Immigration in the UK. Enoch Powell 40 years on............

spinoza

No, it's not the complete answer, I agree.

However, it's an important factor, because more immigrants make the labour market more flexible. Credit was easy for everyone, the UK, France and Germany (maybe slightly easier in the UK), but the UK grew much faster.

The problem with the simplistic calculations over GDP per capita argued over in the Daily Mail and other crapsheets is that the calculation ignores spillover effects. Many jobs filled by immigrants, especially the ones that lead to most economic growth, simply wouldn't exist if there were no immigrants. And these jobs, once filled, create other jobs.

spinoza

It's really quite difficult to emigrate to the UK. I've spent thousands of pounds and countless hours raising my stress levels dealing with ever-changing regulations and idiots at the Home Office. It's a myth that the UK lets all and sundry in. It doesn't.
Huh? So do they work hard or not?
What exploding birthrate? Most estimates I've seen project birth rates at 1.8 per woman - definitely below replacement.

Redlambs

Unfortunately, it seems if you want to do it officially it's harder. This is the problem, allowing too many illegals in. I'm not sure of the answer myself.


Re-read what I said. I'm not implying they don't work hard, that's definitely not the case.



1.87 I believe, and it has gone up in recent years. However, it affects certain areas more. I'm going through it now in my area, we are struggling to get a midwife appointment because we have a high rate of immigrants in neighbouring boroughs and are struggling.

Unfortunately, stats on these things are scarce because of government figures, but I'm living through it and can see with my own eyes the bad side of immigration.

peterstorey

What exactly have you seen with your own eyes (apart from the front page of the Daily Mail)?

spinoza

I don't think there are that many illegals. Do you mean EU immigrants?

That seems like an argument to sack the inefficient workers in the public sector and replace them with better workers, not to reduce immigration.

Redlambs

Well, that's intelligent.

Redlambs

No, I know exactly what I mean.

I've been on three separate building sites this year where there have been busts for using illegal workers, plus I've also been involved with the building of two detention centres around Heathrow. It's not worth trying to argue exactly how many there are over here, because no-one can possibly know.


Maybe both.

spinoza

Fair enough

I'd argue though, that you can't control illegal immigration by enforcing the law. It's probably easier to create incentives for them to return home.

Mihajlovic

I have met quite a few workers from Poland and I can say those guys work like insane, they're honest and really friendly people, I really like them. Maybe I feel like this because I myself am from south east Europe, dont know. However, I met a Bulgarian the other day, when he heard Im from Serbia he felt a bit more comfortable and opened up, and just when I thought "how nice", he asked me if I know if there are hidden cameras in the hotel (we were building a stage for an event) because he saw some stuff which he'd like to "take home". You really get all sorts of foreigners and although I dont know any figures I suspect only a very small number of them are criminal bastards.

topper

I do recall just recently some stats issued to show that UK East European birth rates were much higher than that. Also average birth rates are not really the answer given that the majority of recent immigrant population appears to go to defined places. There was a Channel 4 prog a couple of weeks ago and one area highlighted was around Boston Lincs where the veg growers there were using immigrant labour for picking . Other areas recently highlighted were in and around Slough and Cambridge

Mihajlovic

East European birth rates are catastrophically low. Except from Albanians who have the highest birth rate in Europe, the rest of the countries (Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Hungary) are facing huge demographic problems. The population of Estonia and Bulgaria fro example could decrease by half in the next 40 years.

The population of the East European countries is younger than the one of old Europe (average age 36.9 compared to 40)

topper

unfortunately Spinoza this has/is being tried and not successfully and reports (not in the Daily Mail) have pointed out that there are now examples of people re entering the UK after leaving for another bite of the incentive cherry. Incentives for an illegal immigrant to leave is not the answer but stronger border controls and sea patrols are the best option - if not perfect . You may not stop the flow completely this way but you can reduce it substantially and demonstrate to the locals that something is being done.

At this point in time - and not living in the UK so its hearsay- friends and family members tell me that there is a perception (right or wrong) that illegals found are not ejected quickly enough, that rewards for leaving are wrong and that border controls are inept.

topper

I did say UK East European birth rates ie in UK not in countries of origin

Mihajlovic

You did, sorry, didnt read it properly.

iguanamanc

How do you work that out? Most countries or communities such as the EEC have immigration controls of some sort to prevent people from doing precisely that.

spinoza

The solution isn't to stop the flow, it's to create a two-way flow. Closing borders incentivises immigrants to stay. Opening borders lets them come and go as they please - going being the bit that most people would like of course, without realising that closing borders prevents people from going as well as coming. I'm pretty sure I've explained this several times in various threads.
I agree that illegal immigration needs to be reduced. The solution isn't to crack down on immigration per se, and anyway the methods employed to reduce illegal immigration are not all that effective.

All countries and communities in the EEC officially welcome immigration as a means of filling skill deficits in their economy. Quite often this is lost in a wave of irrational fear, xenophobia or discontent.

Anyway, what I was annoyed about was that your post implied that people have no right to choose where to do what they want to do. Anyone in the world has the right to live and work where they wish, as long as they abide by whatever laws are put into place. And once they gain the right to influence those laws, they have every right to exercise it.

iguanamanc

.
Apologies for that.

I suppose you are correct about this forum being representative of society. I do not consider myself a racist - and I most certainly do not hold the view that my race is superior to another - although some people reading this thread might think otherwise.

This thread was meant to be a question about how Powell would fare as a Prime Minister in the late 60s, not now when he would be howled down at every possible occasion and would hardly have been allowed his freedom of speech.

The prime purpose of that speech was to open the debate on immigration at that time, as most of his colleagues in parliament were afraid to tackle it. That much has not changed in the ensuing forty years.

iguanamanc

For sake of example, you might choose that you wish to live and work in Russia. The Russian Government might then choose that they do not want you.

I don't see how you can claim the right to do exactly what you choose to.

iguanamanc

The figure has been guesstimated as between 500,000 and 700,000.

spinoza

And that would probably be wrong, depending on circumstance. I don't know whether or not you've worked overseas, but in every instance I've done so the visa is basically a contract - we'll let you stay in this country to do this job for this length of time, provided you don't commit crimes, pay your taxes etc etc. Once the contract's been agreed, I can't amend it, and the government shouldn't amend it either, unless this possibility was explicitly allowed for. The UK government has just been told that it can't amend the terms of certain visas, and a very welcome decision it is too.

Funny that you should mention Russia - I know a bloke (British) who was barred from working in Russia. Apparently he pissed off someone and got his visa revoked without explanation. He's annoyed and trying to fight it through Russian courts, not that it would do much good. Same sort of thing.

Within the law. Including immigration and contract law.

This whole thing started off because you've approvingly quoted Enoch Powell, who in his speech quite clearly stated that he didn't support immigrants having full rights in this country. Furthermore he implied that he would have been quite happy to roll back rights that immigrants have already secured. I'm assuming you agree with that.

Fitzjames

No need to apologise.
People rarely consider themselves to be racist...publicly. An anonymous survey always produces different results.
As to the original question......I think I answered it (incidently I would have been around 15 when Powell made that speech). I saidthat Powell might have made a good Prime Minister in the 1870s (the implication being that he was already out of date with the revailing attitudes of the late 20th century). I might add he had no appreciation of "spin" or the common touch style needed in the 1970s.
It was stated that the speech was incorrectly labeled the "Rivers of Blood" speech.....how could it be incorrectly labelled?

Speehes get routinely labelled.......Martin Luther King, John F Kennedy, Winston Churchill probably did not pre-label speeches as "I Have A Dream", "I Am A Berliner", "Blood Sweat and Tears"
Journalists and historians routinely label them afterwards.
Powells speech has been labelled Rivers of Blood.
So how can that be incorrect......unless a person believes that it appears negative, prejudicial, racist even......perhaps Powells supporters would prefer a "softer" label.........but surely it would have been the same speech.

We have moved on in our terms of reference........"Curry and Chips", "Mind Your Language", "Love Thy Neighbour", "Till Death Us Do Part" and "It aint half Hot Mum" set a scene........no longer acceptable in 2008 (lets all phone Jon Gaunt.......political correctness gone maaaaaaaaaaaaad innit?)

but alas in 2008 the racists are more subtle......
its moved from the "n word" to "I aint no racist BUT..." and codified language about work ethics, criminality, birth rates, anecdotes (usually exaggerated).

Can I just also make the point that racism is not necessarily a conservative "value". Often educated middle class people are much more sophisticated than the working class (working mens club colour bars, Smithfield meat porters, West Midlands car workers being the backbone of Powellite support).

But of course The Daily Mail (which backed Oswald Moseleys blackshirts in the 1930s) behaves to type in 2008, even if the racism is more subtle.

iguanamanc

I've done business trips that require visas, but have not worked outside the UK longer term. But what you are saying is exactly what I have said - you still require permission from many other countries to work there, it is not an automatic right.

The issue was brought up because it is 40 years since that speech, and that milestone was reported in the media. A Gallup Poll taken straight after his speech in 1968 indicated that almost 75% of those interviewed agreed with his views. Mine was not an isolated reaction to it. This was at a time, rightly or wrongly, that TV programmes such as Till Death Us Do Part and Love Thy Neighbour were amongst the most watched form of "light entertainment". That era was quite different, and your views for example would have been in a smaller minority than they are now.

spinoza

I took issue with your initial post, which seems to say that immigrants shouldn't emigrate while they can use their skills in their own country. It's purely their choice where they want to use their skills, subject to rules and regulations. I do think that certain people (myself for instance) should be allowed to work and live anywhere, but the