Migration is way too high

The ONS upward revisions to past migration figures are huge. Some here have commented before that they did not trust the figures. With so many people entering and leaving legally, judgements have to be made about which ones are going to stay for a longer time, with or without permission. The authorities also need to enforce better where a person enters as a short stay visitor then embeds as a resident without the necessary permit.

The numbers reinforce the need which some of us stressed to the last government that policies had to change to make a very large reduction in legal numbers. Finally this January the government did put up the minimum  income level for a job, limit dependents coming with students and sought to limit the occupations qualifying for work visas. As a result legal migration is said to be down 20% from a very high peak.

Today’s debate should be about what further measures will this government take to cut numbers more? The income level needs to be raised higher. There need to be more sector work plans to get more U.K. non working residents to take jobs, as was done with drivers post Covid. This is implied by the government’s back to work policy but needs more detail and urgency.

The case for much lower has often been set out here. Too many low pay and no pay migrants leaves us short of homes, NHS capacity and other public facilities. It may be cheap labour for companies but dear for taxpayers.

32 Comments

  1. Ian wragg
    November 28, 2024

    No chance of a reduction in immigration with this lot in office
    They’re marginally worse than the non tories
    2TK is for open borders so we can be culturally enriched at the same time as destroying our way of life.
    We must be rapidly heading for 80 million on this tiny island and there’s no sign of it abating.
    Crayons wanting to build 1.5 million houses won’t scratch the surface.

    Reply
  2. Keith from Leeds
    November 28, 2024

    Failure to control Immigration, both legal and illegal, caused the collapse of the conservative vote in the GE. The Labour Government will do nothing to control or reduce Immigration for the next 4.5 years.
    Kemi Badenoch’s speech was a good start, but how many of the current 121 conservative MPs agree with her?
    The Conservatives need to look at what Javier Milei is doing in Argentina for the economy and what Donald Trump will do in the USA on Immigration and the economy.
    We are over-governed, so we need to dramatically reduce the Civil Service by at least 400,000, determinedly cut Government spending in all areas, cut taxes, and work to support the UK and its people, notons, WHO, Quangos, and foreign farmers, as just four examples of wasteful spending. By the end of this miserable Labour Government, there will be even more to c the United Nations. But by then, it will be a life-and-death event, so nobody will argue it can’t be done. For the UK to survive, it will have to be done.

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      November 28, 2024

      They did not merely “fail” they promised (many times in % several manifestos) but then deliberately did not even try to deliver for 14+ years. Why would anyone ever trust them again on anything?

      Reply
    2. Donna
      November 29, 2024

      Still falling for “we made mistakes but we’ve learned our lesson” speeches?

      I suggest you check out Einstein’s definition of insanity.

      Reply
  3. Keith from Leeds
    November 28, 2024

    Line 2 in para 2 should read … not the UN, WHO, Quangos and foreign farmers

    Reply
  4. agricola
    November 28, 2024

    Too many allowed in. No control when they are in. No disincentives to discourage illegals, in fact just the opposite. No politicians other tha Reform intent on stopping or removing them. A littany of failure and downright obstruction. I see no effective resolution until 99% of our current HoC’s incumbents leave the field.

    Reply
  5. William Tarver
    November 28, 2024

    Yes, all the adverse comments seem directed towards illegal immigration. It’s way too high, clearly, and those partaking obviously see the UK as a soft touch. But the number involved is about 10% of those arriving legally. If we just admitted high net worth people, or those with skills we need, then numbers would be lower and the country would be better off. I am absolutely not an advocate for zero immigration.

    Reply
    1. Mike Wilson
      November 28, 2024

      I am absolutely not an advocate for zero immigration.

      I am. If we had zero immigration people might have to start training and getting jobs. We’ve got half the country sitting on its a*** while millions are allowed in to do their jobs. It is a complete joke.

      Reply
      1. Narrow Shoulders
        November 28, 2024

        I am so much in agreement with this comment.

        If jobs weren’t getting done we might have a proper discussion about worklessness but while we can import Labour we won’t

        Reply
    2. Mark
      November 29, 2024

      Most illegal immigrants came here legally, but simply overstay their visa or right to visit without one.

      Reply
  6. glen cullen
    November 28, 2024

    We need a full migration embargo for 5 years and a comprehensive campaign to return all overstayers and a policy to return illegals to France same day and house other illegals in the army base in hebrides until returned ….its the only way

    Reply
  7. APL
    November 28, 2024

    “Migration is way too high”

    The administration you supported did nothing about it for sixteen years. Don’t think you can fool us into thinking the pseudo Tory party will ever do anything different.

    Reply Just get it that this site provides independent commentary on the government and what could be done for the U.K. When I was an MP I consistently made the case for much lower migration highlighting all the state/ taxpayers costs of large numbers of low pay and no pay migrants

    Reply
    1. Mark
      November 29, 2024

      I think that the current party has a big credibility problem, notwithstanding that a number of former MPs are now saying much more openly what holding the whip dissuaded them from saying, and even among the current MPs there are some who are now beginning to speak out. On immigration, successive manifestos have promised to curb it – and that simply hasn’t happened: indeed we saw a massive surge under Sunak before he belatedly realised that is wasn’t sustainable. I’m not sure we were ever told what he privately agreed with Modi when he visited India, but this is the result according to the ONS:
      the top five non-EU+ nationalities for long-term immigration into the UK in YE June 2024 were:

      Indian (240,000)
      Nigerian (120,000)
      Pakistani (101,000)
      Chinese (78,000)
      Zimbabwean (36,000)

      Reply
  8. Mike Wilson
    November 28, 2024

    Let’s place the blame where it belongs. David Cameron, and successors, promised to get immigration down to the ‘tens of thousands’. Last year, NINE HUNDRED AND SIX THOUSAND PEOPLE were allowed to move here. What, the f*** is going on? Why? Why? WHY? Where are the schools, hospitals, doctors, dentists, etc. etc. for almost ANOTHER MILLION PEOPLE?
    The Tory Party, surely, must never be voted for again.

    Reply
    1. APL
      November 28, 2024

      “Let’s place the blame where it belongs. David Cameron, and successors, …”

      Well, yes. But don’t forget Jack Straw who, if memory serves me, was Home Secretary and opened the flood gates, saying as he left office, ‘Oopsie’.

      There is no difference between the lying Tory party, and the lying Labour party.

      Reply
      1. Donna
        November 29, 2024

        And Blunkett as Home Secretary presiding over the floodgates Blair had opened said “there was no obvious limit to immigration.”

        There is no difference between the Blue and Red WEF Parties.

        Reply
        1. anon
          November 29, 2024

          Exactly.

          Perhaps we should look at how the UAE and others employ contract labour on limited stay visa’s and compare with the UK uni-system / blob. Infringe UAE laws and deportation is likely the least concern.

          Reply
  9. Michael Saxton
    November 28, 2024

    The data released today are truly shocking revealing incompetence at the ONS and within government as numbers were miscounted. And the cost is unacceptable, But the data shows gross incompetence by a succession of Prime Ministers and their Cabinets enacting policies in total opposition to the wishes of their electorate. Notwithstanding the new conservative leaders speech this week I remain unconvinced by her rhetoric. Excessive immigration legal and illegal lost the election for conservatives and it will do the same for Labour.

    Reply
    1. Clough
      November 29, 2024

      To call leaving our borders undefended ‘incompetence’, is a very generous interpretation, Michael. It is surely deliberate policy, followed by civil servants and some big employers, regardless of what the public or one or two courageous politicians think.

      Reply
  10. Narrow Shoulders
    November 28, 2024

    I don’t often offer criticism Sir John but this epiphany is too late.

    We needed you to be St Paul while you were still in Parliament.

    You were critical but not damming and we needed more damming from 1997 to now

    Reply
    1. a-tracy
      November 28, 2024

      Did you see what the papers did to Braverman, the left tried to destroy her, half the public turned nasty on her yet decry the turnaround wasn’t sufficient that she started. It’s embarrassing to admit you voted Tory in 2017 and 2019 which allowed these numbers to flourish, Patel who took away return targets, the debacle of trying to get Rwanda off the ground and when that wasn’t working no other ideas. Why?

      Labours first move was closing Bibby and buying more 4* hotel rooms and lodgings and just spreading more around because the situation in London was getting too obvious.

      Reply
      1. Narrow Shoulders
        November 29, 2024

        And how many Conservatives stood full behind Suella Braverman and Pritt Patel during those attacks?

        We needed more people in all walks of life to tell the worthies that they were being overly accommodating and that real people wanted less immigration.

        Too many of us are too afraid to publicly put our heads above the parapet because there is no support when you are unfairly vilified.

        Reply
    2. K
      November 28, 2024

      Exactly.

      Reply
  11. Mickey Taking
    November 28, 2024

    No mention of the cultural and religious beliefs incomers expect and believe they would have a right to demand at the same time as ignoring long held laws in this country.
    Of course authorities and a few politicians know it and speak it in careful terms due to harassment on the grounds of racism rather than plain speaking – after all it was once a Free Speech Country!
    Could the good reduction in immigration also be due to the changes made in student visas and family restrictions accompanying them? About time too!

    Reply
  12. outsider
    November 29, 2024

    Dear Sir John,
    If we leave aside asylum claims (arranged irregular and false), there is a market mechanism for the Government to set and enforce net zero or any other any target number for immigration. It could be based loosely on the old system of exchange controls, notably the dollar pool.

    Starting with actual emigration over the previous 12 months, the Home Office could set the same number as the number of available places, adding or subtracting according to recommended need. Permits would then be allocated to would-be immigrants (or their sponsors) via central Dutch auctions. This would arrive at the price at which quota would be filled. Allocation by price is in important ways unfair but no more so than any other method of rationing immigration numbers.

    To make the system fairer and more workable, the auctions would need to be quarterly or more frequent. They would also need to be broken down into separate quotas/auctions for different groups such as employment, study and family. If sensitive market mechanisms are used, it is entirely possible and practical for any Government so minded to set a fixed target for non-asylum immigration numbers and to achieve it.

    Reply
  13. Philip P.
    November 29, 2024

    SJR: ‘As a result legal migration is said to be down 20% from a very high peak.’ Yes, but only if you want to compare the ONS’s corrected figure year to June 2023 with the provisional estimate for year to June 2024. When the ONS publishes the definitive 2024 figure, it’s perfectly possible the Tories’ last-minute attempts to check the migration influx will be seen to have achieved nothing.

    Reply Unlikely. The changes did reduce numbers.

    Reply
  14. JayCee
    November 29, 2024

    It beggars belief that our Civil Servants do not have an accurate figure for the nett number of people entering the UK. The digitization of passports should make it easier and even a simple count of bodies at our border points should be able to get closer than +-200,000.
    I visited Loas over ten years ago and visa application was electronic online and electronic verification on entry.
    It is a terrible indictment on our Governments past and present that this is not better controlled.
    Is there an argument for the break up of the Home Office?

    Reply
  15. Donna
    November 29, 2024

    No wonder Sunak jumped off the sinking ship back in July and Badenoch pulled the “we made mistakes but we ‘promise’ we won’t do it again” stunt on Tuesday.

    The truth is that neither of the Establishment-WEF Parties will do anything meaningful to stop the destruction of our country through mass immigration and the Net Zero lunacy.

    No immigrant should be allowed to enter the country to take a low-wage, low-skill job. The salary threshold should be raised to ÂŁ50,000 a year – and higher if they intend bringing in their immediate family (spouse and children). Their employer should also be required to pay a substantial annual contribution to cover the cost of public services (NHS, education etc) and infrastructure for the first 3 years they are here: ÂŁ10,000 pa per individual seems reasonable to me. So the annual levy for a family of 4 would be ÂŁ40,000.

    Reply
    1. Mickey Taking
      November 29, 2024

      ‘No wonder Sunak jumped off the sinking ship ‘
      I think your typo left a t out of sinking ship?

      Reply
    2. Original Richard
      November 29, 2024

      Donna :
      PM Sunak called the GE early to make sure it was before the Rwanda plan could be tested safe in the knowledge that the following administration would cancel it. He was afraid it might actually work.

      Reply
  16. Original Richard
    November 29, 2024

    All parts of the Uniparty in Parliament want to continue with massive immigration. Some because it keeps wages low and profits high and others because they see it as a way to change the electorate. So unless a voter is also supportive of mass immigration they should realise that it is Einstein’s definition of insanity to keep voting for these Parliamentary incumbents.

    Low wages, a falling standard of living compared to other western countries, such as the USA, and high numbers of people not in employment are caused by mass immigration. This is in addition to social, infrastructure and services, breakdown.

    Just as the Black Death in the Middle Ages ended feudalism by causing a severe shortage of labour, so a stop on immigration to the UK would lead to reduced unemployment through rising wages together with a need to increase productivity.

    Reply
  17. Mark
    November 29, 2024

    I read that Jacob Rees-Mogg pointed out that the immigration levels have been vastly understated for many years, not just for the recent couple of years. The government was greatly surprised at how many EU citizens applied for the right to continue to come and live here. That is of course not all. Back during the previous Labour government it was admitted that the International Passenger Survey was not fit for purpose, because it only reported on immigration at LHR and LGW, ignoring those coming in through other airports. It was also clear that the student route was being heavily abused, and although Grayling made an effort to shut down sham colleges back in 2012, it has continued to be abused. Another route for abuse was Mode 4 migration, which is officially excluded from the statistics, since supposedly those coming here under its provisions are not supposed to stay beyond a year and thus are not long term migrants. The statistics covering this are equally dubious. There are questions to be asked about the collusion between the ONS, successive governments, and civil servants particularly in the Home Office, disproportionately many of whom appear to represent the away team. Sir Humphrey joked that the FCO looked after foreigners: now it seems so does the Home Office and DWP, doling out NINOs.

    Perhaps the Starmer plan is to reduce net migration through promoting mass emigration by those seeking to escape his rule. That may ameliorate the numbers, but it takes us back to the Brain Drain of the 1960s.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.