Levels of migration

This week when we finally hear how many people came to UK over the last year we are warned the figure could be considerably higher than the 504,000 additional people when we saw the last annual figure. Some are saying it could rise as high as a million. Others think around 750,000, still well up on the previous high figure. In 2019 the Conservative Manifesto promised to take it down below a figure of under 250,000 which it was running at.

These figures are net. Numbers of people entering the UK has been running above 1 million, with leavers offsetting some arrivals. The incoming migrants are more likely to need subsidised housing, income top up and school places for children whilst those leaving are often older richer people with a home of their own.

I have long opposed the cheap labour model of inviting in many to do low paid jobs. What is cheap for the employer is dear for the taxpayer. Providing a home, school places, NHS capacity, utilities and public services is expensive. The City of Southampton has 250,000 people. If we invite in an extra 500,000 people we need to build two new Southamptons a year to house and service them. We are not building anything like that. No wonder we are so short of houses and no wonder they are so dear.

The EU used to say the set up costs for a migrant were 250,000 Euro to build a home and provide state services. It will be more now. If we took that low field figure of £250,000  that would mean the state spending £125 bn a year to provide capital for 500,000 low paid migrants. It makes the Treasury enthusiasm for more migrants to fill low paid jobs difficult to understand. The OBR model which likes more migrants to boost GDP needs to be recast to be more interested in GDP or national income per head. More low paid jobs do not help that.Migrants also need private sector shops, leisure facilities and the rest.

The Home Secretary wishes to reduce legal migration. The  Chancellor should help her instead of thinking it is good for numbers. In his own terms it is bad, adding to pressure on deficits and state spending and helping fuel shortages which are inflationary.There are many sensible ways to cut legal migration starting with an increase in the pay you need to earn to take a job here with a permit.




  1. Jude
    May 23, 2023

    Ideally let us remove the unelected tentacles of the WEF, UN & NWO mob! That way we can run our country for us not them

    1. Michelle
      May 23, 2023

      We should be run by no foreign Prince (or prelate, etc. if memory serves me)

    2. PeteB
      May 23, 2023

      Jude, I fear any Country is rarely run for the primary benefit of the existing population. Those in power will favour the groups and bodies that got them into power.

      Sir J, on migration can you stress to your parlimentary colleagues that the UK voter expects action on all migration, not just illegal small boat crossings. Accommodating these 50,000 is trivial compared to accomodating 10x that number who arrive legally. Your point on costs and benefits is key.

    3. turboterrier
      May 23, 2023

      That has got to be the only starting point in dragging ourselves out of this mess.
      How many good people are we going to lose as the CS can claim another scalp?
      It all adds up to the elected government having no real control.

    4. Peter
      May 23, 2023

      ‘ The Home Secretary wishes to reduce legal migration. The Chancellor should help her instead of thinking it is good for numbers.’

      It is never a good sign when fighting between politicians and defenestration attempts becomes more newsworthy than the issues for which they are facing.

    5. Gabe
      May 23, 2023

      Indeed but alas the people still have little real choice just Socialist Sunak or Socialist Labour/SNP it seems who have any chance. Plus they never do what they promise before elections anyway read the back manifestos for proof.

      So a CHRISTIAN maths teacher has been banned from the profession for “misgendering” a pupil in a case believed to be the first of its kind in the United Kingdom. Are we not rather short of maths teachers? Is it not a Sunak priority?

      Surely an MP or even a King who endlessly pushes the bonkers “net zero” religion should not be flying in private jets or first class etc. unless they want to be though of as the first class, grade one, deluded hypocrites they are?

      1. Gabe
        May 23, 2023

        Doubtless soon physics teachers will banned for truthfully pointing out why net zero agenda is essentially bogus science, why “renewables” are not renewable & save no or virtually no CO2 and why CO2 is not a problem anyway. Economics teachers not allowed to explain why Net Zero is economic insanity and biology teacher for explaining about X and Y chromosomes.

        Some complete lies from a Gov. web site on travel & CO2. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/transport-energy-and-environment-statistics-notes-and-definitions/journey-emissions-comparisons-methodology-and-guidance

        Direct emissions per mile Indirect emissions per mile Total direct emissions (kilograms) Total indirect emissions (kilograms)
        Bicycle 0 0 0 0
        Walking 0 0 0 0

        The other figure for trains etc. also highly questionable to say the least. Five people walking say 20 miles causes far more CO2 (in food production etc.) than taking them in a car does many times more. Plus they do not need a hot shower on arrival and it does not take six hours!

    6. Ian B
      May 23, 2023

      @Jude Democracy, even the thought of it is dead. Your MP, Our Parliment all refuse to do their job. This Conservative Government has never managed anything they take their orders from what ‘they’ believe are their boses and that is not those that elected them, empowered them and pay their wages. Their self esteem and ego with their bosses is more important, than the voter

      1. Gabe
        May 23, 2023

        Seems so.

        So MASS immigration has not made Britain more productive, the Government’s top expert admitted yesterday.

        Migration Advisory Committee chairman Prof Brian Bell warned: “Having more immigrants makes the economy ­bigger — it doesn’t necessarily make us more productive.”

        Clearly the man is a genius so who would have thought that? Talk about stating the obvious.

        It makes us less productive and poorer per head, puts pressure on housing, schools, roads, police, social services, energy demand, healthcare… and it this forces up tax rates, usually increases crime rates and depresses living standards too – certainly in the short term and prob. in the long term. He might have added.

    7. Sharon
      May 23, 2023


  2. Mark B
    May 23, 2023

    Good morning.

    I see my post from yesterday has finally passed moderation. Could you please have the decency to tell me why ? No link. On topic. Not very long. No name etc, etc. No, I’d doubt you have an answer. Who’s funding this site, the Chinese Government ?

    The Home Secretary wishes to reduce legal migration.

    Yawn ! Roll on 2024 and all that.

    reply I pay for this site and moderate it myself. Why are you so unpleasant?

    1. Ian+wragg
      May 23, 2023

      John you asked the question about imports of electricity and the SOS told you we exported 11 terrawatt of power.
      He never mentioned that we imported 28.7 terrewatt in 2021.
      I wonder why.
      Not a very good result for the Saudi Arabia of wind.

      1. Ian+wragg
        May 23, 2023

        Fishy and Chicom think by increasing the population it gives the illusion of growth.
        The fact that per capita it goes down doesn’t bother them in their ivory towers.

        1. Mickey Taking
          May 23, 2023

          and added stress on housing, education, health, transport, jobs and social intregation.

          1. Mickey Taking
            May 23, 2023


        2. M.A.N.
          May 24, 2023

          Importing more people increases GDP in a crude fashion. At the expense of gdp/ capita naturally. Of MUCH more interest to the treasury however, is that it kills debt interest. (Raising gdp). It’s the laziest form of government ever. As to the long term considerations of an increased population, anyone talking about this will be branded xyz. Half a million new houses a year for twenty years needed.

      2. Lifelogic
        May 23, 2023


        Reported today – Instead of shrinking by 0.3%, as the IMF forecast in April, the UK economy is now forecast to grow by 0.4% during 2023.

        So what is that after inflation and per cap given the immigration of say 750K. A living standards decline of say 10% on average perhaps.

    2. Gabe
      May 23, 2023

      Keep up you good works JR.

      I would put the cost of housing and addition infrastructure needed for schools, healthcare, transport, roads, police, social services at more like £500k per head. They also depress others wages, lowering their living standards and this the overall tax take.

      I am all for quality immigration at sensible levels, perhaps limited to people who will earn about double the average wage or bring capital with them.

      1. MFD
        May 23, 2023

        All incoming Migrants should be self sufficient within 3 months, if not they should be expelled. The cost of feeding , housing and educating must not be stood by the British Tax Payer. It is totally uneconomic.

        1. turboterrier
          May 23, 2023

          Try getting into Australia, Canada without a big balance, a profession they need, the finances to start up a needed business and employ locals and a sizeable pension if retired to pay for your own health care.
          Think they just might be doing it the right way.

        2. Fedupsouthener
          May 23, 2023

          Well said MFD.

        3. Donna
          May 24, 2023


          Or the businesses employing them (including the universities) must pay the full costs of their importation BEFORE they are allowed in. That’s around £250,000 per person.

          These businesses (including universities) are capitalising the profits and socialising the costs.

          It has to stop.

    3. NottinghamLadHimself
      May 23, 2023

      I do wonder why John asks a question, to which – if he were honest with himself – I’m sure he knows the answer!

      1. Mickey Taking
        May 23, 2023

        Martin, are you still in Cardiff, or prefer to be associated with Nottingham?

    4. Dave Andrews
      May 23, 2023

      John’s site, John’s rules. Don’t like it, post somewhere else.

      1. SM
        May 23, 2023


      2. IanT
        May 23, 2023

        Yes, absolutely!

      3. MFD
        May 23, 2023

        Correct Dave🤙🏻

      4. Mark B
        May 23, 2023

        Which I followed unlike others. All I asked for was why, so that I can avoid breaking another rule ?

        Not hard to work out when you think about it.

        1. Margaret
          May 25, 2023

          Tone is everything Mark.

    5. Lifelogic
      May 23, 2023

      Mine have not yet appeared and they seem to have disappeared completely but it is JR’s site he can do as he wishes. At least JR had the courage to address this vaccine damage issue. Let us hope the vast damage done fades away with time but little sign of this as yet alas. Gross negligence in my view to have rolled out these novel vaccines given the trial results, the risk/benefit calculation was rather clear. The risk/benefits for most and certainly for the young were negative & the risks very large.

      1. Mark B
        May 23, 2023


        Did you at the time they were rolling out the vaccines make your own risk assessment ? Did you listen and question the advice that was being given at the time and the measures taken by the government to control the virus ?

        I did all those things and came to the conclusion that it was a scam and said so on this very site. I did not take the vaccine, deeming the risk to me to be low but, kept my distance from those who I believed to be at risk.

        Excess deaths put down to this vaccine do not concern me as much as it would those who drank the cool aid. Perhaps if people spent more time thinking for themselves and not banging pots and pan on a Thursday evening like good little citizens of Eurasia (1984) others might be less concerned.

        PS Sorry that your post got deleted.

        1. APL
          May 24, 2023

          Mark B: “Did you listen and question the advice that was being given at the time and the measures taken by the government to control the virus ?”

          Mat Hancock. Not a doctor, mocked people who isolated themselves at thier own expense in ( what they were misled into thinking was the public interest ). He also displayed blatant disregard for his own ‘social distancing’ regulations.

          ‘Sir’ Patrick Vallance. Who advised people to pursue a particular course of medication. Was not a medical doctor.

          Boris Johnson, ( Not a doctor ), gave false advice and ignored the advice he gave to the population at large. He and the Health Secretary Matt Hancock, made it nearly impossible to consult a GP ( who could be expected to know your medical history and thus give you relevant advice ) .

          I concluded early on, that none of the administrative face of the COVID response were medical professionals, but had made it impossible for the average individual to see his or her GP.

          And, decided not to take medical advice from politicians or civil servants. Since the government had made it impossible to consult my GP, I made a risk assessment of my own. And decided not to believe the liars.

          I’m sorry for anyone who was gulled by the government. Some who I thought very intelligent were.

          PS. I don’t know anyone who died ‘with or of’ COVID, but I knew at least three people who died some period after taking he vaccine.

          1. Mark B
            May 25, 2023


            At the time I ask both our kind host and people here and elsewhere if they knew anybody had dies as a ‘direct result’ of COVID. All said no. Now I admit that was a very small sample but, it made me think too. If this had been the Plague at least 1 in 10, if not more, people would have died. We would soon realise we were in a mess.

            The very fact that the people you mentioned never followed the official advice tells its own story. They of all people knew the risks of the virus but must have thought it so small that they could behave if there was nothing to worry about.

            It is a disgrace that these people are still at liberty.

        2. Margaret
          May 25, 2023

          Gargling with a disinfectant such as chlorhexidine frequently could reduce infection by any virus significantly.No one is silly enough to interpret antisepsis as using under the sink disinfectant. If they do I suggest they pay more attention to the meaning of language and not their own preconceived ideas.

      2. Fedupsouthener
        May 23, 2023

        LL. I agree. Because of the reluctance of authorities to look into the reported effects of the vaccine more people are hesitant or are refusing more boosters. I am one. I dont trust it anymore.

    6. Mark B
      May 23, 2023

      Reply to reply

      What part of yesterday’s post was ‘unpleasant’ that it had to be put into moderation? A question not just for you but for everyone else.

      Reply It was todays post that was unpleasant about me and this site

      1. Mark B
        May 23, 2023

        So you will not tell me. Fine.

        1. John Hatfield
          May 23, 2023

          Settle down Mark.

        2. miami.mode
          May 23, 2023

          Tha’s a bit short on self-awareness, Mark lad!

          1. Mark B
            May 24, 2023

            OK. Cheers guys.

    7. Lester_Cynic
      May 24, 2023

      Mark B

      Sheer frustration I would imagine?

  3. DOM
    May 23, 2023

    The cheap labour argument is bollox and allows Tory MPs to insulate themselves from any inference of Islamophobia, racism or xenophobia which of course is the Tory parties great fear. What we are seeing is the implementation of an ideological driven strategy whose purpose is the redesigning of British demography for both political and electoral ends.

    The Tories are caught in a web of their own choosing. Rather than confronting the Left’s cultural, political and demographic agenda and exposing it for what it is ie vicious, hate-filled, destructive and racist they simply capitulate to it.

    John knows the migration flow is now unstoppable. My own elderly parents no longer recognise the town in which they grew up and that’s happened in the last decade or so under a party and government (Tory) that pees itself on this one issue.

    Labour and the establishment Left do not give a toss about immigrants from E Europe, Africa and the ME as human beings but are viewed as nothing more than electoral, political and cultural capital in their quest to destroy what we know to be Britain in every sense

    No wonder the Left have Braverman in the crosshairs. They brought down Raab as well.

    I have never understood why the Tories could never create and dictate the agenda. Why are the Left so successful at it and the Tories so useless? Is it faith, belief and will? Have they simply handed over the keys to our nation to race who see people like my parents (hard working, law abiding and decent) as nothing more than white, working class slime?

  4. Mick
    May 23, 2023

    The Home Secretary wishes to reduce legal migration.
    Is this before the party’s in the opposition seats try to get the Home Secretary sacked like all leaver MPs that have stood up for the 17million who voted to leave the dreaded EU, about time the Wokey gloves came off the tories and started giving the party’s on the other side a taste of there own medicine, the General Election is only months away now so come on Sir John get your party to pull its finger out before this great country is left to be destroyed by the party’s opposite

    1. Mickey Taking
      May 23, 2023

      Your first line was a mistake.

  5. Javelin
    May 23, 2023

    The politicians are either completely oblivious about the resentment towards them about NetZero, cost of living, mass migration, high taxation etc.

    You only have to read through the comments in any online newspaper to realise resentment has never been higher.

    1. John+C.
      May 23, 2023

      It seems they have higher authorities to satisfy than the general public. Their programme is clearly very unpopular, but there is never any serious effort to explain it. There is never a change of course. There is no aspect of their record that they can point to and say, “That’s been a great success, hasn’t it?”
      Given this remarkable record of unpopularity and failure, one can only assume that this government has objectives that are unclear and inexplicable.

  6. Stephen Reay
    May 23, 2023

    I think the government have now excepted that the likelihood will be that they will be out come the next election. They seem he’ll bent on leaving the next government with all the problems that should have been dealt with by this government.
    This attitude will backfire and people will remember. Gove was right when he said “government must focus on the economy and services”, the Labour Party are running this exact line.

    1. Fedupsouthener
      May 23, 2023

      Yes, but who will pay for it? I hazard a guess it will not be those on benefits or lower wages but middle earners. There are so many tax loopholes the rich can claim it wont be them

  7. Michelle
    May 23, 2023

    We know all this. We (the public) have been saying this for Donkey’s years.
    Patel removed the Resident Labour Market Test, reduced salary and qualifications thresholds. How was that ever going to reduce cheap labour for big business, or give our own the chance? Students staying on for 2 years after they’ve graduated (and then no doubt for as long as ‘they’ choose) even without a job.
    I have read where Braverman wishes to undo this, another reason she has to go I suppose.
    Still, more fool her if she believed she’d get backing, she must know how the party is infested and with who.

  8. Donna
    May 23, 2023

    I’m prepared to believe that the Home Secretary wishes to reduce immigration, both legal and illegal.

    Our problem is that very few in the Not-a-Conservative-Government, or the No-longer-Conservative-Parliamentary-Party, want to do it and no-one in the corrupted, left wing Establishment does.

    It has nothing to do with economics and everything to do with globalisation. The population of these islands is being systematically replaced, on the orders of the UN and WEF.

    1. Narrow Shoulders
      May 23, 2023

      A very good article by Peter Lilley in the Telegraph now. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/05/23/the-immigration-taboo-nobody-wants-to-break/

      Really well argued the stupidity of mass immigration,

  9. Berkshire Alan
    May 23, 2023

    This immigration fiasco has now gone on for far too long, when is enough, enough, good grief at the current rate of 1,000,000 a year we will have a population of 100,000,000 in 20 years time, even more if their relatives are allowed to join them.
    Why, Why, Why are politicians so dumb as to not realise we cannot support anywhere near these rate of immigration, even a slow growing infrastructure, Hospital, schools, roads, transport systems, and above all houses and productive farm land for all of these people.
    Thanks for your efforts in trying to highlight this problem John, but why are not more of your colleagues on board with the thoughts of the population as a whole.
    Do they really think we can support the World ?

  10. Nigl
    May 23, 2023

    The Governments current position on immigration is a disgrace putting ridiculous pressure on already over stretched finances/infrastructure etc plus a major source of complaint at the ballot box. it is in denial and frankly lying to us.

    Daily it reminds us why we don’t trust Sunak et al.

    And in other news confirming it’s utter incompetence. Another big hitter who should be listened to, is complaining about its failure to keep the City competitive and more evidence that the Sales Tax is costing us jobs and income.

    The Chancellor has even been rebuked for spinning duff figures re deficit reduction. Can it get any worse?

  11. Old Albion
    May 23, 2023

    The current level of immigration is unsustainable and has been for years. It’s not just the financial costs of those coming in. The level now is so high, England is becoming unrecognisable.
    I went back to the town I grew up in during the fifties. It used to be a busy thriving town with a very English appearance and a generally unified population.
    Now it’s a run-down home to people from all over the world with little or nothing in common. If you were taken in blindfolded, when it was removed, you would have no idea what country you were in.
    The never requested social experiment of creating a multi-cultural country within England’s borders has failed.
    Eventually my town will be matched throughout the whole country. I’m glad I’ll be dead and gone by then.

    1. Diane
      May 23, 2023

      A homelessness statistic for England ( UKG / latest ) reported today states 101.300 households are in temporary accommodation, the highest since 2005. Across London the number of families in B&B accommodation and in hotels for longer than 6 weeks increased 823% between Feb 2022 & Feb 2023.

  12. JayGee
    May 23, 2023

    ‘What is cheap for the employer is dear for the taxpayer’, you write. Please share your thoughts on the estimated 6,516 potential victims of modern slavery in the UK according to a recent report, with the most notable trend in labour exploitation occurring in the care sector, amid concerns about labour shortages and low pay in care homes. For years you and your colleagues have chosen to ignore the low levels of pay in the care sector, where exploitation has been well-known. That is what I call ‘dear’. Or even very expensive.

    Reply I have always argued for better pay for the care sector.

  13. Christine
    May 23, 2023

    The Conservative Manifesto from 2019 isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. The main points:

    Extra funding for the NHS with more GP appointments
    Tougher sentencing for criminals
    Points-based system to control immigration
    Controlling debt
    Reaching Net Zero by 2050
    Not to raise taxes
    Strengthening the Union

    Not only has your party failed to achieve any of these you have made things even worse. MPs should be paid based on results maybe that would give them an incentive to deliver on their promises.

    Rishi Sunak’s 5 pledges given on 4th January 2023:
    1) Half Inflation
    2) Grow the Economy
    3) Reduce Debt
    4) Cut NHS waiting lists
    5) Stop small boats

    Let’s be honest 6 months on it’s not going very well is it?

    With the introduction of AI, many companies are looking to reduce staff levels so what planet are your leaders on when they import a million people? How are we going to support all these people when the redundancies start? BT announced last week they plan to reduce their workforce by 50k and this is hot on the heels of many other tech companies who also plan to cut staff.

    Working from home has shown many companies that they don’t need expensive offices and they can locate staff in cheaper countries.

    1. Mickey Taking
      May 23, 2023

      oh dear – not a good report card, is it!

  14. Bloke
    May 23, 2023

    The Conservative Government is Cuckoo importing more to prop up its decline.

  15. Gabe
    May 23, 2023

    The Labour health minister was going on again yesterday about the abolition of the Non Dom tax system and how they will use the money raised to throw even more at the dire NHS. Are shadow ministers really so thick that they think this will raise more than it costs? Who would come to work in a job on say £200k if they then get mugged for £400k extra taxes PA on their investment income and circa 45% tax and NI on the salary? Then 40% of their capital robbed of their children etc, on death.

    Many alreday here will just choose to leave. The non dom system is not really generous enough to be competitive already not is the UK tax system.

  16. Barrie Emmett
    May 23, 2023

    I wonder where the current immigrants are housed, with relatives, rented accommodation. Surely they are unable to obtain a mortgage. Notwithstanding the lack of urgency by the government, I fear the inevitable if and when Starmer is in charge. Perhaps this thought is reflected within the government’s malaise.

  17. Cuibono
    May 23, 2023

    The situation is ludicrous.
    I suspect that it is now only being taken seriously because ( from what I have seen) imported problems have finally migrated into upperclass areas!

    I suppose that allowing for floor space you could keep bringing in people to pay for and replace those English people on benefits but it would eventually be standing room only?
    Unless of course Cloward-Piven isn’t a nasty lying old conspiracy!
    But I did hear a Labour person screeching that she wanted to take the country down with ever vaster numbers of newcomers. Not from compassion you understand.

    1. glen cullen
      May 23, 2023

      Rule of Law – Anyone found not to have a visa should be locked up and sent home

  18. Sakara Gold
    May 23, 2023

    Many immigrants are students studying at British universities/colleges and their families, which need the income obtained from overseas students to keep costs down. Many students enrol on courses here to obtain a visa and then disappear into the black economy. Others include graduates who have succeeded in obtaining “indefinate leave to remain” and who then bring in their families.

    Yet more migrants pay people smugglers to get them in via cross-channel lorries etc, the criminals involved then supply them with NI numbers, NHS numbers, passports, forged Home Office documents etc. It is estimated that there may be 2,500,000 illegal migrants living here and making use of our NHS for free, never mind their sewage overflowing onto our beaches and into our trout rivers.

  19. Gabe
    May 23, 2023

    Well done for addressing the vaccine damage and excess death issue yesterday. Let us hope the excess death figures (released later today by the ONS for another week) finally do start to come down. The numbers affected by vaccine harms must be huge. I personally know three people who had heart issues shortly after vaccination. One needed a major operation. The other two various investigations. And this from perhaps just 100 people or so I might know about!

  20. Sea_Warrior
    May 23, 2023

    My contribution appears to have gone missing, so let me try again with a shorter version. These levels show that immigration to this country is now an out-of-control flood. The matter needs urgent correction, by management action rather than by legislation. And that means that visa-issuing needs to be severely restricted – by as much as 80%. If you do not do this, you will lose the next election to a party that will offering an out-of-control flood. Time is running out!

    1. Lifelogic
      May 23, 2023

      Up only 2.5% this week but has been 22% up this year in some weeks, let us hope this decline continues.

  21. John Holloway
    May 23, 2023

    At last somebody who realises that claiming “economic growth” when it is simply an increase in population is nonsense. Yes, it is per head that matters. And when comparing countries GDP, use purchasing power parity which makes us the world’s 10th biggest economy, not 5th. As for GDP per head, we’re about 30th, so not quite so much to trumpet about.

    1. Geoffrey Berg
      May 23, 2023

      Agreed, on both GDP per head and purchasing power being the best measures.

    2. Lifelogic
      May 23, 2023

      This is surely very obvious the politicians have just been lying to us for years.

  22. Narrow Shoulders
    May 23, 2023

    The OBR, the treasury, the Chancellor and the ONS should all be required to report and forecast GDP per capita within all their models and statistics. That way we would see that we are all getting poorer due to mass inward migration.

    Companies sell more to more people, who benefits rather than the CEO who doesn’t have to innovate to grow and the shareholders? What is the point?

    We are paying ever more taxes to support more and more people. If one aim is to alleviate poverty why do we import it?

    There is no divine right to a better life in another country and our previous colonial activates improved countries so that does not make their current poverty under new management our responsibility.

  23. Cuibono
    May 23, 2023

    Governments at one time wanted us to think in a way they now slur as “far right”.
    That was so we would accept and fight their wars.
    It worked! How patriotic we were.
    Now, no doubt for reasons of greed, they demand we accept the conquest of our country.
    Still, on a happy note…there are still plenty of gardens to build on in the leafy suburbs.
    Oh…maybe that’s why we are now talking about the forbidden topic?

  24. Dave Andrews
    May 23, 2023

    A little off topic if I may.
    We hear last month’s borrowing was particularly bad. So it looks like the plan to raise taxes to balance the books isn’t working.

  25. Cuibono
    May 23, 2023

    When we are all confined to barracks and there are no vehicles on the barricaded roads it will be so much easier for marauding gangs to wander into Chelsea, Westminster etc. ( There are some who like to enter homes and cars as a joke you know). And no law enforcers…or at least only those who like helplessly watching statues being torn down! And ambulances not allowed either.
    And for goodness sake…don’t let any well-heeled person get dogs for protection. Dogs are the first to get gunned down.

  26. MPC
    May 23, 2023

    There will be no change / reduction in inward migration, just more talk and maybe some massaging of figures. This indifference to voter concerns, and the perception of Westminster as an ivory tower, from this and the inane emphasis by politicians and London based journalists on a minister’s speeding offence, means there’ll be a very low turnout indeed at the next general election. We might even have proportional representation after the GE and a ‘government of all the talents’, something to really embed the UK’s managed decline.

    1. forthurst
      May 23, 2023

      First Past the Post produces consistently bad governance whether from the Tories or Labour. Government based on the choices of a third of the electorate whose votes determine outcomes as the great body of the electorate votes consistently for the party they believe is the less worse prevents the emergence of new parties with sensible new ideas. It is far too easy under the current system for anti-democratic forces with money to spend operating behind the scenes to ensure that their candidates and policy priorities are substituted for the aspirations of the populace within a two party system.

      The only possible way of achieving an improvement in the consistently dire governance of this country is a new electoral system in which people have confidence that their vote will count for whomever they vote.

    2. Donna
      May 24, 2023

      Results of the 2015 General Election.

      UKIP: 12.6% of the electorate; 4.1 million votes and one MP (which turned out to be representing a majority in the country on the issue of the EU).

      LibDems: 7.9% of the electorate; 2.4 million votes and 8 MPs

      SNP: 4.7% of the electorate; 1.2 million votes and 56 MPs

      If you believe in democracy, you cannot support the corrupted FPTP system in use in the UK.

  27. Michael Saxton
    May 23, 2023

    Surely the points you raise are not only common sense they are in practical and economic terms absolutely right. I cannot understand why a ‘Conservative’ administration, seemingly led by the Treasury, is pushing back against this position? Unfettered immigration has already ruined so many areas of our country, changing our English culture and way of life forever. The present levels are totally unsustainable, unaffordable and unwanted. And, I believe, unwanted by the vast majority of the population who have witnessed unacceptable change and who believe, as I do, further uncontrolled immigration will completely break our country. Why Sir John is Parliament not listening?

    1. turboterrier
      May 23, 2023

      Michael Saxton

      Sir John is one of very few in parliament that recognise common sense and practice it.

  28. James Freeman
    May 23, 2023

    In purely financial terms, isn’t it cheaper for the UK treasury to assimilate an immigrant rather than subsidise raising a child here? Much public expenditure gets spent on childcare, education and universal credit to families. An immigrant is usually workforce ready and more attractive to employers than school leavers or graduates with work experience on their CVs.

    The problem, as I see it, is the lack of housing. Bringing in more people without building more houses is the root cause of the housing crisis. Ironically, the country’s most pro-immigration areas have the most NIMBYS!

    Reply A new migrant needs on average £250,000 of capital to access housing, NHS, schools etc

    1. Chris Dark
      May 23, 2023

      Bringing in more migrants from dubious backgrounds is causing white flight from the major cities, which puts development pressure on the more peaceful parts of the country….those areas where some of us god-awful nimbys have chosen to spend the twilight years of our lives. Is it too much to ask for a little piece of life in reasonably green and pleasant pastures, without living in fear of whether the bulldozer is likely to appear and start ripping it up?
      Yes there are far too many people, most of them packed into the country during the last twenty years. Britain is not a huge land-mass. I have Swedish relatives who cringe at the population density every time they visit here.

    2. dixie
      May 23, 2023

      The employers who find such immigrants so attractive and of such good value should therefore have to pay all the costs associated with the immigrant workers, their training, lanugauage education and for all their imported families;
      – £250,000 per head capital costs for infrastructure and services
      – probably as much again for opportunity costs for denying an existing citizen work and housing, NHS services and education
      Perhaps it is the employers, civil servants and politicos in the areas that are pro-immigration and not the settled people who live there and who object to the special treatment and expenditure given to those incomers at their cost.

    3. James Freeman
      May 24, 2023

      Reply to reply
      We have always invested in raising the next generation, who also need access to housing, schools, etc., when they become adults. But with immigrants, we skip the costs of the first 18+ years. With birth rates below replacement level, there is a need for additional people to fill the gap. I am determining if the cost is a valid argument.

  29. Paul
    May 23, 2023

    David Cameron said net migration should be in the 10’s of thousands. Then it was restrict it to 250,000 now we are at 500,000 and likely to approach 750,000. Does the Conservative government have no shame? Now you try to blame every one else while the Home Secretary hasn’t any idea on what to do except send a few hundred to Rwanda. Why do we not set up a migration centre in France to manage the cross channel activity- oh, of course, we cannot because we blindly left the EU with no plan.

  30. Timaction
    May 23, 2023

    The Tory’s are already toast. With these figures and the price we all pay with health waiting lists and inadequate public services means you’ll not be trusted for a generation or more.

    1. Donna
      May 24, 2023

      Farage predicted the other day that if the Not-a-Conservative-Government doesn’t act very swiftly, a new “populist party” will arise on this issue alone.

      And whoever it is will be in the Nick Griffin/BNP mode and far, far “nastier” than UKIP.

  31. glen cullen
    May 23, 2023

    We’ll have a million in legal immigration and a hundred thousand in illegal immigration because this Tory government sets the levels by laws, design and policy e.g you could stop foreign students from bringing their partners, family and children …doesn’t happen anywhere else in the world
    No matter what, you set the level

  32. beresford
    May 23, 2023

    Once again mass immigration is seen purely as an economic issue, with no consideration to the undesirable alteration to the demography and culture of this country. Such forced alteration is actually against international law. At some point in the next fifty years the balance will tip and the same people who manage failed economies in those countries the migrants come from will hold sway here. Nigel Farage has forecast that by the next election nothing will have been done to reduce immigration. Is he wrong?

  33. Peter Parsons
    May 23, 2023

    An 2018 Oxford Economics study on the fiscal impact of migration concluded:

    * The fiscal impact of migration to the UK is small
    * The net fiscal contribution of EEA migrants in the financial year (FY) 2016/17 was £4.7bn
    * The net fiscal cost of non-EEA migrants in the financial year (FY) 2016/17 was £9bn

    This government’s approach to Brexit has been to made it harder for the first group (the net contributors) to come here. Well done.

    Reply These figures do not include all the costs of migrants to the Treasury

    1. Peter Parsons
      May 23, 2023

      What figures do you think are missing from the study then?

    2. a-tracy
      May 23, 2023

      If the first group, that you claim are (the net contributors), were as you claim. Then why did Juncker and the EU stop Cameron’s request to stop paying their families not in the UK full child tax credit benefits, universal credit at UK rates etc.? Perhaps because they were claiming hefty sums and therefore not net contributors to the UK.

      1. Peter Parsons
        May 23, 2023

        The Oxford Economics study included all those payments made in their calculations and still found that EEA migrants were, overall, net contributers.

        Maybe Cameron’s request was stopped because it wouldn’t have stopped the same payment being made for a UK-born child now living overseas?

        Reply The study like the others did not consider the capital costs of housing and public service provision!

        1. hefner
          May 23, 2023

          I hope one realises that if 750,000 new migrants have entered the country in the last twelve months, at a cost of £250,000 per person, that would add £187.5 bn to the negative part of the budget. Can this be true? I guess not, as the expenses are more likely spread over many years. ‘How many years?´ might be a better question to ask.
          Given an annual budget around £1 tn, what is the annual added cost of immigration in terms of percentage? I doubt very much Lifelogic’s 10% (living standard décline) which as usual he has drawn from his magic hat.

          Reply If you think the figure wrong how would you create cheaper homes in London and the SE for the migrants where most of them find jobs?

          1. EU fan
            May 23, 2023

            If you and Peter are correct then a million or more new arrivals per year will increase our standard of living considerably.
            Perhaps you would agree that we should go for several million a year and make ourselves even better off.
            What great news.
            Thanks both of you

          2. hefner
            May 24, 2023

            Reply to reply: When houses are built whether in London or the SE, they are rarely built with state money but by developers who will make profits out of it. Therefore they will not directly affect the state budget, if anything these profits will improve the positive side of the budget.
            I am surprised I have to state such an evidence.

            Reply The shortage is in social housing where the state finances or backs the investment

          3. hefner
            May 24, 2023

            About 17% of UK housing is in the social sector (about 5 m dwellings). This proportion has not varied by more than 0.1 or 0.2% over the last 10 years. Even accounting for the increase in population over these last ten years, 0.2% would be 10,000 new social houses per year over 10 years.
            At one stage, private developper Persimmon was given £16.53 m to build 930 new social homes in 2005 making the cost of such a unit £18,000 at the time (building.co.uk 11/08/2006 ‘Cost model: Social housing’). Assuming the BoE inflation rate of 65% between 2005 and 2023 (bankofengland.co.uk) building costs for such a unit would be about £30,000 in 2023. So 10,000 new social units would be £300 m this year.
            We are very far from the £187.5 bn.

            reply Most migrants coming into low paid jobs cannot afford to buy a home. The 250,000 figure was an old EU figure – are you for once saying the EU was wrong?

          4. a-tracy
            May 25, 2023

            Hefner, have you checked how many new homes all the housing associations that took over council homes have built. Have you checked how many ‘affordable houses’ have been built using free land from the councils and grants from the government?

            There is a big cover up of just how many side bar housing agreements the taxpayers are funding. Including retirement apartments which are a great idea to move people in 3 bed homes given to them because they had big families to move into when their children leave home and they are living on housing benefits.

            Why should Housing associations just keep all their ‘profits’ as perks and benefits for their staff rather than building and creating growth.

        2. Peter Parsons
          May 24, 2023

          The Oxford Economics study did include calculations on the cost of public service provision such as education.

          Reply It did not include big capital outlays to build the new cities needed

          1. a-tracy
            May 24, 2023

            Peter do you have a link to this Oxford Economics study. Was it Oxford University students that produced it?

            Did they include maternity costs, pre-school free places, full housing benefits, child benefits, disability benefits, all the universal credit benefits and other free provisions such as phones, furniture and clothes. France have said our benefits are overly generous and that is was is acting as a pull factor and causing problems for them whilst people transit through to get here.

            Did the study include buying the land the UK needs for immigrants social need housing projects? The translators, trainers, to help them to overtake people on social housing waiting lists. Two English couples now with children that I know personally split up because the only way they could get an affordable home was if the Mum kicked Dad out and the State became Daddy.

            JR ‘The shortage is in social housing’, I don’t understand why housing associations haven’t been building new homes, they have sufficient homes in my area that they can take two bungalows, suitable for disabled people, out of action to use as community rooms when they have a community centre nearby, there is a guildhall donated to the people going to rack and ruin, and a full building with just a couple of shops left in it going to ruin with empty rooms above the shops and lots of land around it. They just take the profits in earnings and benefits for the old council staff that work from home for them now. We should compare their costs to similar size private house suppliers to see if their costs of running are much higher so they show no profit. No-one checks if the £30m they promised has been spent, they were gifted land, shops with no obligations.

  34. Keith from Leeds
    May 23, 2023

    Any sane Government would stop all migration, except for highly qualified people, for at least three years. That would allow time to sort out the backlog, and deport all illegal immigrants, whether to Rwanda or their country of origin. Then devise a proper system so we only allow in people with the skills we want. Neither Labour nor Conservatives have handled immigration properly. A proper approach would be to study the need for housing, jobs, schools, hospitals, GPs, Dentists etc & prepare properly. Thinking not just of an immigrant today but what their requirements will be over 50 years. For example, immigrants have more children, so one house today maybe 4 or 6 in 20 to 30 years. It is not rocket science, but it seems to be beyond the majority of our MPs.

    1. MFD
      May 23, 2023

      I would prefer they stop migration of all but highly qualified people we need for the good if our country.

  35. George Sheard
    May 23, 2023

    thank you

    1. glen cullen
      May 23, 2023

      13 years of talk

  36. Ian B
    May 23, 2023

    “incoming migrants are more likely to need subsidised housing,” – Why

    Based on Media stories these people are spending many thousands of pounds to traffickers to break UK Law and gain entry illegally – yet it is expected the UK Taxpayer will fund this criminal activity. While at the same time the UK Taxpayer doesn’t have the right to be housed with the same sort of ‘gusto’

    The madness of the Conservative Government exposed.

  37. Lifelogic
    May 23, 2023

    Perhaps Sir John is a bit busy trying to get the Conservative party to be at least a tiny bit Conservative and get them of have sensible economic, energy, health, tax… policies?

    Rather an impossible task it seems.

    1. Wanderer
      May 23, 2023

      Yes LL. Many recent posts are reminders to the government about what basic conservative policies should be, and what basic errors are being made through a misunderstanding of economics, human nature, market capitalism etc.

      I feel for our host. An almost lone sane voice in the midst of bedlam. The sound of decency, being drowned out by the worst politicians in my lifetime.

      The rest of them can’t be fools though. At least not all of them. I think most are closet corporatist-globalists, deliberately wrecking what good is left in Britain. I also think they want to hand Labour the worst mess possible, in the hope that after a Labour term they can come back and be the ones being paid to continue the globalist agenda.

      1. turboterrier
        May 23, 2023

        Your last paragraph just about sums it all up in a nut shell. Until we get politicians big and brave enough with some fighting spirit to identify, be honest and see this globalist agenda for what it really is, you and I have got more chance of walking on water.
        Remember the old school boy cry?
        ” Don’t care what your name is get off my pond” AKA. Miracles never really happen only in the minds of loser’s.

      2. Donna
        May 24, 2023

        Agreed. They’re operating a scorched earth policy so that Labour will look even worse than they are, in the hope the electorate will forgive them for the deliberate destruction in 2028/9.

        They won’t.

  38. Mark+Thomas
    May 23, 2023

    Sir John,
    If this situation continues London will eventually spread from Southampton to Southend.
    Increasingly the people who have the means and motivation will leave, while those with nothing but extended families will continue to arrive.
    We can say goodbye to the welfare state and the NHS once most of the population become net beneficiaries.
    If you want a vision of the future just watch the film Bladerunner or it’s equally dystopian sequel.

    1. Hat man
      May 23, 2023

      ‘You can’t have open borders and a welfare state’ (Milton Friedman). So the way things are going, our rulers will at some point decide the welfare state is unaffordable, and must be scrapped. Job done, from the neoliberal point of view.

  39. Peter Gardner
    May 23, 2023

    I have commented before about how Australia has incentives for employers to recruit Australians first, to train Australians and how the real need for skills made clear from these measures is linked to the ponts based immigration system. Also that there is a cap on overall immigration and on immigration is each category of skill. Australia thereby invests in its human capital as one of its core strengths. As a result of these and other measures and policies Australia’s GDP/capita is almost 50% higher than the UK’s – US$k66 compared with, UK’s US$k46.
    It is hard to understand why the UK is unable to adopt similar policies. They are simple enough to understand. How can there be a sensible objection?
    The UK is far more open to foreigners to use its free services than Australia – healthcare, education, housing, living allowances. When I travel to UK I am supposed to pay to use the NHS but the last time I visited I could not find a doctor’s surgery that even had the means to take my money. It’s a joke.
    It is beyond belief the government seems to believe nothing need be done to address this situation. Even worse the PM is doing nothing to support the one minister in his government who does understand against the intolerant woke mob who are among the well-paid elites unaffected by mass immigration. The Government fiddles as if trying only to fool voters at the next election rather than trying to deliver the desired solution to the problem. It is a fearful little Government.

  40. Kenneth
    May 23, 2023

    There is also the social cost. This could turn out to be even worse than the economic cost.

  41. paul
    May 23, 2023

    The fundamental problem is the treasury and the way it has set up the economy to run on a model of immigration and high taxes because of climate change. Ministers and governments has no choice but to follow the treasury by laws on climate change, this is the main problem for Brexit as well. Till this can be change which I don’t think it can because they have bound the treasury by international laws that have been inbeded inside of it.

  42. agricola
    May 23, 2023

    I am inclined to say lets shut the door to all but the most dire cases until we have sorted out the basic infrastructure of the UK , schools, universities, housing, NHS, energy, transport road and rail, and care of the elderly and unfortunate. We would then be in a position to welcome refugees from war and politically torn parts of the World.

    1. IanT
      May 23, 2023

      There will be a howl of protest from the University’s and Industry – but if we returned many of our Uni’s back to Technical Colleges and Poly status (and reversing Mr Blairs target of having 50% of our young taking degrees) then perhaps we would not only be producing graduates with skills industry actually needed (e.g. they would be employable) but also have more home grown trades men/women to actually build and maintain things. Our young might then have careers that are well paid and reasonably secure. I’d take good odds that we will still need plumbers and heating engineers long after AI has killed off many of our so-called ‘professional’ graduate jobs.

      1. turboterrier
        May 23, 2023

        Ian T
        I have said many times on this site there are thousands of us out here who have done our time, read and wrote the books, made the CD and videos, got the T shirt which hides the scars we picked up along the way and when you try to give something back, you are too old, over qualified or just a silly old sod wanting a last roll of the dice.
        If you want to find out how hard it is try applying to get into Further Education.
        My perception you are seen as a threat as you just might be bringing hard won common sense to the table.
        At the moment I am Invigilating for GSCEs with great kids many with real problems at times I feel like weeping when I collect in the examination papers. But common sense decrees that the experience gained, many times through the journey of life experiences you wear your heart on your sleeve.

        1. a-tracy
          May 24, 2023

          So true turbo. We volunteered to deliver business experience to a group of teens at High School, our team won several categories where business people voted for the winner, yet all the hardest working students who made the products, sold them, marketed them, did the accounts etc. Failed the exam attached to it, the lazy ones in the team who trained to pass the test without lifting a finger took the victories from the wins and a distinction on the exam.

          Everything is upside down. But at least the teens that worked with us knew how to turn a profit, earned proper national minimum wage for their labours and a commission from each sale. The outurn was I wouldn’t volunteer again it was a horrible experience.

    2. John+C.
      May 23, 2023

      “Until we have sorted out the basic infrastructure etc. ” My guess, this would be take 20 to 30 years. That is, if we tried really hard.
      I’m afraid that we will have to be realistic. Immigration will actually grow. The economy will decline, and with the amount of debt we are accumulating, will become a basket case. Crime will get out of control, and few areas will be safe. Lefties will still refuse to admit that their policies have brought us to our knees.
      We will be very obviously poorer and the welfare state as such will collapse.

    3. turboterrier
      May 23, 2023

      Gets my vote pal, no pasanada.

  43. a-tracy
    May 23, 2023

    What difference does the wage cap make if those people coming into work are not eligible for any benefits for five years, including child benefits, and housing benefits? They have to be self-sustaining for their first five years including paying for medical insurance as they are in many other Countries. We are criticised by the French for being too generous with benefits and it acts as a draw.

    1. turboterrier
      May 23, 2023

      Great comment.

  44. a-tracy
    May 23, 2023

    If John allows interesting figures here

  45. Bert+Young
    May 23, 2023

    We are overcrowded full stop . Schools , Hospitals , Roads , Housing , Surgeries are beyond coping . The only solution is to stop all immigration – there should be no “soft soaping ” about this dilemma . Flights should take off within hours of any illegal arriving to Rwanda or elsewhere . There must be no delay caused by the intervention of the House of Lords or any other source . Enough is enough .

    1. Mark B
      May 23, 2023

      As I keep saying. The Rwanda deal will not help, it is a one out, one in situation.

      1. a-tracy
        May 23, 2023

        Who are we to take in, though, Mark, a dependent claimant or a skilled Rwandan ready to perform productive work in a skill we are told we need?

    2. a-tracy
      May 23, 2023

      Suella is getting hung out to dry with that attitude Bert, would you take her place? The Tory cabinet allows her to get hounded without grounding it, they allow people to call all Tories scum and turn a blind eye to it, then they wonder why people don’t want to associate with them. They think they can set someone up for a fall and everything will be ok when they put a weak EU loving replacement in her place.

      Traitor Grieve pops up on Sky like a bad penny to condemn her: “Suella Braverman is a servant of the Crown. She has no business asking her civil servants to carry out an Intervention…which was to her personal advantage…shouldn’t have happened”.

      1. Geoffrey Berg
        May 23, 2023

        Every commentator has overlooked the point that as well as the private dimension there is a more significant public dimension to the rather minor transgression of the law (which may even have been inadvertent and was certainly not a sackable offence for her or anybody else) when it is done by the Attorney General or Home Secretary as that allows other transgressors to say it can’t be a significant law if the main law officer or law enforcer in the country also broke that law, bringing that law into disrepute. The public interest is therefore that it should not have been publicised. The Home Secretary was therefore correct to ask her civil servants to help her stifle publicity about it and the civil servants were wrong not to assist her. Even more wrong were the other public officials administering the speed awareness courses to allow other celebrities (there is no conflict with the public interest if a footballer or an entertainer is caught speeding) at the behest of some lawyer to do the course alone and in private but not the Home Secretary upon her own application.

        1. IanT
          May 23, 2023

          A lot of fuss about nothing.
          I’m pretty sure that not so many years ago, no Home Secretary (or Attorney General) would ever had actually received a speeding ticket – it would have quietly disappeared in the system (rather like my friend’s Passport renewal). But then not so many years ago, Ministers also had staff who weren’t constantly looking for ways to get rid of them.

  46. formula57
    May 23, 2023

    Despite ” In 2019 the Conservative Manifesto promised to take it down below a figure of under 250,000..” (which would still require c. 1 new Southampton-sized city that we will not build) the other day Mr. Sunak was backtracking on that promise. Accordingly, we can expect no help from him and his colleagues.

    1. turboterrier
      May 23, 2023

      formula 57
      In the darkest hours before dawn I do honestly wonder if Liz Truss could have done a worse job than this. The current emotional feeling is NO

  47. Mark J
    May 23, 2023

    For years many have been saying that mass immigration has been the root cause of many of our issues, yet (as usual) no one in power takes a blind bit of notice.

    I’m not anti-immigration, however I do think we should have the right to choose a sensible number of arrivals each year and who we allow into the country. At present, neither are being applied. We certainly SHOULD NOT be accepting people who contribute nothing to the UK, becoming a net drain on public finances and services.

    Many of our MPs are totally ignorant to the situation right under their noses. Walk round the streets of central London, Park Lane, Edgware Road, Oxford Street, Regent St, The Strand and even around Westminster. You will see a mass of people whom clearly have no legal right to be here, begging, stealing from local businesses and sleeping in shop doorways at night. The Strand and Oxford Street at night time resembles something from a third world shanty town.

    Why are these people not being rounded up and kicked out? It is the same old story – no will to do so. Instead the problem just gets worse and worse as a result of inaction

    Why is the Government also not doing anything to close the loopholes regarding “dependents”. If someone wishes to come the UK, then that is their choice. That does not mean we are then expected to cater for their children, partner, uncles, aunts, parents and grandparents too. The rules really need looking at here, including entitlements to public services, and yes I do include the NHS in that. As it has already been said, other countries do not allow such generosity, why is it just the ‘soft touch’ UK yet again?

    An Oxford University Professor of Demographics was on Mike Graham’s “Independent Republic” a few weeks ago. They stated by 2040 we could be looking at a population of around 80 million by 2040, if the status quo continues. A population of near 100 million by 2060.

    We simple do not have the infrastructure to cope with huge numbers of arrivals each year, and UK taxpayers should not be forced to stump up ever higher levels of tax just fund the Government’s ignorance of immigration numbers.

    Time for this Government to start sorting out this issue. The Conservatives WILL be guaranteed to lose the next election if they don’t.

  48. MWB
    May 23, 2023

    Why can’t you charge the companies who want the cheap migrant labour, the costs of providing the resultant benefit payments and the infrastructure such as houses, schools, health services etc., etc.?
    Also, why can’t you sack the obstructive civil servants ?
    You have been in power for 13 years, and for the last 4 years have had an 80 seat majority, so why can’t you actually do something ?

  49. Cuibono
    May 23, 2023

    Starmer has plans for U.K.-wide ULEZ!

    1. Mark B
      May 23, 2023

      I would imagine so too would anyone else who gets into government.

      1. Cuibono
        May 23, 2023

        Yes…I put that for anyone who thought that Starmer might come along and “save” them!

    2. Donna
      May 23, 2023

      Not quite right. The WEF has plans for UK-wide ULEZ. Starmer will just implement them. And I fully expect Sunak will do the same if he somehow manages to stay in No.10

      1. Cuibono
        May 23, 2023

        How very nit picking.
        We can scarcely confront the WEF but we can warn people that Starmer is not our saviour.
        And that does NOT mean that I have any faith in Sunak but the tories I believe would be willing to part with him if only they could find a more conservative leader.
        And by the way…I was mentioning the WEF on here and being deleted a very long time ago!!
        And then when I mentioned it and was published not a single spark of interest. I often put links.
        But then, maybe some on here followed them?

    3. glen cullen
      May 23, 2023

      So does this government

  50. British Patriot
    May 23, 2023

    Sir John, you are absolutely right in what you say, but can’t you see that you are a voice in the wildnerness in your party? Sunak and Hunt are determined to have an open door immigration policy, as this is what businesses want, and because they are mesmerised by overall GDP figures (rather than GDP per capita).

    Etc ed

    1. glen cullen
      May 23, 2023

      I watched SirJ tonight on GB News and he was a ‘lone-voice’, he talked like a traditional tory, and sounded like in-opposition

  51. glen cullen
    May 23, 2023

    Listening to the government at the HoC today answering questions about ‘energy security and net-zero’ you’d think that we have a Green Party at the helm
    This is not the government I nor millions voted for

    1. Mark B
      May 23, 2023


      They are determined ‘to be the greenest government EVER !!!’ As per, David Cameron’s 2010 manifesto promise.

    2. MFD
      May 23, 2023

      Your right Glen, I have cast my last vote for Conservatives, and I can also say it will not be LibLab to follow the same route.

  52. turboterrier
    May 23, 2023

    With the civil serpents smelling more blood abely supported by the opposition how many leave supporters will be driven out of their posts?
    It is all becoming to appear too planned to be just a coincidence. Who is pulling the strings I ask myself?
    With all the things going wrong with this country all the opposition can focus on is a speeding offence. Speaks volumes what we are going to get to govern us.
    Are you and a very few supporters the only ones who are smelling the coffee?

  53. Stred
    May 23, 2023

    Nigel Farage had a representative of the Remainder big business community on his programme last night. It must be for balance but it gave a clear idea of what we are up against. He was all for getting rid of the Home Secretary for her crime of using what’s app and asking a civil servant to find how to use the option of a one to one speeding course. Both of course are used by other ministers and busy people. He kept asking where his business would find workers if the high numbers were not available. Farage answered “Pay them more”. Perhaps there are some trades and seasonal jobs where our education system does not provide suitable labour but this Remainder obviously had no thoughts on the cost or shortages caused to the rest of us. It seems obvious that the conservative ministers are following the UN Pact which requires assisting migration and the requirements of big business. The many MPs who are resigning may be hoping for a lucrative job offer in return for welching on their promises.

  54. Pauline Baxter
    May 23, 2023

    Freedom and prosperity Sir John? Shouldn’t you also demand we control our own borders?
    My reading of history tells me Queen Elizabeth 1 did.
    ‘Britain’, the U.K. is just too full. It can not support the numbers here now, let alone more.

  55. a-tracy
    May 23, 2023

    United Kingdom – Historical Net Migration Rate Data – This is what the pro-immigration people quote:

    Year Net Migration Rate Growth Rate
    2023 2.240 -12.910%
    2022 2.572 -11.400%
    2021 2.903 -10.260%
    2020 3.235 -9.280%
    2019 3.566 -8.520%
    2018 3.898 -0.640%
    2017 3.923 -0.630%
    2016 3.948 -0.600%
    2015 3.972 -0.630%
    2014 3.997 -0.620%
    2013 4.022 -13.190%
    2012 4.633 -11.650%
    2011 5.244 -10.440%
    2010 5.855 -9.450%
    2009 6.466 -8.630%
    2008 7.077 11.850%
    2007 6.327 13.430%
    2006 5.578 15.530%

    net migration 2015 329; 2019 271; 2020 32; 2021 397; 2022 504.
    So if the trend was 320 and only 32 managed to come in 2020, then the rules probably say we have to make up an extra 250k per year on top of the expected 320 until we’re on the UN track again. Just in time for Labour to come to power, they will appear to stop it!

    (I’m unsure how trusted these figures are because many more EU citizens claimed settled status than those we were told were here).

  56. Bloke
    May 23, 2023

    New entrants contributing financially would improve our economy. However, fine law-abiding citizens may be better even if they are less wealthy but develop into friendly neighbours, helping maintain high standards of our nation. Folk merely dripping with wealth may lack more important attributes. The presence and behaviour of upright citizens is the essence of excellent neighbourhoods. A majority of people would prefer to live in a relatively poor area, where it is safe to walk on the streets day and night; a place without drugs and crime, without litter, without graffiti, rowdy pubs and fast food joints, without rough sleepers begging; a place with good schools and pupils eager to learn to do better, growing up to support their own family rather than a life down to living on benefits. We need a riff raff filter. With that in place people could be happy.

  57. Derek
    May 23, 2023

    I thought it was arithmetically very clear that this country cannot afford to house the world, nor feed the world nor medically treat the world, nor can we provide unlimited funding to all those come here.
    Without balancing contributions from them to our Welfare State, this country is doomed to bankruptcy.
    It must stop before we lose the confidence of the global FX and suffer a crashing GBP again.
    Or is that exactly the plan of the die-hard Europhiles now skulking in Whitehall, Westminster and beyond? Will we ever have to ask the EU to let us back? If they have their way, we will. Be afraid for your offspring.

  58. Original Richard
    May 23, 2023

    We’re no longer a democracy. On the big issues of immigration and Net Zero our current Parliament is either unwilling to override or incapable overriding the actions of the Civil Service and the judiciary.

    In the case of Net Zero, the statement on P19 of the Net Zero Strategy that we will have cheap and abundant renewable energy is a lie. They know it’s a lie and furthermore know that Net Zero is only feasible with intermittent supplies of expensive energy and the rationing of food, energy, heating and transport.

    For instance, they consider there’s no problem with lack of energy or battery minerals or charging points for evs because there will be very few people who will be allowed or will be able to afford to own these vehicles.

  59. John+C.
    May 23, 2023

    I’m very sure they understand the concept of GDP per capita. They’re not stupid, but their aims are not clearly to increase our wealth and happiness.

  60. glen cullen
    May 23, 2023

    ‘’Breathe: Tackling the Climate Emergency’’ the title of new book by Sadiq Khan the Mayor of London ….Just like the Tories; another Green Party politician …he also welcomes more and more immigration

  61. Lynn Atkinson
    May 23, 2023

    I’m afraid the cost of the immigration in Sterling is a mere bagatelle compared to the fact that the nation has been seriously undermined. We are, to a very large extent, no longer British. This is existential and irreversible.

  62. Frances
    May 23, 2023

    Net migration means exporting wealth and skills and importing poverty and ignorance.
    Declare a 30 year moratorium on asylum. Declare it will only be for those we invite.
    Dump whatever supranational court stops us from getting rid of the uninvited.

  63. turboterrier
    May 23, 2023

    China shows the way with the needs of having a excessive population and being the world’s major manufacturing base.
    In the first quarter they produced more CO2 than the UK would produce at our present rate to 2050.
    They are really signed on to the NZ project aren’t they then.

    1. passingby
      May 24, 2023

      Turboterrier.. yes and we await Liz Truss’s speech about China when she gets out there to Taiwan.. she’ll tell ’em what’s what

      1. mancunius
        May 25, 2023

        I see you’ve learnt very little about English punctuation over the past years of your fake multi-ID posting on behalf of the EU.

  64. mancunius
    May 23, 2023

    And meanwhile, as the Spectator’s stats analysis shows, in a major city such as Manchester, 20 out of 100 people of working age are permanently signed off, largely with ‘mental incapacity to work’ for which the checks are unbelievably lax.
    Dismantle the benefits system, and force people back to work, or starve. As St Paul said, “If a man will not work, he shall not eat. We hear that some among you are idle. They are not busy; they are busybodies. Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the bread they eat.”

  65. paul cuthbertson
    May 24, 2023

    It is all part of the globalist NWO WEF UK Establishment plan and they do not care one iota about the people. Nothing will happen until the whole system of government is changed. Wake Up people

  66. Hat man
    May 24, 2023

    Why is mass migration happening? Why is the government failing to act? Out of curiosity I counted how many times comments on this blog asked the ‘why’ question – 37 times.

    But surely we know why: because for some, it’s profitable.

    The interesting question would be to ask who benefits from it.

    1. Frances
      May 24, 2023

      World population rise and media and foreign govts undermined interventions meant to keep people in their own countries,

      1. Hat man
        May 24, 2023

        Do foreign governments grant British work visas, Frances? Do the media? Do foreign governments escort into our harbours boatloads of migrants? Do the media? I don’t think so.

        Time to face the question: who in this country actually wants high migration levels? And that’s not a rhetorical question.

  67. XY
    May 25, 2023

    It seems the conservatives have lost contrrol of the “Conservative” Party. Sunak seems intent on letting the establishment blob continue their contrived witch-hunt against Brexiteers.

    Your only hope was to use the Johnson/Truss times to eliminate hese people from the parliamentary party, which is where the rot exists, but cutting the head off the snake is the recommended treatment. Now they’re doing it to your lot.

    It also seems that the electorate has not yet woken up to this in terms of feeling able to vote for a new party. It may take a Farage moment to do that. Or they may vote out the current MPs and decapitate the snake for themselves… the problem is… at what price? Starmer will give the vote to 16 year olds ensuring there’s never a non-socialist majority, re-run the referendum and rejoin the EU. It would take a century to undo that harm.

    It seems we really need a new party now. Or your ERG need to oust Sunak before the election and ensure a victory for a right-wing candidate (but the 1922 now seem to know how to stitch up the vote via cunning plans such as “100 MP votes to go through to the membership vote”). So how you achieve that is not clear.

  68. mancunius
    May 25, 2023

    This ‘cheap labour’ is only cheap for business. Its true costs include the massive amount in in-work benefits the lower-waged cost the net taxpayer. Add in the economically inactive and the state-employed, and the ever-diminishing number of net taxpayers is carrying an ever-increasing, Atlas-sized burden on their backs.
    This is unsustainable. But it seems as if in every parliament most MPs are concerned only to make polite noises and get their own money and pension safely into harbour, and damn the country’s future.

  69. Frances
    May 27, 2023

    enable people in social housing to be able to move for a minimum wage job. That cannot be by building. It could be by subsidizing hostels near work. Social housing locks people away from work.
    As to real skills shortages short term work permits and mean it. Thats what other countries do.

Comments are closed.