Migrants go home!? Our economy is broken!

Command_doh

LE
Book Reviewer
#1
The government is "floundering around" on UK immigration because it believes the issue is an "electoral liability", the shadow home secretary has said.

Dominic Grieve spoke out after the government said the number of migrants entering via the points system may have to be cut due to the economic crisis.

Immigration minister Phil Woolas told the Times immigration became "extremely thorny" if people were losing jobs.

The Tories have urged the government to show how they would deliver the plans.

Mr Woolas said the government would not allow the UK population to pass 70 million.

He said setting a population policy - which would be a first for Labour - would enable the government to set a limit on migration.

In a wide-ranging interview Mr Woolas, who became immigration minister earlier this month, told the Times: "It's been too easy to get into this country in the past and it's going to get harder.

"There has to be a balance between the number of people coming in and the number of people leaving."

Tougher immigration policies would also require getting the British "back to work", for example with more retraining for the unemployed, he said.

Mr Grieve said Labour were matching Tory policies on setting immigration limits.

But he insisted it needed to be "carefully explained".

"The government hasn't got to grips with this issue at all, and that they're floundering around because they know it's now become a serious electoral liability."

He added: "Tough talk is simply not enough, they must now explain how they intend to deliver."

'Powerful controls'

The government recently introduced a new points-based system to attract migrants from outside the EU to certain jobs.

The Home Office said the UK's new system provided "a powerful and flexible set of controls" which allowed it to "raise or lower the bar" according to needs.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics show the population grew by nearly two million to 60,975,000 people between 2001 and 2007.

Various official projections predict this to rise to 77m in 2051 or 110m in 2081.

BBC political correspondent Ross Hawkins said it was significant Mr Woolas had quoted an upper limit for the UK population.

The government had previously shied away from setting a "population policy" because it was difficult for ministers to explain how it would be managed, he said.

This is because immigration from inside the EU cannot be controlled, and neither can a limit be placed on genuine claims for asylum.

Former Labour minister Frank Field, a member of a cross-party group on immigration, welcomed Mr Woolas's comments.

The MP for Birkenhead said when the country was moving into a recession the immigration policy suitable for a boom was unsuitable.

He said the key was to "break the link" between people coming to the UK to work and gaining citizenship, which increased the population.

'Distorted picture'

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, which argues for balanced migration, told BBC Five Live Mr Woolas's remarks showed a significant development in the immigration debate.

"This is the very first time that a government minister has recognised the link between immigration and population," he said.

But the chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, Keith Vaz, said he disagreed with Mr Woolas.

A Labour government had never supported a quota for immigration, he said, adding that the points-based system was based on needs of the economy and not numbers.

He said the government should avoid providing a vehicle for the "distorted picture the far right will want to portray".

Keith Best, chief executive of the Immigration Advisory Service, said immigration quotas were not workable in a modern trading economy.

"What are you going to say to the employer who is desperate to fill a job, but can't find anyone suitable in the European economic area?" he said.

"Are you going to say 'sorry, the quota has been filled, you'll have to wait till next year'?"

Chris Huhne, the Lib Dem's home affairs spokesman, said it was surprising the issue was being considered now, when many immigrants were returning home because of the financial crisis.

"I do find it rather worrying that Labour and the Conservatives seem to be opening up this debate now at a time when traditionally people have looked for scapegoats in immigrant communities for economic problems, and in fact exactly the opposite is the case.

"The people who get the hardest hit first are often migrant communities."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7677962.stm
And there was me thinking Immigration was 'solved' seeing as it's not been in the media for about 5 minutes.

Thoughts anyone?
 
#2
God forbid the unemployed should be encouraged or "educated" back into work! Is the dole not a god-given right? Right ho, onto disablility allowance for me then-ooh me back!
 
#3
They're about 6 months too late, most of the migrant workers have gone home as the pound is so weak against the euro.

It's amazing that the migrant workers get slated so much when they do the jobs that others wouldn't, they probably paid more tax in a year than the dole scroungers who racially abuse them and tell them to go home have done in their lives.
 
#4
Northern Monkey said:
God forbid the unemployed should be encouraged or "educated" back into work! Is the dole not a god-given right? Right ho, onto disablility allowance for me then-ooh me back!
I have lived in The Democratic Republic of Lumbago for the past 30 years!
 

Command_doh

LE
Book Reviewer
#7
Argee2007 said:
They're about 6 months too late, most of the migrant workers have gone home as the pound is so weak against the euro.

It's amazing that the migrant workers get slated so much when they do the jobs that others wouldn't, they probably paid more tax in a year than the dole scroungers who racially abuse them and tell them to go home have done in their lives.
It's exactly the EU migrant workers that they are worried about, but only because they cannot control their migration (since we sold our laws down the river in favour of the EU variety).

So as there are now god knows how many Romanians (and Bulgarians to a lesser extent) - who are not exactly shy in asking for free money and houses - added to the the hundreds and thousands of the other (hardworking) EU economic migrants living here, the Gobment are panicing a tad. Jobs are being cut all over the place, and despite the comments that some are returning home, significant numbers are not. As they qualify for dole payouts after 2 years in country. And most have been here since 2005.

So the only people they can stop coming here is the non - EU economic migrants. And they will, to a certain extent. But there will still be ways around the system. I know for a fact that many Financial sector employee's have changed (or are in the process of changing) their work permits to 'skilled migrant' so as to bypass the Work Permit quota, as many are now in fear of losing their jobs. So they will have to cut back on the number of 'skilled migrant' visa's being issued.
 
#8
Turf out everybody who has arrived in the last 10 years or so then make the lazy workshy muppets (like Sven) get off their bone idle arses to take up the slack.
 
#9
Northern Monkey said:
God forbid the unemployed should be encouraged or "educated" back into work! Is the dole not a god-given right? Right ho, onto disablility allowance for me then-ooh me back!
I met somebody a while ago who had been on one of these courses, north of the border.

Day one covered interview skills, including making yourself clean and tidy. Everybody was given a little bag containing some toiletries.

One of the candidates stood up and shouted "Are ye tryin' to say we're manky?"

He then launched his free can of deodorant at the instructor before storming out shouting "Get me ma social worker".

Working with the unemployed. It's not just a job. It's an adventure.
 
#11
AndyPipkin said:
Simple fact is that it's the skilled, decent hard-working migrants who will leave, whilst those who come to sponge off benefits will stay.
Unless they've settled down and established roots here, I fear you're right. We're in danger of going for the easy targets yet again while making no effort to target the real cause of our problems - the vast masses of idleness who simply won't earn their own way regardless of how hard they're pushed.

If we're going to cut down on immigration we also have to 'incentivise' the layabouts we seem to produce in such numbers. My personal favourite is to cap the total amount any family is able to claim in benefits at a bare minimum. Just found out Little Timmy has autism? Tough. You're already getting top whack for Auntie June's Type-2 diabetes and motability panzer. Want more? Get a job. Like the rest of us have to if we want a better standard of living.

Working immigrants contribute far more to UK than this lot. Fair play to them. Disclaimer: I'm married to one and therefore possibly biased.
 
#12
smartascarrots said:
AndyPipkin said:
Simple fact is that it's the skilled, decent hard-working migrants who will leave, whilst those who come to sponge off benefits will stay.
Unless they've settled down and established roots here, I fear you're right. We're in danger of going for the easy targets yet again while making no effort to target the real cause of our problems - the vast masses of idleness who simply won't earn their own way regardless of how hard they're pushed.

If we're going to cut down on immigration we also have to 'incentivise' the layabouts we seem to produce in such numbers. My personal favourite is to cap the total amount any family is able to claim in benefits at a bare minimum. Just found out Little Timmy has autism? Tough. You're already getting top whack for Auntie June's Type-2 diabetes and motability panzer. Want more? Get a job. Like the rest of us have to if we want a better standard of living.

Working immigrants contribute far more to UK than this lot. Fair play to them. Disclaimer: I'm married to one and therefore possibly biased.
Steady on. A lot of genuinely ill people need the benefits to survive, and that existance is poor at best. What does need to happen is a change in unemployment benefits so that people have an incentive to go back into work. It also rests on the doctors to require more in the way of proof when people are claiming a disability, although a lot of that is to do with just how easy it is to fake an illness.
 
#13
Of course it's easy to fake it. Look at this link and see how many people are now claiming IB for stress, FGS.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2096603/Stress-benefits-claimants-boom-under-Labour.html

An 800 percent increase? And how many are claiming for having a "bad back"?
FGS, I'm stressed out at work with some of the stupid civvies I now have to work with but don't claim it as "unable to work". And I just don't believe that almost 3 million people in this country are so "disabled" that they can't work, even if only shelf stacking in a local supermarket.
 
#14
[/quote]
Steady on. A lot of genuinely ill people need the benefits to survive, and that existance is poor at best. What does need to happen is a change in unemployment benefits so that people have an incentive to go back into work. It also rests on the doctors to require more in the way of proof when people are claiming a disability, although a lot of that is to do with just how easy it is to fake an illness.[/quote]

Yes absolutely, why should doley boy next door to me who has not worked for 12 years have free rent, £60 a week and free council tax. Fit enough to climb in his attic and grow cannabis.

Maybe we should have a clever dumb balance and offer the dolies the job of spud picking or any available which they can do. If they refuse, then they go live in Poland and a Polish worker comes over here.
 
S

stabradop

Guest
#15
jarrod248 said:
I cannot imagine anyone knows that the population is and the migrants will do the jobs that our sponging Chavs will never do anyway.
I have noticed things are getting tougher for people on benefits being made to go on courses to get them into work.
I have been on a couple of those courses. One was just about filling out forms and doing a CV etc. The other one (which I managed to avoid) was just turning up a couple of times a week and doing a job search. I managed to force them to send me on a courier training course instead which has since borne fruit.

The trouble is the DWP do very little to get people back into work until you have been off for a while. It's only when the New Deal kicks in (after a long long time and is age dependant) do the "advisors" actually pull their finger out.

It was only after doing research on my own and having a decent pragmatic new deal advisor that I got on the courier course, otherwise I would have been forced to spend 13 weeks doing what I already had been. this has resulted in me getting a trial which will lead to a job. Plus I now get some money toward any kit I need.

The whole system needs an overhaul and the DWP need to employ people who will actually work for their living rather than just sit there and chat to each other. One thing I used to notice is that they would jump down your neck if you were a minute late but would be more than happy to sit and chat with each other for 15 minutes past signing time while you sit there waiting.
 
#16
jew_unit said:
Steady on. A lot of genuinely ill people need the benefits to survive, and that existance is poor at best.
And survival is what I'm talking about. If you want more than bare survival you need to work for it. Can't work? That's too bad for you and yours and I genuinely sympathise. But not to the point of being willing to deprive me and mine to subsidise the non-essential spending of the out of work.

As said, it's too easy to fake an illness. It's also far less effort than getting out of bed in the morning and means you don't need to miss your soaps.
 
#17
smartascarrots said:
AndyPipkin said:
Simple fact is that it's the skilled, decent hard-working migrants who will leave, whilst those who come to sponge off benefits will stay.
Unless they've settled down and established roots here, I fear you're right. We're in danger of going for the easy targets yet again while making no effort to target the real cause of our problems - the vast masses of idleness who simply won't earn their own way regardless of how hard they're pushed.

If we're going to cut down on immigration we also have to 'incentivise' the layabouts we seem to produce in such numbers. My personal favourite is to cap the total amount any family is able to claim in benefits at a bare minimum. Just found out Little Timmy has autism? Tough. You're already getting top whack for Auntie June's Type-2 diabetes and motability panzer. Want more? Get a job. Like the rest of us have to if we want a better standard of living.

Working immigrants contribute far more to UK than this lot. Fair play to them. Disclaimer: I'm married to one and therefore possibly biased.
One quarter of our adult population is unemployed and one third of people live in homes where most of the household income comes from welfare. The government spends 190 billion quid per year to keep that lot in plasma tellys and mobile phone top ups.

To put things into perspective, 190 billion is only about 10% less than spending on health, education and defence combined. One third of all government spending goes on welfare.

That's an awful lot of vested interest in the status quo. An incoming government will have to have the cajones do to the welfare state what Thatcher did to the unions in the 1980s. Frankly, Dave's cajones pale into insignificance when compared to Maggies.

A few things that he might have the stomach to consider:-

1. Enforce the work permit regulations correctly. Migrant workers aren't supposed to get a UK work permit unless there's no readily available Brit to do the job. The fact that permits are being doled out to non-EU recent graduates to do their graduate apprenticeships in the UK makes a mockery of this.

2. Stop giving non-EU companies tax free status. British businesses simply can't compete with this.

3. Stop the anomaly where benefits pay more than a minimum wage job.

4. Stop letting people on benefits refuse to take jobs that they are offered.

5. Stop letting people claim incapacity benefit for acne, depression, drug addiction, obesity, alcoholism and, god help us, 'unknown and unspecified ailments'.

You know it makes sense. Vote Mariner in the next election.
 
#18
Me, 40 years ago arriving at a farm. "You have a pound a day and your grub and your job is muckspreading".

Me, ' Where's the muckspreader ?'

George Haines - 'that's you Joe Soap, fork it out of the cots and onto the trailer, then you fork it across the meadows'.
 
S

stabradop

Guest
#19
So long as the course have a purpose ie: leading to a specific job or industry.

A few other things might help such as not allowing recruitment agencies to advertise jobs that are not available just to fill up their databases. Encourage employers to advertise through the jobcentre first and allow the staff there to vet the potential applicants first.

AM

I turned down a job offer on the basis that you needed a full driving licence (which I don't have). The jobcentre bod insisited that I take the job until I pointed that out to them (it was on their computer). The only good thing that came of all the hassle I got is that the jobcentre bod who was making all the fuss lost her temporary promotion (I made a huge complaint as did the employer whom I rang about it).
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top