Net immigration is still over 300k, I don’t get all the articles claiming that it’s gone down to insignificant figures. It’s also twisted by thousands of our trained/educated/talented skilled professionals leaving the country because their prospects are so poor here
Fatkante on
This figure don’t count asylum seekers arriving on boat , does it ? I think this is the legal route they are talking about which is a shame because we need may of them to keep the country running
regprenticer on
The article says that net zero isn’t particularly likely and the number will bounce back, though not as high as it once was
> The near-term decline “is a very specific downwards blip . . . in five years’ time no one will be talking about this”, Sumption said.
GMN123 on
Net zero, or close to it, would allow housebuilding and infrastructure to catch up and maybe our younger generations could afford to buy homes.
ianlSW on
Astonishing.
As Labour haven’t immediately achieved a perfect result after the years of open borders under the Tories, and have merely made massive progress, the right leaning commenters on here will instead vote for Jenrick and Farage – the man in charge of immigration who filled up the hotels when it was at its highest ever levels, and the man who backed Boris’ and promised Brexit would bring border control.
bars_and_plates on
The focus on net immigration is an attempt by the media to spin the narrative away from the actual issues in play. It’s the same story as inflation, they just use whatever figure makes a good spicy story.
If 30 million British nationals left the country tomorrow and 30 million Martians moved in then net immigration would be zero. The people remaining would live in a completely different society full of E.T. that happened to have the same buildings and landmarks in it.
Gross immigration is equally irrelevant and misleading. The same figure could mean 500k British nationals returning from overseas, or it could mean 500k Martians moving in.
The “aligned” metrics on immigration should be things more like:
– net flow of foreign nationals, seperate from
– net flow of Brits
– what is the delta in skill capital (admittedly hard to quantify), e.g. the metric should be bad if we mostly see doctors leaving and delivery drivers entering, and vice versa
– what is the net gain/loss of wealth, both in total and on a per capita basis, i.e. the metric should be bad if we lose successful entrepreneurs to Dubai and gain significant numbers of asylum claimants
All of these are seperate, mashing Otherwise it just turns into a KPI exercise where the Government optimizes for things with downstream effects that are the opposite of we want.
6 commenti
>betteridges law of headlines
Net immigration is still over 300k, I don’t get all the articles claiming that it’s gone down to insignificant figures. It’s also twisted by thousands of our trained/educated/talented skilled professionals leaving the country because their prospects are so poor here
This figure don’t count asylum seekers arriving on boat , does it ? I think this is the legal route they are talking about which is a shame because we need may of them to keep the country running
The article says that net zero isn’t particularly likely and the number will bounce back, though not as high as it once was
> The near-term decline “is a very specific downwards blip . . . in five years’ time no one will be talking about this”, Sumption said.
Net zero, or close to it, would allow housebuilding and infrastructure to catch up and maybe our younger generations could afford to buy homes.
Astonishing.
As Labour haven’t immediately achieved a perfect result after the years of open borders under the Tories, and have merely made massive progress, the right leaning commenters on here will instead vote for Jenrick and Farage – the man in charge of immigration who filled up the hotels when it was at its highest ever levels, and the man who backed Boris’ and promised Brexit would bring border control.
The focus on net immigration is an attempt by the media to spin the narrative away from the actual issues in play. It’s the same story as inflation, they just use whatever figure makes a good spicy story.
If 30 million British nationals left the country tomorrow and 30 million Martians moved in then net immigration would be zero. The people remaining would live in a completely different society full of E.T. that happened to have the same buildings and landmarks in it.
Gross immigration is equally irrelevant and misleading. The same figure could mean 500k British nationals returning from overseas, or it could mean 500k Martians moving in.
The “aligned” metrics on immigration should be things more like:
– net flow of foreign nationals, seperate from
– net flow of Brits
– what is the delta in skill capital (admittedly hard to quantify), e.g. the metric should be bad if we mostly see doctors leaving and delivery drivers entering, and vice versa
– what is the net gain/loss of wealth, both in total and on a per capita basis, i.e. the metric should be bad if we lose successful entrepreneurs to Dubai and gain significant numbers of asylum claimants
All of these are seperate, mashing Otherwise it just turns into a KPI exercise where the Government optimizes for things with downstream effects that are the opposite of we want.