *used* to see. The numbers have plummeted over the last 18 months thanks to the xenophobic foreign policy we’ve had under the Tories and now Labour. And we’ve lost god knows how many jobs as a result. Unis a couple of years ago employed about 400k staff across the UK, but every one I know has gone through a 10-20% minimum salary cutting programme since then, so we could be looking a 40-80k roles across the UK lost because the Daily Mail (and friends) has made people frightened of foreigners.
It’s another example in a long list where we’ve made ourselves poorer and less influential because we’ve listened to bad faith actors who’ve weaponised immigration. |
Sorry, accidentally down arrowed this. Completely agree, it's mad that we've shot the higher education sector in the face because of anti-immigration rhetoric and policy. They've starved HE of funding for a decade and then stopped it being able to do the one thing that kept the sector solvent. One of the few areas where the UK is still a world leader and it's been run into the ground. Sad to see. |  |
| |
| Reform Policy on 20:28 - May 7 with 620 views | lowhouseblue |
| Reform Policy on 19:44 - May 7 by Swansea_Blue |
Yes, you’re right. But it’s a massive increase we *used* to see. The numbers have plummeted over the last 18 months thanks to the xenophobic foreign policy we’ve had under the Tories and now Labour. And we’ve lost god knows how many jobs as a result. Unis a couple of years ago employed about 400k staff across the UK, but every one I know has gone through a 10-20% minimum salary cutting programme since then, so we could be looking a 40-80k roles across the UK lost because the Daily Mail (and friends) has made people frightened of foreigners.
It’s another example in a long list where we’ve made ourselves poorer and less influential because we’ve listened to bad faith actors who’ve weaponised immigration. |
the increase in the overseas student population, from about 450,000 to about 750,000, worked to fund HE, and to fund the expansion of HE, at least in part by effectively selling access to graduate visas. it's a very bad way to fund HE and a very bad way to determine immigration numbers. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Reform Policy on 20:47 - May 7 with 596 views | DJR |
| Reform Policy on 19:09 - May 7 by lowhouseblue |
so reading off the following graph from the house of lords in sept 2024:
the total number of overseas students rose from about 450,000 in 2017/18 to about 750,000 in 2022/23 (the highest point). a rise of about 300,000 in 6 years. so that amounts to net migration of students of about 50,000 a year over that period. that's small relative to total net migration. obviously in any year when the total number of overseas students who are here remains constant net migration of students is zero. in a year when the total number of students here falls (eg 2024) then net migration is negative.
this obviously ignores dependents. i suspect that the graduate visa is actually a bigger, but separate, factor. |
Here are some recent statistics on student migration.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/inter
It includes the following.
"Figure 2: More non-EU+ nationals who arrived on study-related visas in recent years are remaining in the UK for longer and transitioning to other visa types, rather than emigrating at the end of their studies
Figure 2 shows 78% of non-EU+ nationals who arrived in the UK on study-related visas during year ending (YE) June 2019 had emigrated by YE June 2024. Since then we have seen behaviours change, with greater proportions of non-EU+ nationals remaining in the UK for longer. Of those who arrived in YE June 2019, 54% remained in the UK one year after arrival compared with 87% of those who arrived in YE June 2023."
I imagine that those that come from further afield (the numbers of which have greatly increased in comparison to EU students) will be more inclined to want to stay longer, And it may be that, say, the scientists that Johnson wanted to attract may stay in academia longer than non-scientists given the nature of science (eg. doctorates). [Post edited 7 May 20:56]
|  | | |
| Reform Policy on 21:10 - May 7 with 537 views | lowhouseblue |
| Reform Policy on 20:47 - May 7 by DJR |
Here are some recent statistics on student migration.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/inter
It includes the following.
"Figure 2: More non-EU+ nationals who arrived on study-related visas in recent years are remaining in the UK for longer and transitioning to other visa types, rather than emigrating at the end of their studies
Figure 2 shows 78% of non-EU+ nationals who arrived in the UK on study-related visas during year ending (YE) June 2019 had emigrated by YE June 2024. Since then we have seen behaviours change, with greater proportions of non-EU+ nationals remaining in the UK for longer. Of those who arrived in YE June 2019, 54% remained in the UK one year after arrival compared with 87% of those who arrived in YE June 2023."
I imagine that those that come from further afield (the numbers of which have greatly increased in comparison to EU students) will be more inclined to want to stay longer, And it may be that, say, the scientists that Johnson wanted to attract may stay in academia longer than non-scientists given the nature of science (eg. doctorates). [Post edited 7 May 20:56]
|
i think as i said, it's access to graduate visas. that explains the rise in overseas student numbers, because doing eg a masters is the route to the graduate visa, and the fact people therefore stay longer on a second, non-student, visa. but being a student in itself doesn't explain the level of net migration. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Reform Policy on 21:45 - May 7 with 512 views | DJR |
| Reform Policy on 21:10 - May 7 by lowhouseblue |
i think as i said, it's access to graduate visas. that explains the rise in overseas student numbers, because doing eg a masters is the route to the graduate visa, and the fact people therefore stay longer on a second, non-student, visa. but being a student in itself doesn't explain the level of net migration. |
I haven't really followed that closely what you said but a student in, say, the second year of a three year degree is irrelevant to the net migration figures which are only concerned with people entering or leaving in a particular year.
What I think has happened is immigration has switched from largely EU to largely non-EU people, and the latter are much more inclined to stay longer, which in turn affects the level of emigration (and thus net migration) whether or not they entered as a student or remained a student. [Post edited 8 May 7:03]
| | | |
| Reform Policy on 04:44 - May 8 with 406 views | Benters |
| Reform Policy on 08:55 - May 7 by Whos_blue |
What's not beautiful about the country benters?
It's still a beautiful country.
Granted the vibe around the place is a worry, but writing it off as 'once beautiful" is hyperbolic bobbins mate. |
It’s all gotten to busy bloody houses everywhere.
I remember a time sitting outside my local in the summer months and you would hardly see a car,now it’s so busy.
We have lost so many beautiful fields to housing it’s such a shame. |  |
| |
| Reform Policy on 07:08 - May 8 with 327 views | DJR |
| Reform Policy on 21:45 - May 7 by DJR |
I haven't really followed that closely what you said but a student in, say, the second year of a three year degree is irrelevant to the net migration figures which are only concerned with people entering or leaving in a particular year.
What I think has happened is immigration has switched from largely EU to largely non-EU people, and the latter are much more inclined to stay longer, which in turn affects the level of emigration (and thus net migration) whether or not they entered as a student or remained a student. [Post edited 8 May 7:03]
|
Another factor that has struck me in relation to emigration (which feeds into net migration) is Brexit because it is now much more difficult for British people to emigrate given the abolition of freedom of movement.
These days I imagine it is only relatively high skilled Britons who can emigrate whereas freedom of movement did not depend on skill levels. And there will also be much fewer Brits retiring to Spain or France. [Post edited 8 May 7:08]
| | | |
| Reform Policy on 07:15 - May 8 with 308 views | DJR |
| Reform Policy on 04:44 - May 8 by Benters |
It’s all gotten to busy bloody houses everywhere.
I remember a time sitting outside my local in the summer months and you would hardly see a car,now it’s so busy.
We have lost so many beautiful fields to housing it’s such a shame. |
'Twas ever the case, though. Just look at how in past times villages like Highgate and Hampstead were swallowed up by the expansion of London. And outside the very centre of Ipswich, there would have been fields before Victorian times, fields that were replaced by successive waves of housing: Victorian, Edwardian, pre-War (eg 30s housing), post-War (eg 60s housing). Indeed, I lived on Broke Hall estate built in the late 60s on what was once open land. [Post edited 8 May 7:31]
| | | |
| Reform Policy on 07:16 - May 8 with 305 views | tractordownsouth |
| Reform Policy on 04:44 - May 8 by Benters |
It’s all gotten to busy bloody houses everywhere.
I remember a time sitting outside my local in the summer months and you would hardly see a car,now it’s so busy.
We have lost so many beautiful fields to housing it’s such a shame. |
We need more housing Benters! |  |
| |
| Reform Policy on 07:21 - May 8 with 273 views | Benters |
Build in the right areas not on prime farmland then. | |
| |
| Reform Policy on 07:34 - May 8 with 246 views | Herbivore |
| Reform Policy on 07:21 - May 8 by Benters |
Build in the right areas not on prime farmland then. |
Sounds like you should be angry at developers rather than immigrants, mate. | |
| |
| Reform Policy on 08:44 - May 8 with 198 views | tractordownsouth |
| Reform Policy on 07:21 - May 8 by Benters |
Build in the right areas not on prime farmland then. |
That does happen in the vast majority of cases anyway and it still doesn’t stop people objecting for often spurious reasons.
It’s good that the planning laws have been reformed to make it easier to build. | |
| |
| Reform Policy on 09:13 - May 8 with 150 views | EdwardStone |
| Reform Policy on 08:44 - May 8 by tractordownsouth |
That does happen in the vast majority of cases anyway and it still doesn’t stop people objecting for often spurious reasons.
It’s good that the planning laws have been reformed to make it easier to build. |
People should only be allowed to object to a planning application for new housing if they fulfill both of these requirements
1 Under 45 years old
2 Homeless
Nimby ism is not a new trait.... I was reading a document from the Middle Ages where one of the characters said " Pull up the drawbrige Johann for I am safely accross the moat " | | | |
| Reform Policy on 09:18 - May 8 with 146 views | flykickingbybgunn |
| Reform Policy on 11:13 - May 6 by MattinLondon |
Let’s be honest, all parties do one thing in opposition and another once in power.
I hope that Reform now having a certain degree of power and will face far greater scrutiny- and hopefully criticism. |
I hope Reform do well.
In the same way that I hope Labour do well and all the other parties.
I want successful leaders.
Because their positive achievements benefit us all. |  | | |
| Reform Policy on 09:22 - May 8 with 118 views | Benters |
| Reform Policy on 08:44 - May 8 by tractordownsouth |
That does happen in the vast majority of cases anyway and it still doesn’t stop people objecting for often spurious reasons.
It’s good that the planning laws have been reformed to make it easier to build. |
I don’t think so. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
