As the New York Times notes in a newsletter this morning:
A small cafe-bar in western France recently had a surprising visitor: the president of the Republic. Emmanuel Macron has taken to dropping in on random bars, without press or an entourage, to schmooze with patrons and hear their day-to-day concerns.
“He did not come to scratch!” a bar owner said, alluding to betting games he offers on scratch cards. “He came to chat.”
This is how to do politics.
And economics.
And any form of policy-making.
Talk to real people.
The likes of Labour's so-called guru, Morgan McSweeney, do not know the answers to very much at all, which is why Labour will not do well today. Just talk to real people where they are - and not in focus groups - and they will tell you what they think.
For once, Macron has got something right. Perhaps he has realised he needs to break out of his bubble.
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!
When was the last time you went to visit some coastal towns in Kent and hear their concerns on illegal immigration?
I live in East Anglia.
People make up stories about the problems from migration everywhere.
Illegal migration to the UK in 2024 – 43,000 (approx)
Legal migration to the UK in 2024 – 162,000 (approx)
Total number of births in the UK 2024 – 605,000 (approx)
Total number of deaths in the UK 2024 – 672,000 (approx)
Population of the UK: 68 million.
Immigration doesn’t seem like much of an issue. I can think of several bigger problems this country is facing.
Agreed
Your numbers are a work of fantasy!
NET migration has been well about 0.5 million for many years (almost 750,000 in 2024) and of course gross migration has been more than double that, so you might like to revisit your opinion!
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/longterminternationalmigrationprovisional/yearendingjune2023
Students need to be taken out of the data.
You might need to stop misrepresenting what migration is.
And what is your problem anyway? Be rational here.
They key figure round migration surely is the birthrate, which I gather stands at about 1.45 infants per child-carrying individual (former name: women) in the UK.
So with that, and massive disincentives in the form of ever-increasing UK house prices – roundly cheered on by the Mail, the Telegraph, etc – where is the necessary population to do the necessary jobs going to come from?
Apart from immigration, of course…
@Andrew
What are the concerns?
As I live in Florida where immigration is a concern, I am curious about the concerns of people in Kent.
I live in Kent and I’m not sure what the problem is, my assumption is:
We have several tens of thousands arrive each year by crossing the Channel on inflatable boats. These people have to be accommodated, fed and given medical care. Many are rescued by the Lifeboat service and UK Border Guard but many drown in the Channel.
I think the problem is that people who are struggling to manage see immigrants arrive by boat, and be looked after (sort of) by the authorities, while they are left to manage as best they can with little or no help. The outcome is that local residents see these people being looked after (sort of), listen Nigel Farage and decide that they are the cause of their hardship. The people arriving by boat are blamed for everything from overloaded medical services, to overcrowded schools, to lack of housing, to congestion on the roads.
I live in mid Kent, so I don’t see the boats arrive and have little contact with people who do, but there is a great deal of bad feeling.
Until recently, most of the care responsibility fell on the local council. That’s now changed but the Government do their best to make their life a misery by providing poor accommodation, not permitting them to work and generally trying their best to refuse entry for whatever reason!
In the past, when the arrivals came by truck, I have seen them being let out of the back of trucks on the Motorway. That’s been stopped now by additional security at Calais. But stopping people getting into an inflatable boat is much harder
Since the early 2000s when the arrivals started, the local BBC TV has done its best to fan the flames of resentment.
Looking at the Migration Observatory data, for year ending June 2024 the net migration figures were:
Those coming for work – 417,000
Those coming for study – 375,000
Asylum seekers – 84,000
Humanitarian arrivals – 66,000
Other – 14,000
TOTAL – 956,000, excluding study – 581,000.
I think the number arriving across the Channel is about 50,000 each year (less than 10% of the total), but they get the blame for everything!
Thanks
The “problem”?
Depends on who and where you are.
A refugee/migrant/asylum seeker may feel the problem is the horrible sitation/inequality/war/persecution/climate change making their precious loved home unsustainable.
Or if you are in a boat, maybe being drowned at sea is the problem?
Or the price they pay, the debts they incur to come and the threats they experience from their creditors?
Or that they aren’t allowed to contribute to the UK society?
Or that they are scapegoated?
Or that they can’t apply for asylum or status or visas on the way, instead of waiting to get on a beach at Dover?
Or that the UK government and their privatised immigration warehouse contractors treats them so badly, unfairly and carelessly?
Or that hypocritical politicians scapegoat them to gain maximum political advantage, without ever taking “the problem” seriously?
Many of those problems our own government could EASILY solve, then Fa***e would have to find another scapegoat.
If you are a homeless or unemployed person here in UK, then the problem is that the government isnt tackling homelessness and housing insecurity and our unemployment support is mean and inefficient, and our employment policies chaotic.
If you are a housing officer then you already know the stupid regressive policies for financing housing policy that have been highlighted here and that central gov’t could change but chooses not to, and which exacerbate the unfairness to immigrants and UK homeless alike.
Is all this easily solved?
No, and anyone saying it is, is lying.
But is “the problem” Fa***e makes votes out of, and the government blow dogwhistle diversions about, the real problem his supporters are told it is? Absolute bollocks.
Do his supporters have real problems that neither the government nor Reform want to tackle? Yes, they do, and only Fa***e is (pretending to) listen.
Deal with those, and scapegoating would be much harder. Because the “left behind” audience for Reform would be much smaller, and much less easily hoodwinked.
Thanks
@Robin Trow
Thank you for your response but I really wanted that Troll masquerading as “Andrew” to answer the question!
Again, Thank you for your response.
Chapeau to Macron. I sense desparation creeping in. France is a key-stone state, wrt to the Ruzzia-supported right-whinge. A problem in France (just like the Uk) has been the defunding of local gov. The solution is to find ways to re-fund local gov & one way (broken record starts) is via commune-energy. There is plenty of other stuff that could be done – but it would all be smallish-scale/local & will fit very badly with the usual centralising tendendcies which have been a feature of French politics since … 1875.
For those that want to see this in comic form – Clochemerle – will leave you weeping with laughter.
Last comment: confusing efficiency (centralise) with effectiveness has been another problem. Some communes will do things well, others, badly. And? leave it to the locals to sort out.
Thank you, Mike.
Yesterday evening, France 2 interviewed a young woman mayor from the Pyrenees. She said that the job was overwhelming here as the central government has reduced funding and services. She was often harangued about matters not under her control. The young woman will soon resign. It’s her first term.
I understand the issues here and I fully agree that power should be shared but…
This person is in local politics yet didn’t see the issues she’d be facing on accepting the job?
I feel for her but have to ask, was she ever up to the job?
Shameful.
As for the comment by Mr Lawson – it is entriely possible the lady did not fully understand the mountain that faced her. France (& other countries) will live and die on the basis of how they address the funding of local government.
Now, central gov is gifting itself @ the next election to right whinge grifters/liars like Fart-rage et al/RN in France. It does not have to be like that. Most people live their lives … doh – locally – locally is what matter to them. Even the imbecile McSweeney worked that one out (once). Fix local & the right whinge will evaporate (as McSweeny proved back in … 2010?)
Enjoying France myself at the moment. Contemplating some of the differences. In France the corrupt of the Right get convicted in America they become President.
What I like about the French is they still remember they fought to have a republic and won’t tolerate any president who has ideas above being a servant of that republic. Hopefully Macron has finally realised this. There is hope for him. I understand he did try to get theMinsk 1 & 2 agreements enforced in Ukraine – but was overruled / undermined by American influences.
I’ll be back in a few weeks – very tempted to bring a Guillotine back with me.
Macron became President in 2017 two years after Minsk 2. Do you mean he tried to revive the agreement?
Trump would have been in office.
I wonder what Macron plans to do next. Just under two years until the next French presidential election and he can’t stand for a third term. He will be only 49, turning 50 later that year. What does a former president of France do in their 50s and 60s? Can his party survive without him?
I have often wondered how retiring heads of state or government who want a new job or jobs get them. I suppose their name goes down on the personnel file of international organisations or multinational companies, so when the next vacancy comes up they get nominated, if they want it.
Leo Varadkar retired not too long ago as the taoiseach in Ireland. He is now lecturing, or will be shortly, at Harvard and has joined a US PR company to advise on public affairs. That seems to be typical. Speeches too. Whether that will satisfy M Macron, who knows?
Enjoying France myself at the moment. Contemplating some of the differences. In France the corrupt of the Right get convicted in America they become President.
What I like about the French is they still remember they fought to have a republic and won’t tolerate any president who has ideas above being a servant of that republic. Hopefully Macron has finally realised this. There is hope for him. I understand he did try to get theMinsk 1 & 2 agreements enforced in Ukraine – but was overruled / undermined by American influences.
I’ll be back in a few weeks – very tempted to bring a Guillotine back with me.
Meanwhile, Starmer was already getting shouted out of pubs 4 years ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RdqVxz-Izw
No good talking to Richard Murphy about pubs – he was banned from all those in his local area in the recent past!
This is typical of the stupid comments I get, but which has been offered a number of times now.
I have never been banned from a pub in my life, and know quite a number around here, including some staff quite well. I’d actually suggest I am liked by them.
Where do these idiots come from?
The trick in populist politics is:
1. Find your donors. (To pay for your granular targeted social media campaign. They must see whst bang they are going to get for their buck. Initially they may just want rid of threats to the status quo but then they will want MORE. The rich are insatiable.
2. Find your MSM support. Less important nowadays but your older supporters will need those messages.
3. Find your frontman/woman, ready to lie, be outrageous, easy to listen to, preferably without integrity or conscience and with no track record of actually delivering solutions.
4. Pay them, prime them, promote them, they now belong to you.
5. Identify a popular problem, exaggerate and misdescribe it. (Eg: housing shortage, rising cost of energy, poor access to health & social care)
6. Find a scapegoat to blame for the problem. (Foreigners can be blamed for most things, “foreigners over here” – immigrants – can be easily blamed for almost anything, and “foreigners over there” are a convenient perceived threat to be kept at bay – eg: 70m Turks about to dominate EU, or Chinese, taking all our jobs). Domestic scapegoats are also essential, so you can demonise any effective opposition (wokerati, benefit claimants, Muslims, trans-gender, students, women, disabled people).
Eventually, you can make the scapegoat “the main problem” that occupies the headlines (eg: “small boats”) to take people’s attention off the real problem (because of course you have no solution for the real problem and no intention of finding one.)
7. Promise to “fix the problem” (preferably by suggesting harming the scapegoat in a way that will do no good to anyone but will make your supporters feel better, which is what scapegoats are all about. Riots & arson of refugee accommodation works well but is illegal, so you need to get that done by proxies, and then sound as if you disapprove, so once the riots are over, deportation will be an effective alternative which everyone will agree, is better than rioting. Everyone is now focussed on your scapegoat, so no need for a policy on the real problems.
Essential preconditions for success include opponents who are just as dishonest as you but who neither understand the real problem nor have any effective solution – in fact they don’t believe there is a problem – they are quietly selling out their supporters, with plans that favour the wealthy. As long as they are the incumbents, they can also be blamed for their failure. Loudly. Their strategy will be largely focussed on blowing dogwhistles and making vague aspirational statements.
Your opponents should also have a track record of arrogance, corruption and failure to listen to the ordinary people in cafes, omnibuses, on the front line of public services, and who run or work in SME’s. Tories and Labour fit the bill admirably. LDs have been out of power for so long they don’t have a track record.
One unresolved issue for UK populist politics… is there a long term plan? In USA, the answer is yes, formerly PNAC, now updated to Project 2025. In UK – I’m not so clear, yet. Maybe others can enlighten me.
What to do?
How to stop Reform?
I don’t think we can. Not at present. And what’s the point of keeping LINO in office anyway?
I think the strategy has to be multi-layered.
A) Long term – change the assumptions about economics at both the academic AND the popular level (ie. reverse what was so successfully done back in the 80’s with Thatcher’s household analogy)
B) Short-term. Encourage revolt in LINO and re-alignment on the left. A serious revolt in the PLP could even give us PR. I’m not optimistic but MPs do collectively have power but they won’t use it unless prompted by fear. Let’s frighten them.
C) Prepare an urgent political agenda for radical progressive sustainable change for adoption by those in power. It needs to do 2 things simultaneously – high profile QUICK relief for those bearing the heaviest loads, financing what CAN be done and doing it quickly. Those suffering now cannot wait and their political support is needed urgently. We’ve been bribing the rich for a LONG time, to make everything WORSE. It’s time to reward the poor with a plan that makes things BETTER.
Constraints? Unwillingness of protagonists to leave ideological bunkers and collaborate.
Then, we also need the long term but radical changes that will make our country (& planet) sustainable and liveable in, and with every “net zero” change financed so the poor are protected and prioritised – changes that directly benefit them come first and come BIG, with money being spent to the limit of what is possible now and planning how to do more, soon. (Domestic energy retrofits, community renewable energy projects on housing estates, in preference to projects on agricultural land, if its labour intensive that’s a social benefit, not a problem.
Buses! Trains! Water!
Just do what CAN be done, quickly, and what takes longer, slowly.
Esp buses!).
And try and hardwire some progressive long term economic, fiscal and political changes that will make it harder to undo good progressive initiatives.
Ramble over. Enjoy your local election results.
Thanks
Robert,
Very hard to fault your analysis and prescription for dealing with the situation you identify.
Hoping that reasonable people will prevail seems forlorn. Perhaps some deus ex machina event will shake people out of the inevitability of this train of events….or perhaps not.
I can’t fault your thinking RobertJ. Your comments on organised scapegoating is business as usual for those pulling the strings on our political puppets – sorry “Leaders”. The best example of this was in 2008. When we should have been prosecuting and locking up the Bankers, the Daily Telegraph gave us “The MP’s Expenses Scandal” I believe at the end of that operation only £400K was recovered in false claims. Not even a decent bonus for a single Banker at the time.
We can only hope for disaster for Labour when yesterdays election results have been fully processed. I believe that time is already running out for a back-bench revolt of this current Labour party that will ditch Reeves and re-program or replace Starmer. If they cannot produce some kind of positive outcomes for those left behind, then it will be all too easy for Farage’s little band of financiers to convince them that immigration is the problem.