I tweeted this yesterday.
I was sickened by Patel's smile as she said she'd make sure she took away the human rights of people in the UK.
I was appalled as she stated her aim to make the world a worse place.
I was ashamed and sickened that this was happening in this country.
It seems a lot of people agreed.
There is no room for this in the twenty-first century.
And that's why I oppose those who want to leave the EU.
Staggering that a daughter of migrants should even want to say that. As a person from an economically migrant family (yes, that's why the Irish came to England) I am sickened by this https://t.co/ybbHKABBKx
— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) October 1, 2019
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Nothing ‘pretty’ about this at all. Ugly stuff.
I’ve seen a fair bit of this in immigrant families over the years – they get on and make something of themselves, fight against prejudice even but when they think they have made it – and when the Establishment finds a totemic/tokenistic role for them – they somehow forget where they have come from.
I understand her family got away from Idi Amin? I know Hindu’s who fled that regime and they are lovely people despite their suffering. Our local temple loves to cook for people (the Langar at the Sikh temple too). And then look at Priti -Tory to a Tee.
Priti shitty in my opinion.
There is nothing “sickening” about a country having control over its own borders, and deciding upon an immigration policy that is in the interests of its citizens. It is perfectly legitimate for a sovereign country to opt out of the EU Freedom of Movement, if it wants to. It is a sensible idea that is supported by a majority of people in this country, who are concerned about the massively high and unprecedented levels of inward immigration over the last 15 years, which are in no way comparable with the levels when your family came here, or when the Patels came, for that matter.
I am no fan of Priti Patel, but that is all she is saying – only a short while ago the leadership of the Labour Party was agreeing. Unfortunately Labour have now completely lost the plot and voted for what is, in effect, an open border immigration policy, an insane policy that will further undermine our welfare state, NHS and social fabric. I cannot understand how a sensible person like you isn’t directing your ire at this plan, rather than the words spoken by Priti Patel.
We hear a lot these days about “words have consequences”; I’d say for you to demonise the beliefs of millions of people as “sickening” is a matter for concern – it is all part of a concerted effort by certain parts of society who have influence to make the whole issue of immigration beyond debate.
We do have control over our borders, now. Most immigration is under our sole control. We don’t seem to exercise that control, but that’s another issue.
And what is it about migration that actually worries you? Economically there is no doubt that migrants add to the UK, so what else is it that concerns you?
And why is it that you are so keen to stop the free movement if British citizens who want to leave the UK? Is that a benefit? Why?
I am curious
I am in favour of migration, but not at the huge and historic levels of recent times, with net migration at around 250k mark or more annually, along with whatever migration that is unrecorded. This places a huge strain on housing, the NHS, schools etc, and also encourages employers/business to employ ready trained migrants from abroad, rather than investing in/training people already here. It may be economically beneficial by some measures, but it has a huge impact on work home and social fabric.
The Labour plan, which grants full citizenship and benefits to migrants whoever they may be, with no serious action to remove those arriving illegally, will make the UK an even more attractive place for migrants to come, and they surely will do (why shouldn’t they) until there are so many that we can no longer provide them (or anyone else) with the free schooling, healthcare, welfare benefits that makes this country a good place to live. Is that not a reasonable concern?
Alan
I agree there is stress in housing, but few suggest it is migration created
The NHS is massively dependent upon migration for staff at all levels
And schools are threatened by UK based growth – more children are being born here to all groups in society – which helps make us sustainable when failing to reprdocue is a real issue in many countries – so that is good news
I accept the point re training – but in universities, for example, appointment is blind on this issue – best candidates win and there aren’t enough (by a long way) from the UK because they will not do this work
I am not supporting the Labour plan: I think migration always has to be managed. My point is, it has been and we have gained from it
So please tell me what the evidence is that we have not?
@Alan Tyler
It seems to me the people who are mostly in favour of restricting free movement fall into one of three categories
1) The people who have moved already to where they want to be.
2) Those who, because they are wealthy or well connected, think they won’t personally be adversely affected.
3) Those who have no desire to go anywhere, and no expectation that they will never want to, let alone need to.
I think these people lack any breadth of imagination and have not inherited any folk memory, or taken on board multiple lessons from, even relatively recent, history.
Well, those characterisations are not true of me, so you are wrong.
Alan Tyler says:
“Well, those characterisations are not true of me, so you are wrong.”
Just because you are not true to type doesn’t invalidate my observation on the generality…..
I agree that ending FoM is only one measure for the effective management of migration, and that it is not obvious what the Tories under Boris Johnson are really committed to.
I am in favour of migration, but not at the historically unprecedented levels we’ve had over the last 15 years or so, at around 250k net migration per year, or more, (roughly 500k new people every year) not including migration that is not unrecorded. This places a huge strain on NHS, housing, schools etc, even if there are some economic benefits by some measures like GDP. In 2016 for instance ,there were 750k new GP registrations from migrants (ONS) – some double counting there but the figure is indicative – that shows a massive annual increase in patients year by year. Another thing – freedom of movement/high migration encourages employers to take on ready trained foreign labour rather than investing in and training and employing our own citizens. There is little incentive to do anything else when we can attract trained and willing labour from around the world.
The Labour plan, which would effectively grant citizenship rights to anyone who comes here, including the vote, access to benefits, free health care, etc, will make the UK an even more attractive destination for people around the world. My concern is that so many will arrive that we will soon find that we can no longer provide these benefits to them, or indeed to ourselves. Is that not a reasonable concern? It seems obvious that this is what will occur if we do nothing to stop it. But increasingly, anyone who raises such a concern is reviled.
Might you answer my questions?
My last two attempts to respond here seem to have disappeared on your website, so the answer might have to be no.
I have not deleted anything
So far you have made no serious attempt to answer – because the problems you strate are caused by austerity and not migration
“reviled”?, Alan Tyler? I think not, merely called out for having views which are demonstrably a confection of unproven generalisations and which cumulatively give effective comfort to others whose anti-mmigrant rhetoric is based in demonstrable racism.
Your plaint that immigration is “putting huge strain on” the NHS is a perfect example. You cite a number for new immigration generated patients – but neither give a source nor do you attempt any balancing computation of immigration generated doctors, nurses, lab technicians etc. etc. The airy assumption that new training can make up for lack of ‘home’ applicants makes no sense as it totally fails to even attempt a calculation of the time lag involved in such a ‘fix’. The overall effect is to paint immigrants as a problem stoked by “historically unprecedented” numbers. Just how does this line of generalisation differ from the language of the Farages and Pattels?
What all these ‘voices’ have in common is a blindness to (a) the proven economic balance of benefit which immigration – yes, and mass migration – brings to the ‘host’ country, (b) the extent to which the foreign policies of the supposedly “strained” host countries have generated the misery of mass refugee movements and (c) the facts that people are drawn especially to these islands because islands seem relatively safe places and because we speak and use the world’s lingua franca – English.
The abolition of our rights as citizens of Europe to free movement in our own continent is a stain of shame for which this Breximaniac mob will never be forgiven. Lastly, as a Scot (part Scottish, Irish, Scandanavian, English, Spanish with a tincture of Nigerian) I’m particularly proud that the SNP is a pro-immigraion party of determined Europeans.
Alan Tyler: “The Labour plan, which would effectively grant citizenship rights to anyone who comes here, including the vote, access to benefits, free health care, etc, will make the UK an even more attractive destination for people around the world. My concern is that so many will arrive that we will soon find that we can no longer provide these benefits to them, or indeed to ourselves. Is that not a reasonable concern? It seems obvious that this is what will occur if we do nothing to stop it. But increasingly, anyone who raises such a concern is reviled.”
How will an influx of people many of whom are demonstrably more than happy to do the work involved in healthcare create a problem in supplying it? Let us not forget too this will be happening in an environment where many of our old people will be retiring abroad on a permanent basis and many of our young will be leaving to take up careers and live their lives elsewhere in the EU. Where’s the problem?
In London at the moment – talking to money men. Passing lots of building sites – lots of non-Brits working on them. Doubtless a mix of the skilled and the unskilled. Funy how the Brtis seem to be incapable of training crafts people (or indeed engineers that, post degree, become…..engineers as opposed to finaciers). Anyway, Patel will be doubtless happy to see all the non-Brits return from whence they came, building activity in London will cease – what then? Doubtless the Tories will put together an abitious plan (& funding) to get Britain “up-skilled” – in fairness, they have been talking about it off & on for 40 odd years – you never know something may happen – oh look a couple of pigs just flew past the hotel window (doubtless bloody foreigners! – foreign flying pigs taking business away from British flying pigs – what is the world coming to?)).
If you don’t like Priti Patel’s views, don’t vote for her. You don’t have that option with Charles Michel and Ursula von der Leyen. Stop equating every disgusting Tory with people who just think the EU is undemocratic.
We do have the option with Commissioners – their appointment is approved by our democratically elected representatives
Our Cabinet is not
Why not point out the real issues?
‘Why not point out the real issues?’ (To Andy Tyler).
May I? Thanks. I don’t need to be asked twice.
We as a country have increasingly relied on immigration in sectors of our economy because of wages – which have not really recovered from the 2008 crash. Remember that the late grate(sic) David Cameron telling us in 2011 that we Brits had to compete on the world stage by working for less money. Yes – he really did. It’s on Youtube.
A rather good documentary recently pointed out that a lot of our carers for our elderly come from the immigrant population as does a fair number working in our NHS.
In the documentary some typical English people were asked about working with the elderly in the care system but the overwhelming response was ‘Not for minimum wage’. Housing costs are factor in this – the UK has some of the highest accommodation costs in the Eurozone. So much for Thatcher’s ‘home owning democracy’ that can’t even help people to own homes anymore. And now Boris can’t even give them democracy either!!!
Anyhow, since 2010, we’ve had austerity (from the Tories Andy) and public sector wages and investment has been harshly cut as the Tories look for another of their Unicorns called ‘balancing the books’ ( BREXIT is their best work as far as Unicorn’s are concerned however – it’s so good even Labour want to adopt it).
A lot of English – born people haven’t put up with that and have left this public service or that for the private sector or have emigrated (even better I say). The recruitment gap has been taken up with the country buying in work forces from other countries (forgetting of course the impact of the loss of highly trained people to the donor country – but sod them hey).
The recruitment gap is also exacerbated because as an austerity measure, access grants to colleges have been hacked away so those less academic youngsters can’t go to college to learn a trade. Yes there are apprenticeships but not enough places.
Or, because of cuts to education and giving a lot of what is left in the budget to another Tory Unicorn – ‘Free Schools’, those schools set up in the town I work in to cater for vocational training have had to close down those facilities and leave them unused just so they can deliver the basic curriculum (whatever it is called these days).
So this is why we have a shortage of English born brick layers and we see a lot of Eastern Europeans instead or why some of the firms I work with have to employ Spanish quantity surveyors – because we are incapable of producing our own – or enough of them.
There are always people who as immigrants are not able for whatever reason to contribute to the economy but these cases also occur naturally in our own communities. But a heck of a lot do contribute Andy because we do not seem to want to invest in our own people – the people we have here already – either because of stupid ideas like austerity or because as a country we are obsessed with doing and getting things on the cheap.
Since we have reduced the influence of trades unions (another Tory Unicorn seems to be to get rid of Unions forever) , we don’t seem to take decent wages seriously anymore either. And so the infernal logic of the race to the bottom ensues – low wages = constant search for that which is cheap. And immigrants who have been used to much lower remuneration at home are quite happy it seems to work for what is better wage to them here but obviously a lower wage for the indigenous population.
I must also add, that for a Government of these Tories to start talking like Patel does knowing full well that the NHS and the care system is propped up by immigration can only mean that this is a deliberate act of sabotage that can only be used to say that the NHS is not working so that it can be handed over the Trumps US ‘health providers’ as a private concern.
To manage immigration therefore is not just about who is coming into the country. It is also about the society and economy that the immigrants are coming into. Immigration is being used to cover up the failure of austerity (across all public services, including the under fund GP system you talk of Andy), the lack of investment in education, the lack of a proper income/wage policy, the failure of the social security system, the failure to provide accommodation as well as the abuse of immigrants who are being used to arbitrage wage reductions in sectors by some of the more unscrupulous employers we have here.
All of this is in play Andy but it seems to be beyond you. These facts are beyond you because at the root of it all, like so many of your type you are giving in to your worst base prejudices rather than engaging with the issues in a broader way.
I’m so sorry but I am heartily sick to my back teeth with people who talk like you. You are in fact worse than Ms Patel and nothing but cannon fodder for the likes of Farage, Johnson and Cummings who – when they have got away with their mischief having been helped by you and your ilk – won’t even give you a second look Andy.
Please, just please think about it.
@Pilgrim.
“All of this is in play Andy but it seems to be beyond you. These facts are beyond you because at the root of it all, like so many of your type you are giving in to your worst base prejudices rather than engaging with the issues in a broader way.”
I’m not sure what I did to provoke that little outburst. And I wonder what you think ‘my type’ is !!
Examples:
GP registrations from people from overseas in 2016/17 was over 700k. Maybe some double counting, but this surely indicates how much strain high levels of migration place on the NHS. How could it not be the case?
Similarly, if the number of households built each year barely covers the additional number of households coming in from abroad, how can this possibly be doing anything but putting a strain on housing resources? This can be seen quite clearly by people in London like me who see family homes in many parts of the suburbs now given over to multiple occupation from migrants from E Europe and elsewhere. This must have had an impact on the cost of renting in London. Again, how could this not be the case?
You do know how many doctors are immigrants don’t you?
And that without them – as you propose – the NHS could not function?
The problem is underfunding of the NHS and housebuilding, not migration
Both problems could be solved overnight
Are you really sure you are not being racist in ignoring the real issues?
I am aware that doctors are immigrants, thanks, and that immigration can help us provide staffing for the NHS.
But it is odd that an economist cannot acknowledge that huge annual increases in the number of people demanding housing and healthcare is not going to place a strain on our ability to provide housing and healthcare. And conversely, that if levels were lower then this would make things a bit easier.
I realise it is not a zero sum game – but it isn’t all win-win either. There is a proper debate to be had. By trying to engage with you, you have resorted to suggesting I am a racist. Which gets me back to my original point (that you avoided), which is that people like me who dare to question the ethos of high levels of migration in the 100s of thousands are usually smeared in this way.
Immigrants are highly productive
As an economist I’d say they help solve the problems you identify and do not create them
Alan Tyler says:
“…. a strain on our ability to provide housing and healthcare. And conversely, that if levels were lower then this would make things a bit easier.”
Possibly so, but since there is a lack of will in the current government (and frankly, it’s predecessor government) to deal with the problems, at any level, and a failure to implement the immigration powers at its disposal I find it hard to lay blame elsewhere than at the door of our own government.
Lack of investment in infrastructure, housing, schools surgeries et. has allowed pressure to develop and waste much of the benefit that might have been had from immigration by creating a zero sum climate in these stressed areas. Governments of both sides of the house have consistently blamed the EU ‘straitjacket’ for their own failure to deal with current issues as they have arisen. Curbs on local government finance have made it almost impossible for local government to respond appropriately to the demands they have been faced with.
I don’t imagine Brexit is going to improve matters. If anything it will take a way the injections of EU investment cash into the areas neglected by our own home-counties focussed governments. If I did I might be somewhat more in favour of ‘leaving’.
Maybe ending the free movement of money would be more effective.
🙂
Hi Richard,
I think that some people from ethnic minority backgrounds originating outside of Europe perceive an injustice in the fact that people from Europe are free to move here to work whereas people from their own heritage/wider family are not. They believe that if the regime is equalized between EU/non-EU migrants that it will result in a more generous set of rules for non-EU.
I personally cannot stand Ms Patel/the Conservatives/Brexit and object to the removal of my freedom of movement.
Alan Tyler
I have come across a piece from the World Economic Forum on James Melville’s twitter account – https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1177486830477856769. It appears to show that the EU country with the largest number of citizens living abroad is the UK.
It seems to me that if we are going to restrict the numbers of people coming to this country, other countries have every right to stop the British going to their countries. This will impact most on the young who will no longer be able to move freely in Europe for whatever reason. As for the oldies, they may have to give up their ideas of retiring to sunnier climes.
The prospect that the young cannot work, study and travel where they want is a compelling reason for rejecting this restriction on movement
And it applies to 61 year olds as well……
Aaah now I see it – the co-author of Britannia Unchained (Shitty Priti) – a book that labelled the English as ‘lazy’ – wants all ex-pats back in the UK on lock down to work for the minimum wage and boost the economy!!
Ah……bless her – isn’t she lovely?
🙂
@Alan Tyler
If you are so convinced that the majority of the Country supports your views why are the brexit team so unwilling to re put the options to the public in a further referendum now that more facts are available. Surely that would put to bed all this non-sense about elites trying to stymie brexit and Parliament would have no argument to block brexit. It is unfortunate that it would have to be by a referendum but as the original vote was in that manner there is no real alternative as this is a single issue question and many other factors come into play where a General Election is concerned.
Furthermore the Johnson Government has in the last month pledged over £50bn in spending from government coffers. I suggest that public services are under strain not because of immigration but because a Conservative government has deliberately chosen to under resource them in the past. Seemingly now there are more than enough public funds available to adequately fund anything that Johnson and Cummings think will generate a favourable vote.
There are reasons why some people dislike immigration but to suggest that reason is down to over stretched public services is a cloak and hides their true motives.
Alan Tyler
Dr Mu-Chun Chiang has lived in the UK for many years, originally coming with her parents in 1997. She studied here, and now works in Liverpool. She has been told by the Home Office to leave the country. Each month, if not more frequently, we learn of people being told to leave, regardless of their origins. They may have come to this country seeking refuge, or simply a “better” life.
There is a very moving account on Rajesh Thind’s Twitter account of his father’s last stay in hospital: https://twitter.com/RajeshThind/status/1171038619378864129. Gurbachan Singh Thind had served as Mayor of Slough. Unfortunately he did not survive and his funeral is on Friday.
Today James Cleverly says that No Brexit will lead to riots. I think he’s correct that there will be riots, but these will happen with Brexit, particularly a No-deal Brexit. It will, of course, be those who wanted Brexit but believed those who told them how easy it would be and how much better off they would be. The penny will have dropped and the riot police and army will be on the streets as Martial Law is declared, the various UK parliaments suspended and Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings reign supreme.
Andy Crow
I mistook ‘Alan Tyler’ for ‘Andy Tyler’ – proving that you should not comment when on a tight lunch break. My comments to Mr Tyler still stand. It is good to see so many here replying to him anyway.
Other than occasional minor bout of nascent Scottish exceptionalism, I never really have any trouble with your comments Andy Crow.
The facts are out there, if people bother to look: https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/high-immigration-nhs-crisis
https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-immigration-and-pressure-nhs/
These reports conclude there is no evidence to support the accusation that pressure on the NHS is due largely to immigrants.
Unfortunately, politicians tell lies, like Johnson does, or imply as much; the right wing media and BBC repeat the lies and some people believe them without doing due diligence.
Thank you
As an Australian living in the UK, I endorse the points system.
FoM gives one group of immigrants preferential treatment over another group, for no good reason other than nationality. Surely an irrelevant consideration.
The points system means the same rules for everyone who isn’t British who wants to live here.
And the Australian system is fair?
You define fairness as having had opportunity?
I define fairness as a level playing field for all applicants, with the criteria being on relevant grounds (eg job skills, ability to speak English) not on irrelevant grounds (nationality, skin colour, religion).
Some people will not meet the criteria, but no modern country can have open borders to allow all applicants.
From recollection, there are separate programmes for refugees, asylum seekers and spouses, so they aren’t caught up by the points system.
And there is FoM with NZ, so that is one small blip on the level playing field issue, but one that can be justified by the very close similarity between the 2 countries. Are there any 2 countries as similar to each other anywhere else?
Brian Davidson says:
“The points system means the same rules for everyone who isn’t British who wants to live here.”
Hmmmm…. depends on who sets up the points system doesn’t it. ? Is your current bank balance the defining criterion …….and how many points are added or subtracted for skin colour… are we simply thieving human resources oven-ready from other economies or are we going to develop latent talent…….
If it is to be a fair system it needs to score the points rather more imaginatively than the Aussie system I think. And all that ignores international agreements on asylum and refugee population displacement and resettlement.
Andy, skin colour isn’t one of the criteria for points under the Oz system. When I was a child (early 70s) there were very few black immigrants there. Now, plenty.
Age counts – more points if you’re in your 20s rather than your 70s. They want people to settle, develop, raise their families (desire to have children isn’t a criterion itself, but that is the thinking behind it).
As I recall bank balance isnt an issue in itself, though you need enough to support yourself initially, and there are (I think?) points if you turn up with a lot of money to start substantial businesses that employ people.
You can argue the toss over the criteria the UK should set. And that will move over time. But it would have legitimacy if decided democratically, and if the criteria are relevant, not irrelevant (eg skin colour).
In other words, the system is biased to certain groups….
If you have any system where you can’t accept everyone, there are 2 ways of doing it:
1. Set pass-fail criteria, which of course, will benefit those who meet the criteria over those who don’t. There are plenty of other examples of this in life. Marks you need for a university, getting professional qualification etc.
You will never iron out all the biases.
So for a points based system where you get points for speaking English, an applicant from an English speaking country will have an advantage over an applicant from a non-English speaking country. So what?
2. Make it some kind of game of chance – maybe some kind of lottery.
I’d prefer the former to the latter.
The third option of course is open borders. Allow anyone who wanted to come. Am not sure that is a realistic proposal.
I tell you what @Alan Tyler, I have a solution you might like to the huge immigration problem and the huge strains it causes.
Let’s just stop foreigners, doctors & nurses included, coming over’ere.
Then our Healrh service will be able to allow people to die, at last!
This will, in turn, mean the government will save money on the NHS& Social care, also on pensions!
No more need to build homes either, as the old die, the young can move in. Sorted the immigration problem for you.
Please share with Patel, she’ll love it!
I realise that evidence does not go down well with most Brexiters, but can I point to Jonathan Portes work on the subject. This is not a bad place to start:
https://www.socialsciencespace.com/2019/07/jonathan-portes-on-the-economics-of-immigration/
The consistent bottom line of this and other research is that immigrants contribute more economically than they take out. Being on average younger they place less of a burden on health and social services whilst being a key proportion of staff in those areas. Its ironic that those older folk voting for Brexit are the ones placing the greatest burden on health and in care homes, and who will suffer the most when those areas are hit by (even greater staff shortages.
On housing its worth reading Ian Mulheirn’s work that challenges the automatic assumption that we just need more houses. More social and affordable housing, especially in cities yes, but in the rural, small town, possibly depopulated areas? Averages across the country are very misleading. He also points to the financialisation of housing as a big factor which I suspect many of those here would recognise.
There’s another factor that does not get mentioned; its been known for years that organisations with greater levels of diversity are more productive. Its been part of the case for persuading organisations to diversify on all dimensions. I suspect that also applies to communities and that its no coincidence that those areas that struggle are often those with lowest levels of diversity. The tendency for areas with low levels of immigration to be the ones voting for Brexit and vice versa. And yes, there are exceptions to every generalisation. Tough call tackling that one…
Thanks Robin
Id just add that I share the absolute revulsion at Patel’s speech and the manner of its delivery.
Its personal as well, as she cancelled the funding for a significant girls and young women’s programme in Africa that was highly rated by DfID’s own assessments, to pander to the Daily Mail. Happened to be managed by my son in law, with one of the other major funders being Melinda Gates. As a result you won’t convince the Gates Foundation that this government really cares about girls and young women in developing countries. Unless its something like FGM which can be turned into an Islamophobic Mail headline. Patel also managed to offend a number of African heads of state who knew that the programmes were succesfull and welcomed them.
One looks for redeeming features in politicians, even if one disagrees with them. I can find none at all in Patel