Written by Sir John Redwood
~~~ *** ~~~
This article was first published in Sir John Redwood’s Diary here. We republish it with his kind permission.
~~~ *** ~~~
The Migration Observatory reports this week that the official figures for migrants coming to the UK need to be amended, as it seems many more migrants came from the EU over the last decade and fewer from the rest of the world. The suggested changes to the figures show a 76% increase in EU numbers from 2012 to March 2020 and a 31% decrease in rest of the world numbers. Instead of the EU being a minority they accounted for 64%. The overall total also rises. The ONS is having to change its way of estimating the numbers. It has in the past used passenger surveys, but now recognises these were not accurately capturing what was going on. It appears net migration has been running at around one third of a million a year. It is clearly difficult to pin people down about their plans in a system of free movement when interviewing them on arrival.
It is most important that we have more reliable data as many policy decisions flow from how many people are coming to stay in our country. We need better figures to work out how much health and education capacity we need, how much more transport capacity, and above all how many additional homes. We want all who are coming to have access to good services and the opportunity to rent or buy a suitable home. Assuming more than 3 million additional people have come over the last decade, as seems likely, that means we needed another 1.25m homes assuming the same average household size of 2.4 people per home as the current population. For some purposes we also need to look at gross migration, as the newcomers may want different housing in different places to those leaving the country. Some leaving the country still keep a residence in the UK and might return years later as their life draws to a close.
An answer to the Green wish to reduce the claim on resources, to cut pollution and reduce the production of CO2 would be to cut the rate of growth of the population. The UK needs to expand its output of CO2, make more claims on minerals and food and take more land for houses because the population has been growing rapidly over the last decade.
I want to live in a free society so I have no wish for government to stop couples having babies as they choose. Nor in a decent society should we say No to asylum seekers seeking a haven from violence and oppression. The UK has gone well beyond these central rights and decencies, welcoming in millions of people to take on low paid jobs. The UK state has also recruited many to come here with great skills and qualifications from lower paid countries. There a is a strong case for a new model. We need to grow more of our own skills base by excellence in education and support for those who will make the commitment to gain the qualifications. Is it really sensible to bid away more great people from a poor country than would come naturally, only to have to do more by way of overseas aid to support that country that is missing some of its natural leaders and qualified people? We also need to move to a higher pay higher productivity model of working. More of the low paid jobs should be backed with better machinery and automation to enrich the job in many ways. We want more interesting and better paid jobs which more automation and digitalisation can generate.
In order to have a good migration policy there needs to be accurate data. In order to plan service and other provision there needs to be good data. No wonder we have seemed short of homes, short of transport capacity, short of NHS capacity, if we have been catering for more people than the official figures say are here. Migration Observatory also thinks there has been a further net increase in EU migrants since the Brexit vote up to March 2020, despite claims that the opposite would happen. They also think that far fewer people left the UK last year than some have suggested despite the collapse in many lower paid jobs owing to the closures of many businesses in response to the pandemic.
These large errors in the official figures had consequences. It meant the government was constantly blamed for failing to control migrant numbers from the rest of the world, when it turns out they had done much more than recognised. It also meant pro EU commentators and politicians could claim EU migration was not large or important when the numbers were understated by 76%.
I would say, Sir John, we have more than enough housing stock and social capacity if the government was a little more choosey of who are let in and who is promptly ejected.
We still have Rotherham rapists walking around despite being sentenced to deportation.
Why is the Boris clan heavy on the real countrys population and soft on the trash who have invaded us. Cowardism in Westminster I would suggest
Well perhaps there is an opportunity for Westminster to “correct” the impression of cowardice.
I have just read a news report on my browser which headlines “UN experts condemn Britain’s latest race findings and say the committee should be sacked”
I hope the government will be strong enough of their condemnation of these so called “experts” I”d call them ignorant racist meddlers,and he should adopt the report in its entirety and ban BLM as a terrorist organisation
“Nor in a decent society should we say No to asylum seekers…”
All very well but let us consider that virtually no so-called asylum seekers meet the definition as they mostly arrive by sea from a safe country. We must also consider their intent; too many of a particular religion want to change our country to suit their beliefs.
Our country has suffered enough from those wanting to make it their country in all respects. If mass immigration is not stopped then what sort of country are we going to leave for our descendants?
Apart from the illegals these people did not invite themselves! It is not the intent of the Islamists that worries me it is the intent of the poltical establishment, academia and the corporates to change the face of Britain for good that worries me.
I was definitely ‘put off’ when I first read this Diary entry. HIM slavishly defending the Party Line!
Err well . . . . He HAS previously attacked the Government’s wholesale ‘easing’ of building restrictions – a P.Q. and/or letter, or something.
To be fair, in recent years Britain’s massive immigration problem has been the result of our E.U membership. Although he does not mention the culture or religion of all these EU ‘citizens’, wasn’t a large part of the problem the ‘kind of people’ shall I say, that were coming in via the E.U.
Malmo, in Sweden, have, or have had, great problems, always skirted round by the B.B.C., of a great influx of certain people.
There is a lot there in that Diary entry. He has to be read and thought about very carefully.
No one is perfect. No policy is perfect. Nothing can be changed – improved – overnight.
Certainly no DATA is perfect, or beyond reproach. As we have had reason to find out!
I agree with all the comments above. Sir John says what we want to hear but they will never act on it . Although I am hugely disappointed by Nigel Farage and the way he let down millions of supporters and grassroots Kippers, he was the only person who would have sorted this problem out but that ship has sailed. Right now UKIP are the only Party with a workable manifesto.
But what IS the problem with Ukip Lisa? Why are ‘leaders’ only ‘interim’? Why do I not get answers when I email them? Why can I not find out from their website how the Party is organised and run?
I can understand your point about their manifesto but somehow that Party seems to have lost it’s energy.
It is run by unelected persons with criminal records.
Thousands of members have left for this reason.
I will try and find out Pauline.
UKIP certainly has the policies, but sadly, it doesn’t have leaders committed to the cause anymore. Most of them seem committed only to themselves and securing a more lucrative position than they could ever aspire to in the real world. Emails to leaders are rarely responded to, most of them seem to be ignored or more likely, filtered out before their intended recipient. In many years as the chairman of UKIP in Wales I never received emails that people claimed to have sent to me via UKIP and I only received one reply to mine sent via the UKIP email address.
In North Wales all but two of UKIP branches have closed, my own, at the wish of it’s members, went into a state of what can only be described as ‘hibernation’ until such time as our leaders start to lead. Those holding the levers of power within the party seem to have an aversion to leaders democratically elected by loyal party members preferring instead appointed rather than elected leaders. Most of the former Welsh branches were democratically organised and operated, and therein lay the problem. Now that most branches are closed and members long gone the problem with democracy has gone too
Under our present Welsh leadership most of our branches have gone, along with most members and our representation in the Senedd has shrunk from seven, down to one,but we do still have the best policies of any party. Pity about the leadership. Can I vote for one but not the other? Can I vote UKIP.?
Warwick Nicholson
Lisa We are all disappointed with NFs post referendum antics. To be fair to NF he has put himself forward in national elections seven of eight times and the people rejected him. Can’t blame him, if he is thinking sod ’em I have done my bit and now I am going to direct my efforts into getting rich.
Breaking through the FPTP system is terribly difficult I am afraid to say.
TGS asks why this article makes him nervous.
I”ll give him my version of what I think is/are the reasons.
First off though is this latest ” discovery” by the inimitable Sir John.
I//we have for some considerable time, probably years been pointing out this country is showing all the signs of being FULL UP, it’s a bit late for him to suddenly start moaning (completely ineffectually) about the state of housing stocks, overcrowded schools, roads and transport services , health service and social attendance services and never mind the structural services such as law courts and even charities founded to help fall out from over stressed primary services.
I say first off is because the totality of these strains are the result of MONSTER and perhaps in the circumstances MONSTROUS invasions , in essence new towns of the size of Coventry, Leicester and perhaps even Newcastle on Tyne., annually spread over the whole of the country require an increased percentage contribution of all items where “snuggling up” is the only game in town.
Does nobody realise that every good intention resolution to deal with the situational have any effect must start from a standing start and one of the necessary requirements must be an immediate end to ALL immigration.
At this stage I’m not going in to secondly or thirdly, sufficient to say I am not just nervous, I am outraged at successive government failures to deal, I won’t say adequately with this problem, but it appears to have been an instrument of policy by all parties since its inception by a certain B Liar
John Redwood seems very comfortable with open borders and mass immigration. Too comfortable, too casual. Very New Labour.
I remember the Camoron cry “We’re all in it together”, perhaps backed up by that little toady Osborn(e?)
Both Sir John’s comments and suggestions are sensible but the problem is the Tory party and individuals like Sir John are deeply untrustworthy to do anything about it. They never have and never will. All this patronising tosh from Sir John and other fake centre -right MPs is carefully managed by the Party to fool the useful idiot members and supporters into thinking the Tories are tough on immigration.
Why does this article make me nervous.?
It has all the hallmarks of having been put together by a committee.and suggested to Sir John.The committee has on it at least two mandarins and a membrer or two of conservative political party nec. It is clumsy and carries all the main ingrediants beloved of our servants.. If you split it up there is confession, apologetic, manfully owning up, the solution, the promise , misdirection of blame, How it doesn’t matter,etc even a hint or two of green uplands, but in the wrong order..Masterful.
You are all correct, then look .again, then consider what it presages. Then consider how it got out and why when etc. It freezes the genitals. ( Paranoia ? maybe. ) Then wonder at Labour’s probable response.