Reply to: Good news for Britain!

[DodgyAgent]

It's not about border controls at all, it's about whether people have the right to work and stay. Unless you're planning to turn the UK into a police state and spend 50% of GDP on an anti-immigration police force there's no practical way to hunt down anyone who gets in (even legitimately) and doesn't leave when they're meant to.

In practical terms Brexit will change nothing at the border. More than likely we'll enter into a visa-free travel arrangement with EU countries, and to do otherwise would just cost billions in beureacracy and 99% of visas would get approved anyway. The "take back control of our borders" brigade are talking nonsense; to keep trade and tourism the borders will be no less open than they are now.

All you can actually achieve is make it impossible for the same EU migrants to pay taxes in the UK. Which is why the US has largely given up pretending it can keep out the illegals, with the exception of those dumb enough to believe Trump's claims about "taking control of our borders".

Which I agree with. As far as the police state is concerned this is where I have a problem. Despite the "technicalities" of having a Democracy in the EU (as arguably every African state has) we are walking into an Orwellian world run by unelected bureaucrats (or at best those that are divvied up by our political leaders) . It is not the EU that should be removed but the people within it and the way it is constructed and run should be changed. My own view is that we should grasp this nettle now and bring it down and rebuild or reform it. If we remain the EU will expand its power and close in on itself.

[OwlHoot]

Its great to have Dyson in the UK. And disgraceful that he has to manufacture abroad.

ISTR a few years ago he was petulantly demanding to concrete over literally hundreds of acres of prime Wiltshire farmland to build factories and warehouses for his cheap tat, and in a sulk when consent was refused set up shop abroad.

Good riddance I say, if that was the case, when there are plenty of brown field sites available for factories, and doubtless for that matter disused factories.

(although I may be thinking of someone else)

[BlasterBates]

Perhaps we could find an example in world of a country where there is aging population, no immigration a refusal to join trading blocks and everyone is getting richer.

Now if you can find one, that would be a very good argument for Brexit with tightly controlled immigration.

[VectraMan]

Having your own border controls and how effective those border controls are . - Are both entirely separate issues. according to the logic of this stupid idiot a law that cannot be enforced 100% should be abandoned

It's not about border controls at all, it's about whether people have the right to work and stay. Unless you're planning to turn the UK into a police state and spend 50% of GDP on an anti-immigration police force there's no practical way to hunt down anyone who gets in (even legitimately) and doesn't leave when they're meant to.

In practical terms Brexit will change nothing at the border. More than likely we'll enter into a visa-free travel arrangement with EU countries, and to do otherwise would just cost billions in beureacracy and 99% of visas would get approved anyway. The "take back control of our borders" brigade are talking nonsense; to keep trade and tourism the borders will be no less open than they are now.

All you can actually achieve is make it impossible for the same EU migrants to pay taxes in the UK. Which is why the US has largely given up pretending it can keep out the illegals, with the exception of those dumb enough to believe Trump's claims about "taking control of our borders".

[DodgyAgent]

not sure I agree, there is some logic in getting the best for the top jobs as one great designer, businessman or inventor can literally drive an industry.

e.g. Dyson, Brunel, Ferrari, Wittle, Conran.

Just as great minds can drive research. I want the best Penis enlarger experts here attracting worldwide funding.

Now why we have to import mediocre at the mid to bottom end of the scale and undercut locals I have no idea. Truly outstanding people in mid range yes as they will develop to top end. See even Alexei is doing well.

[DodgyAgent]

And I totally disagree with this. The UK can fill those jobs with better training. A while ago I spoke to a bus driver who had done a year training course in coding, but could not get a job. I bet there are plenty of overseas coders doing the job he could have done.

Similarly for nuclear power stations. Why involve foreigners?

The UK is a small island and is full.

The ability to select means we can simply not select anyone

[BrilloPad]

not sure I agree, there is some logic in getting the best for the top jobs as one great designer, businessman or inventor can literally drive an industry.

e.g. Dyson, Brunel, Ferrari, Wittle, Conran.

Just as great minds can drive research. I want the best cancer experts here attracting worldwide funding.

Now why we have to import mediocre at the mid to bottom end of the scale and undercut locals I have no idea. Truly outstanding people in mid range yes as they will develop to top end. See even Alexei is doing well.

I don't think the people in the office below Alexei are doing that well.

Its great to have Dyson in the UK. And disgraceful that he has to manufacture abroad.

[vetran]

And I totally disagree with this. The UK can fill those jobs with better training. A while ago I spoke to a bus driver who had done a year training course in coding, but could not get a job. I bet there are plenty of overseas coders doing the job he could have done.

Similarly for nuclear power stations. Why involve foreigners?

The UK is a small island and is full.

not sure I agree, there is some logic in getting the best for the top jobs as one great designer, businessman or inventor can literally drive an industry.

e.g. Dyson, Brunel, Ferrari, Wittle, Conran.

Just as great minds can drive research. I want the best cancer experts here attracting worldwide funding.

Now why we have to import mediocre at the mid to bottom end of the scale and undercut locals I have no idea. Truly outstanding people in mid range yes as they will develop to top end. See even Alexei is doing well.

[VectraMan]

Net migration to UK rises to 333,000 - second highest on record - BBC News

I'd like to see immigration increase, but only for very highly educated and skilled individuals with a firm job offer or existing and profitable business.

So why post a hysterical headline that's purely about numbers? If it's about the type of immigrants then it's not simply a question of numbers and pressure on schools, housing, etc, as the Kippers always say that it is. If your point is that it's a large number of unskilled people that are coming here then why not argue that with evidence to back it up? And then we can argue about whether the British economy needs an army of Indian computer programmers over fruit pickers.

[jamesbrown]

The debate is not about immigration per se it is about picking and choosing who we want to bring to the UK. We cannot just keep increasing the population of the country by acting as the job repository for failing economies elsewhere. it is not unreasonable either to expect people to work longer and we should be forced into looking after and developing our own population (there are still 1.5 million unemployed in the UK) rather than sticking them on welfare and bringing in migrants from abroad.

Exactly, and the tendency among some Bremainers to accuse those with differing views as somehow bigoted, xenophobic, or even racist must be rejected as completely toxic to democracy (undeniably, this view has resulted in more extreme parties gaining traction throughout Europe). I agree with that well-known xenophobic wingnut and ex Green Party voter, Steve Hilton, we need to focus on quality, not quantity. Most of all, we need to debate it outside of the playground.

[BrilloPad]

^ This.

I'd like to see immigration increase, but only for very highly educated and skilled individuals with a firm job offer or existing and profitable business.

We just want the ability to select who can live and work here and who can't. Simples.

And I totally disagree with this. The UK can fill those jobs with better training. A while ago I spoke to a bus driver who had done a year training course in coding, but could not get a job. I bet there are plenty of overseas coders doing the job he could have done.

Similarly for nuclear power stations. Why involve foreigners?

The UK is a small island and is full.

[BrilloPad]

Ask the people you want to give MORE power too... and the real reason for most the issues you talk about...

Ouch! I am against centralising power.

As an example, MrsBP and I were talking today about baby weening. There are NHS guidelines on this. But every baby is different.

There are some decisions that Europe can really help on. Like mobile phone chargers. Trade agreements. Several others. We don't need to transfer sovereignty to get those.

[DimPrawn]

The debate is not about immigration per se it is about picking and choosing who we want to bring to the UK. We cannot just keep increasing the population of the country by acting as the job repository for failing economies elsewhere. it is not unreasonable either to expect people to work longer and we should be forced into looking after and developing our own population (there are still 1.5 million unemployed in the UK) rather than sticking them on welfare and bringing in migrants from abroad.

^ This.

I'd like to see immigration increase, but only for very highly educated and skilled individuals with a firm job offer or existing and profitable business.

We just want the ability to select who can live and work here and who can't. Simples.

[DodgyAgent]

Britain is pretty average when it comes to immigration.

Compare your country by OECD

I lived in Switzerland for 8 years and most of the people where I lived were not Swiss, the statistics bear that out and they're not in the EU.

All OECD countries have declining working populations, which is why you're seeing so much immigration everywhere. Britain would lose 250,000 from it's workforce every year with no immigration, that's a city the size of Birmigham appearing every 4 years with no productive people, sitting around tulipting and peeing in their underwear and generally going gaga.. If you want to cut immigration you either take a significant cut in your standard of living or you raise the retirement age significantly.

The debate is not about immigration per se it is about picking and choosing who we want to bring to the UK. We cannot just keep increasing the population of the country by acting as the job repository for failing economies elsewhere. it is not unreasonable either to expect people to work longer and we should be forced into looking after and developing our own population (there are still 1.5 million unemployed in the UK) rather than sticking them on welfare and bringing in migrants from abroad.

[BlasterBates]

Britain is pretty average when it comes to immigration.

Compare your country by OECD

I lived in Switzerland for 8 years and most of the people where I lived were not Swiss, the statistics bear that out and they're not in the EU.

All OECD countries have declining working populations, which is why you're seeing so much immigration everywhere. Britain would lose 250,000 from it's workforce every year with no immigration, that's a city the size of Birmigham appearing every 4 years with no productive people, sitting around tulipting and peeing in their underwear and generally going gaga.. If you want to cut immigration you either take a significant cut in your standard of living or you raise the retirement age significantly.