Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Immigration speech David Cameron

Options

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Lockstep
    Registered Users Posts: 9,029 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    Meh, typical attempt to play up to immigration fears, despite the fact that UK immigrants contribute more than they recieve.
    Sam Bowman does a good piece on it: Link


  • Options
    #3
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    A petty sop to the right and a deliberate pandering to idiots. 'Immigration angst' is so widespread now that it is taking on Monty Pythonesque proportions. Considering that one of our fastest growing exports are young Irish people, I wonder will we begin to open up to the idea of the free movement of peoples?


  • Options
    #4
    Cork boy 55
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,324 ✭✭✭Cork boy 55


    Lockstep wrote: »
    Meh, typical attempt to play up to immigration fears, despite the fact that UK immigrants contribute more than they recieve.
    Sam Bowman does a good piece on it: Link

    nonsense
    House of Lords
     Economic Affairs Committee
    2008 The Economic Impact of Immigration
    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/82/8211.htm#a32
    Read the summary
    215. The overall conclusion from existing evidence is that immigration has very small impacts on GDP per capita, whether these impacts are positive or negative. This conclusion is in line with findings of studies of the economic impacts of immigration in other countries including the US. The Government should initiate research in this area, in view of the paucity of evidence for the UK (para 66).
    216. Although possible in theory, we found no systematic empirical evidence to suggest that net immigration creates significant dynamic benefits for the resident population in the UK. This does not necessarily mean that such effects do not exist but that there is currently no systematic evidence for them and it is possible that there are also negative dynamic and wider welfare effects (para 69).









    I don't see anything wrong with this speech

    He says new labour let in too many people too fast.

    Net immigration quadrupled to 237,000 a year between 1997 and 2007. In 2009 it was 196,000. 3 million immigrants have arrived since 1997.

    He then talks about how he is going to cut down on Non-Eu migration
    Forced marriages, sham marriages, brass-plate bogus students, illegals ,welfare(to get brits working)
    and work visas making sure the skilled workers are skilled workers.


  • Options
    #5
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Cork boy 55 wrote: »
    nonsense
    House of Lords
     Economic Affairs Committee
    2008 The Economic Impact of Immigration there is currently no systematic evidence.

    A point I tried but failed to make in another thread. There doesnt seem to need to be evidence for people to believe that immigration on a large scale is either good or bad.

    I havent heard his speech so won't comment yet, but I doubt that he presented any specific evidence either.


  • Options
    #6
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    I don't think he presented anything that new or exciting in that speech (I read the transcript rather than watching the video). It was set up in a way that people could read into it what they wanted. The same people who were pro-immigration are still going to be pro-immigration, and vice-versa. Meh.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Lockstep
    Registered Users Posts: 9,029 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    Cork boy 55 wrote: »
    nonsense
    House of Lords
     Economic Affairs Committee
    2008 The Economic Impact of Immigration
    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/82/8211.htm#a32
    Read the summary
    215. The overall conclusion from existing evidence is that immigration has very small impacts on GDP per capita, whether these impacts are positive or negative. This conclusion is in line with findings of studies of the economic impacts of immigration in other countries including the US. The Government should initiate research in this area, in view of the paucity of evidence for the UK (para 66).
    216. Although possible in theory, we found no systematic empirical evidence to suggest that net immigration creates significant dynamic benefits for the resident population in the UK. This does not necessarily mean that such effects do not exist but that there is currently no systematic evidence for them and it is possible that there are also negative dynamic and wider welfare effects (para 69).









    I don't see anything wrong with this speech

    He says new labour let in too many people too fast.

    Net immigration quadrupled to 237,000 a year between 1997 and 2007. In 2009 it was 196,000. 3 million immigrants have arrived since 1997.

    He then talks about how he is going to cut down on Non-Eu migration
    Forced marriages, sham marriages, brass-plate bogus students, illegals ,welfare(to get brits working)
    and work visas making sure the skilled workers are skilled workers.
    Hardly nonsense, the ASI refers to two Home Office reports.
    Did you read the post in full?

    Your own source doesn't dispute what Bowman says. Rather, it shows that there is no evidence to show significant dynamic benefits to the resident population. Bowman does note that it is equivalent to only one percent off the basic tax rate! Not significant but showing that immigrants contribute to the economy more than they take in (especially as working age immigrants won't need to be educated by the State but will be inclined to go straight into the workforce)


  • Options
    #8
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    southsiderosie wrote: »
    I don't think he presented anything that new or exciting in that speech (I read the transcript rather than watching the video). It was set up in a way that people could read into it what they wanted. The same people who were pro-immigration are still going to be pro-immigration, and vice-versa. Meh.

    Just reading down through it now and am thinking from some of his 'let's have a substantive sensible discussion' that he must have read my thread
    Cameron wrote:
    Now, immigration is a hugely emotive subject … and it's a debate too often in the past shaped by assertions rather than substantive arguments. We've all heard them. The assertion that mass immigration is an unalloyed good and that controlling it is economic madness … the view that Britain is a soft touch and immigrants are out to take whatever they can get. I believe the role of politicians is to cut through the extremes of this debate and approach the subject sensibly and reasonably


  • Options
    #9
    Bottle_of_Smoke
    Registered Users Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭Bottle_of_Smoke


    Don't really see a point in immigrants when you've got increasing unemployment. Yeah maybe they'll bring some money with them but is it really worth social problems or an increase in support for the BNP?


  • Options
    #10
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    Laminations wrote: »
    Just reading down through it now and am thinking from some of his 'let's have a substantive sensible discussion' that he must have read my thread

    I do agree that Britain needed (and needs) to have a sensible conversation about immigration, and that was a huge failure of the previous government. But I am suspicious of that fact that Cameron gave this speech three weeks before local elections and I'm finding it very difficult to see this as anything other than a naked political ploy.


  • Options
    #11
    NufcNavan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,832 ✭✭✭NufcNavan


    A typical right-winged speech to deter the amount of support for the BNP, EDL etc.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    LordSutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    I don't see anything wrong with the PMs speech, nail on the head for my way of thinking, but I do think that Vince Cable was out of order.


  • Options
    #13
    LondonIrish90
    Closed Accounts Posts: 882 ✭✭✭LondonIrish90


    A very good speech to my ears, although as some have said, he may have just been telling the people what they want to hear before the may elections.

    Lets hope he backs up his positive words proactively.

    Seems that even the other lib dems in the cabinet do not agree with poor old Vince today anyway.


  • Options
    #14
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    One of the joys of coalition government is that it allows talking out of both sides of the mouth simultaneously......but then I am somewhat of a cynic.


  • Options
    #15
    digme
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,584 ✭✭✭digme


    NufcNavan wrote: »
    A typical right-winged speech to deter the amount of support for the BNP, EDL etc.
    +1


  • Options
    #16
    serfboard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,680 ✭✭✭serfboard


    There are local elections coming up next month and their polling/focus groups are obviously telling the Tories that they are losing ground to UKIP/BNP on this issue. So it's no surprise that Cameron makes a speech like this at this time.

    On the other hand, he's after being out in Pakistan praising them for what they are doing to get the Asian vote.

    In fact, now that I think about it, printing money has finally stopped in the UK, and it's time to pay the piper. People are only fully feeling the effects of the recession in the UK now, and are probably indicating their disgust with conventional politics and threatening to vote BNP.


  • Options
    #17
    opo
    Registered Users Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    NufcNavan wrote: »
    A typical right-winged speech to deter the amount of support for the BNP, EDL etc.

    :confused:

    Are you saying this is a good or bad thing?


  • Options
    #18
    opo
    Registered Users Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    serfboard wrote: »
    There are local elections coming up next month and their polling/focus groups are obviously telling the Tories that they are losing ground to UKIP/BNP on this issue. So it's no surprise that Cameron makes a speech like this at this time.

    Whether you are right or wrong - it must be painful being called a racist any other time you try to address this issue in any meaningful or structured way.


  • Options
    #19
    opo
    Registered Users Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    southsiderosie wrote: »
    I do agree that Britain needed (and needs) to have a sensible conversation about immigration, and that was a huge failure of the previous government. But I am suspicious of that fact that Cameron gave this speech three weeks before local elections and I'm finding it very difficult to see this as anything other than a naked political ploy.

    Are you equally "suspicious" if he talks about the economy, taxation, schools or any other matter - for much the same reasons?

    If not - why not?


  • Options
    #20
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    opo wrote: »
    Are you equally "suspicious" if he talks about the economy, taxation, schools or any other matter - for much the same reasons?

    If not - why not?

    No because he talks about them all of the time. That is not the case with immigration.

    Parties are very selective about how they use airtime and what they talk about during a campaign. David Cameron's big policy objective is "the big society", yet we are hearing little about it now because other people in the party don't like it and voters don't get it. But they do get immigration, and electioneering that suggests a reduction in levels of immigration will go over well with voters - especially Tory voters who might defect to a right-wing party.


  • Options
    #21
    opo
    Registered Users Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    southsiderosie wrote: »
    No because he talks about them all of the time. That is not the case with immigration.

    And isn't that the supreme irony. Whilst he gags himself - the BNP and EDL thrive by doing the opposite.

    southsiderosie wrote: »
    But they do get immigration, and electioneering that suggests a reduction in levels of immigration will go over well with voters - especially Tory voters who might defect to a right-wing party.

    These errr "right wing parties" would struggle to exist if he was permitted to deal with and discuss immigration without the smears of racism and the whining that greets such debate by those who claim to support immigration the most.

    You are of course entirely correct in suggesting that immigration control is universally popular - even in the countries that immigrants come from and often a whole lot more than in Britain.

    Entrenched vested interests, chest thumping anti-racists, open border fanatics and the naive continue to try steal the middle ground.

    For their efforts - they are arguably the BNP's and EDL's greatest enablers.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    LondonIrish90
    Closed Accounts Posts: 882 ✭✭✭LondonIrish90


    opo wrote: »

    Entrenched vested interests, chest thumping anti-racists, open border fanatics and the naive continue to try steal the middle ground.

    For their efforts - they are arguably the BNP's and EDL's greatest enablers.

    It is quite odd that Unite Against Fascism turn up at every BNP rally, but have never once shown their faces at a demonstration by islamic extremists, brandishing boards with slogans such as "freedom go to hell" and "islam will dominate Britain".

    If this isn't a form of fascism, then I don't know what is - yet UAF don't want to know. This leads me to believe they themselves are a fairly racist party.


Advertisement