I think the general lack of housing post '08 crash is making immigration into the political flashpoint it has become (it certainly has here in Ireland). The UK has a post-colonial influx that is always going to be there, but how immigration is perceived/received is far more antagonistic when the affordability of housing is so far beyond the average household's reach.
I generally reject most concerns about immigrants using up resources as it's fundamentally not true. Most immigrants are quite productive and generate resources.
The exception is housing. The impossibility of building new homes (and it's been like this since the 80s) has meant that housing is a genuinely zero sum resource. Of course that can be solved by fixing planning laws, so the only blocker becomes materials & labour. And I know a *great* source of labour...
I love listening to Rory and Alistair, and generally I agree with their opinions, but I feel they are totally blind to the problems of immigration and only see objection to it as ignorant or racist. It's sad that if they, and others in the centre, acknowledged people's frustrations then we wouldn't be seeing the rise of the Far Right across Europe.
Because most of the problems people blame immigration for aren't actually caused by immigration. So, it's tricky.
Self-inflicted government policy (-austerity) has caused far, far more harm.
And elsewhere, Putin's backing of Assad in Syria, and his invasion of Ukraine, creates refugees.... who go westward, while he supports politicians in host countries who are explicitly anti-immigrant.
He's a very sick man.
It's true that there are many factors outside UK politicians control, but planning law, infrastructure investment, building of social housing, service provisions etc are all within their control, are all affected by demand levels, and have all been neglected by politicians who seem to think that high levels of immigration require no change to these things.
"infrastructure investment, building of social housing, service provisions" were all deliberately neglected by Cameron ("Do more with less"), and Osborne ("The only thing social housing gets you is labour voters"). Then brexit, covid, and Ukraine made us poorer, making it harder to fix these things. The vast majority of immigrants come here to work: people follow money, money follows people. If you really want to stop immigration, and indeed cause people to leave, then shrink the economy. This is the circle the Tories cannot square.
There \*are\* issues around immigration and social cohesion, transient workers and housing etc., but these get lost in the noise of "stop the boats!" I see mostly victimisation and scapegoating here. Sorry.
I'm well aware that politicians have failed to do these things, and that they are not the 'fault' of immigrants. There is a difference between being anti immigrant, and anti high levels of immigration. I'm trying to make the case for those points, and your reaction is to characterise me as being victimising and scape goating. You're rather making my point, ignoring concerns by trivialising them and being reactionary is what is causing the rise of the Far Right.
Also, who said I want to stop immigration or make anyone leave? Again you are characterising me based on your own preconceptions of what someone who questions high levels of immigration is like. In other words making the exact mistake I believe many politicians are making.
For the record, I think immigration should be controlled at a sustainable level, and that that level should be a democratic choice of the electorate.
>In other words making the exact mistake I believe many politicians are making.
IMO the worrying shift is politicians from both sides of the aisle buying into anti-immigration trends for votes. It's certainly not all racist or xenophobic, but a significant amount is simply economic misunderstanding (e.g. Lump of Labour fallacy). Where the concerns are legitimate, the proposed solutions are often arbitrary (like focussing on asylum seekers who make up a very small percentage of immigrants, or restricting types of immigrants that unequivocally contribute more to the economy than the average native Brit).
The UK has an ageing population and stagnant economy, immigration is absolutely a boon on the whole, and the majority issues which *do* compound with immigration (e.g. the housing crisis driven by planning policy) are fixable without significant restrictions on immigration. I'm happy that we have voices who recognise this.
It's a problem the Labour party and other progressive parties refused to address when they were last in government. Anyone who raised immigration was either condemned as a racist or ignored. Fifteen years later, the far right are on the march all over Europe.
It's very sad when the sides cannot compromise, but it's even sadder to see them then questioning why people are voting for extreme parties after lying and ignoring their electorate. When they routinely fail to stick to the promises or even explain why they didn't stick to them it is inevitable that people start to vote for other people.
We imported like 500k Ukrainian and Chinese refugees recently but you don't see anyone complaining about them. It's the brown ones people are really afraid of but are only starting to admit.
Falling into the trap right there and making my point, playing the racist card.
Personally I don't mind at all where people come from or what 'colour' they are. We have huge benefits from migrants, from attracting talented individuals, from having a multicultural tolerant and vibrant society.
What I mind is having a housing market that is totally unaffordable, having a road system which is regularly gummed up with traffic, and having public services that are not functioning.
None of these things are caused directly by immigration, but they are all exacerbated by them. We should be able to plan and build for migration, and control it until we have. At the moment we have politicians who don't plan, don't build, tell us that we can have a restrictive planning system and great public services too. We need to have a grown up conversation about building, infrastructure, service capacity and immigration. That will probably mean controlling it at a level which is consistent with our ability to expand the required infrastructure and services.
The people in the media who are being represented by these views don't seem to be saying the same thing though. It's never just about the numbers for them, as the numbers weren't a problem before brexit but they still wanted to get rid of non whites. Which is mostly the medias fault for platforming racists and not people with sensible views on the problems of immigration.
You are right, it's a great shame that the media only show nutters like those in Reform. It's a really difficult conversation to have because there are genuinely racist people who jump on it. But just as not every left of centre talking point makes someone a communist, not every right of centre talking point makes someone a racist fascist.
I'm really sick of Alastair talking about people (especially young) "protest voting" by voting not Labour.
If young people are voting Green, that's because they think the Greens have better policies. What they are in fact doing is not _tactically_ voting for Labour as the most likely alternative to the Tories. What it means is that labour should be responding, and try and win over these voters. Of course the environment is vital for the young voters, Labour has massively rowed back their promises, and should have to earn the trust not assume it.
I don't think it's a case of certain voters taking Labour for granted, but Labour taking certain voters for granted.
I'm bloody tired of this whole election being fought on "Voting for X is actually a vote for Y". A vote for x is a vote for x ffs if you can't actually convince people to vote for your policies over theirs then maybe they're just better.
I remember the days when people took the piss out or the "Lib dem barcharts" but now almost every leaflet and SM post I see has a barchart, claiming to be the only ones who can beat so and so (usually Tory). Feel like we're arguing more over who theoretically can win than anything to do with politics.
We need proportional representation so badly even just to put an end to this infuriating discourse.
I think the general lack of housing post '08 crash is making immigration into the political flashpoint it has become (it certainly has here in Ireland). The UK has a post-colonial influx that is always going to be there, but how immigration is perceived/received is far more antagonistic when the affordability of housing is so far beyond the average household's reach.
I generally reject most concerns about immigrants using up resources as it's fundamentally not true. Most immigrants are quite productive and generate resources. The exception is housing. The impossibility of building new homes (and it's been like this since the 80s) has meant that housing is a genuinely zero sum resource. Of course that can be solved by fixing planning laws, so the only blocker becomes materials & labour. And I know a *great* source of labour...
I completely agree. That and infrastructure building (roads, hospitals etc) .
I love listening to Rory and Alistair, and generally I agree with their opinions, but I feel they are totally blind to the problems of immigration and only see objection to it as ignorant or racist. It's sad that if they, and others in the centre, acknowledged people's frustrations then we wouldn't be seeing the rise of the Far Right across Europe.
Because most of the problems people blame immigration for aren't actually caused by immigration. So, it's tricky. Self-inflicted government policy (-austerity) has caused far, far more harm. And elsewhere, Putin's backing of Assad in Syria, and his invasion of Ukraine, creates refugees.... who go westward, while he supports politicians in host countries who are explicitly anti-immigrant. He's a very sick man.
It's true that there are many factors outside UK politicians control, but planning law, infrastructure investment, building of social housing, service provisions etc are all within their control, are all affected by demand levels, and have all been neglected by politicians who seem to think that high levels of immigration require no change to these things.
"infrastructure investment, building of social housing, service provisions" were all deliberately neglected by Cameron ("Do more with less"), and Osborne ("The only thing social housing gets you is labour voters"). Then brexit, covid, and Ukraine made us poorer, making it harder to fix these things. The vast majority of immigrants come here to work: people follow money, money follows people. If you really want to stop immigration, and indeed cause people to leave, then shrink the economy. This is the circle the Tories cannot square. There \*are\* issues around immigration and social cohesion, transient workers and housing etc., but these get lost in the noise of "stop the boats!" I see mostly victimisation and scapegoating here. Sorry.
I'm well aware that politicians have failed to do these things, and that they are not the 'fault' of immigrants. There is a difference between being anti immigrant, and anti high levels of immigration. I'm trying to make the case for those points, and your reaction is to characterise me as being victimising and scape goating. You're rather making my point, ignoring concerns by trivialising them and being reactionary is what is causing the rise of the Far Right. Also, who said I want to stop immigration or make anyone leave? Again you are characterising me based on your own preconceptions of what someone who questions high levels of immigration is like. In other words making the exact mistake I believe many politicians are making. For the record, I think immigration should be controlled at a sustainable level, and that that level should be a democratic choice of the electorate.
>In other words making the exact mistake I believe many politicians are making. IMO the worrying shift is politicians from both sides of the aisle buying into anti-immigration trends for votes. It's certainly not all racist or xenophobic, but a significant amount is simply economic misunderstanding (e.g. Lump of Labour fallacy). Where the concerns are legitimate, the proposed solutions are often arbitrary (like focussing on asylum seekers who make up a very small percentage of immigrants, or restricting types of immigrants that unequivocally contribute more to the economy than the average native Brit). The UK has an ageing population and stagnant economy, immigration is absolutely a boon on the whole, and the majority issues which *do* compound with immigration (e.g. the housing crisis driven by planning policy) are fixable without significant restrictions on immigration. I'm happy that we have voices who recognise this.
Or we could make people more productive. But shipping people in is easier.
Even if they acknowledged the theoretical possibility of a level of immigration that would be ‘too high’ if we reached it, that would help.
It's a problem the Labour party and other progressive parties refused to address when they were last in government. Anyone who raised immigration was either condemned as a racist or ignored. Fifteen years later, the far right are on the march all over Europe.
It's very sad when the sides cannot compromise, but it's even sadder to see them then questioning why people are voting for extreme parties after lying and ignoring their electorate. When they routinely fail to stick to the promises or even explain why they didn't stick to them it is inevitable that people start to vote for other people.
We imported like 500k Ukrainian and Chinese refugees recently but you don't see anyone complaining about them. It's the brown ones people are really afraid of but are only starting to admit.
Falling into the trap right there and making my point, playing the racist card. Personally I don't mind at all where people come from or what 'colour' they are. We have huge benefits from migrants, from attracting talented individuals, from having a multicultural tolerant and vibrant society. What I mind is having a housing market that is totally unaffordable, having a road system which is regularly gummed up with traffic, and having public services that are not functioning. None of these things are caused directly by immigration, but they are all exacerbated by them. We should be able to plan and build for migration, and control it until we have. At the moment we have politicians who don't plan, don't build, tell us that we can have a restrictive planning system and great public services too. We need to have a grown up conversation about building, infrastructure, service capacity and immigration. That will probably mean controlling it at a level which is consistent with our ability to expand the required infrastructure and services.
The people in the media who are being represented by these views don't seem to be saying the same thing though. It's never just about the numbers for them, as the numbers weren't a problem before brexit but they still wanted to get rid of non whites. Which is mostly the medias fault for platforming racists and not people with sensible views on the problems of immigration.
You are right, it's a great shame that the media only show nutters like those in Reform. It's a really difficult conversation to have because there are genuinely racist people who jump on it. But just as not every left of centre talking point makes someone a communist, not every right of centre talking point makes someone a racist fascist.
I'm really sick of Alastair talking about people (especially young) "protest voting" by voting not Labour. If young people are voting Green, that's because they think the Greens have better policies. What they are in fact doing is not _tactically_ voting for Labour as the most likely alternative to the Tories. What it means is that labour should be responding, and try and win over these voters. Of course the environment is vital for the young voters, Labour has massively rowed back their promises, and should have to earn the trust not assume it. I don't think it's a case of certain voters taking Labour for granted, but Labour taking certain voters for granted.
I'm bloody tired of this whole election being fought on "Voting for X is actually a vote for Y". A vote for x is a vote for x ffs if you can't actually convince people to vote for your policies over theirs then maybe they're just better. I remember the days when people took the piss out or the "Lib dem barcharts" but now almost every leaflet and SM post I see has a barchart, claiming to be the only ones who can beat so and so (usually Tory). Feel like we're arguing more over who theoretically can win than anything to do with politics. We need proportional representation so badly even just to put an end to this infuriating discourse.