1 in 6 believe immigration has benefited the UK?

woodoo

According to a survey of 20,000 people commissioned by Lord Ashcroft in the UK. Only 1 in 6 (approx 17%) of those surveyed thought immigration had brought more advantages than disadvantages. In addition, 79 per cent of respondents supported the message on the Home Office’s controversial “Go home or face arrest” advertising vans aimed at illegal immigrants.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10278665/1-in-6-believe-immigration-has-benefited-Britain.html

Perhaps people aren't as in favour of immigration as our leaders and the left think? Is this a little worrying for Ireland and Europe too as we are heading down the same pro immigration road?

Lapin

The 1 in 6 who favoured immigration were all from Nigeria.

Dj Grimreefer

1 in 6 people are also immigrants in the uk, could they be the same people voting in both polls???? 7 out of 20 people think so

somefeen

The 1 in 6 is probably a business owner delighted they can employ someone to work crazy hours in **** conditions and who doesn't know their rights.

redtapestyl

We're not allowed to have negative opinions on immigration I'm afraid.

Yellow121

Atleast the immigrants who arrived in Britain haven't taken control of the land violently and made the natives suffer for centuries. Right?

Wacker The Attacker

redtapestyl wrote: »

We're not allowed to have negative opinions on immigration I'm afraid.

True

RayM

redtapestyl wrote: »

We're not allowed to have negative opinions on immigration I'm afraid.

I see negative opinions on immigration throughout the media all the time. I'm not sure why people think you're not "allowed" to say the very things that they quite freely say (often with monotonous regularity).

brummytom

I'm surprised it's that low.

Karl Stein

somefeen wrote: »

The 1 in 6 is probably a business owner delighted they can employ someone to work crazy hours in **** conditions and who doesn't know their rights.

This is a very valid point. I'm reminded of Marx's quote:

But if a surplus labouring population is a necessary product of accumulation or of the development of wealth on a capitalist basis, this surplus population becomes, conversely, the lever of capitalistic accumulation, nay, a condition of existence of the capitalist mode of production.

Karl Marx, Capital, vol. 1

I'd add to that that employers enjoy having an 'employer's market' i.e. many people chasing the same job. It keeps workers passive and less demanding when they know they can be replaced.

woodoo

redtapestyl wrote: »

We're not allowed to have negative opinions on immigration I'm afraid.

Thats true, there is a lot of effort put into silencing debate on the issue. Everything from being called a racist to being called stupid, unreasonable etc is used. That is part of the problem. The people have not really been asked if they are happy with current immigration levels.

You don't hear any real debate on the radio, on current affairs programs, in the Dail, in the papers etc either?

bodice ripper

Reading this has made me want to listen to The Wall. Can't think why...

Dj Grimreefer

I hate those silent debates it's impossible to get a word in

Friend Computer

redtapestyl wrote: »

We're not allowed to have negative opinions on immigration I'm afraid.

Is that why you see them all the time on AH and elsewhere? Or did you mean freedom of speech isn't a one-way street where only you get to say what you want?

I'm sorry the idea of people criticising you is so abhorrent.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

woodoo wrote: »

Perhaps people aren't as in favour of immigration as our leaders and the left think? Is this a little worrying for Ireland and Europe too as we are heading down the same pro immigration road?

We have nowhere near the levels of immigration that the UK has, indeed the biggest non Irish national group here are from the UK.
Do you really think people from all our former colonies are going to want to come here?

Potatoeman

There seems to be self segregated comunities in the UK where people have no intention of integrating. Its not surprising this is causing tensions. There are also cultural values that will impeed any real acceptance of western lifestyle.

Phoebas

Lapin wrote: »

The 1 in 6 who favoured immigration were all from Nigeria.

I wonder if any of the remaining 5/6 have ever emigrated.

Legs.Eleven

redtapestyl wrote: »

We're not allowed to have negative opinions on immigration I'm afraid.

Indeed you are but just don't expect your opinions not to be challenged. That's a little unrealistic this being a discussion forum and all.

Karl Stein

woodoo wrote: »

Everything from being called a racist to being called stupid, unreasonable etc is used.

Unfortunately immigration debates tend to attract racists, the stupid, the unreasonable, the dim, the angry at everything, the 'knows-what-they're-against' but not what they're for types.

Bad weather? Blame the immigrants.

Soup too salty? Blame the immigrants.

Shoelaces come undone? Blame the immigrants.

Beefy78

When I go home I'm seeing more and more people scapegoating immigrants for pretty much every problem that Britain has got. It's a little bit scary, to be honest. It's no surprise to me at all that UKIP is doing so well at the moment.

I think a lot of the problem is the lack of any informed debate on the topic. Both the left and the right use such hyperbole and throw around accusations of racism so freely that no one has the opportunity to bring up any salient points or counter-points without being labelled as being either then next Hitler or some looney lefty who wants to pitch up at Dover and give a mountain of tax money to everyone as they come off of the next ferry.

Britain has benefited massively from immigration and I think it's a shame that in ten years time we won't be a part of the EU any more (in my opinion). I wonder who we will blame for all of our problems then.

dr.bollocko

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Unfortunately immigration debates tend to attract racists, the stupid, the unreasonable, the dim, the angry at everything, the 'knows-what-they're-against' but not what they're for types.

Bad weather? Blame the immigrants.

Soup too salty? Blame the immigrants.

Shoelaces come undone? Blame the immigrants.

And then the aforementioned slack jaws complain that their "legitimate" views have been silenced unfairly by the PC police when, in fact, they were just incapable of forming a solid argument without being a complete racist.

Fratton Fred

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

We have nowhere near the levels of immigration that the UK has, indeed the biggest non Irish national group here are from the UK.
Do you really think people from all our former colonies are going to want to come here?

When were Nigeria, Poland and China Irish colonies?

Its got feck all to do with former colonies, it's all about work. People don't emigrate to poor countries.

enda1

Page 158 of the OECD's report on the economic impact of imigration would argue that the UK has net benefited at least economically from imigration.

Of course it doesn't say anything about social or other implications. A lot of negative sentiment and social exclusion is formed however on the basis of spurious economic feelings so I wonder if the mindset were to shift in understanding of the economic impact, would social issues become less fraught?

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Fratton Fred wrote: »

When were Nigeria, Poland and China Irish colonies?

Its got feck all to do with former colonies, it's all about work. People don't emigrate to poor countries.

Poland is the EU and the poles have integrated well into Irish society as have most other EU citizens.
As for Nigerian, Chinese,etc they make up a tiny percentage of the population here, we are far from overrun with non EU immigrants.

Leftist

redtapestyl wrote: »

We're not allowed to have negative opinions on immigration I'm afraid.

this comment sums it up perfectly. We're not allowed to have negative opinions on immigration.

Not a defined aspect of immigration, but immigration as a whole.

That is to say: we're not allowed to have a negative impact on outsiders coming in.

Galwayguy35

Beefy78 wrote: »

When I go home I'm seeing more and more people scapegoating immigrants for pretty much every problem that Britain has got. It's a little bit scary, to be honest. It's no surprise to me at all that UKIP is doing so well at the moment.

I think a lot of the problem is the lack of any informed debate on the topic. Both the left and the right use such hyperbole and throw around accusations of racism so freely that no one has the opportunity to bring up any salient points or counter-points without being labelled as being either then next Hitler or some looney lefty who wants to pitch up at Dover and give a mountain of tax money to everyone as they come off of the next ferry.

Britain has benefited massively from immigration and I think it's a shame that in ten years time we won't be a part of the EU any more (in my opinion). I wonder who we will blame for all of our problems then.

Not sure would that be a bad thing, will it not give Britain more control on the amount of people allowed to enter their country?

Immigration was handled badly here IMO, in 2004 we basically went from having little or no migration here to the floodgates being opened in a matter of months and I'm not sure the country was ready for that.

Fratton Fred

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Immigration was handled badly here IMO, in 2004 we basically went from having little or no migration here to the floodgates being opened in a matter of months and I'm not sure the country was ready for that.

All those immigrants rented apartments, which put demand up, which meant more building, more immigrants needed to work on building sites and therefore more demand for apartments and onwards went the property spiral.

Then they went home.

Galwayguy35

Fratton Fred wrote: »

All those immigrants rented apartments, which put demand up, which meant more building, more immigrants needed to work on building sites and therefore more demand for apartments and onwards went the property spiral.

Then they went home.

Yeah and look where that got us, a country in debt to it's hole for years to come.

Fratton Fred

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

Poland is the EU and the poles have integrated well into Irish society as have most other EU citizens.
As for Nigerian, Chinese,etc they make up a tiny percentage of the population here, we are far from overrun with non EU immigrants.

The EU is irrelevant, an immigrant is an immigrant be they from India, Ireland or Poland. It has more to do with people looking for a better way of life or more opportunities than feeling obliged to go to the home of their former colonial masters.

Generally, integration has worked well and whilst I'd agree, parts of the UK look more like Lahore then Yorkshire, the Uk is mot over run with immigrants.

Fratton Fred

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Yeah and look where that got us, a country in debt to it's hole for years to come.

Reckless lending, greed and incompetent government played a bigger part, that created and fuelled the demand. Immigration was more of a side effect than a cause.

old hippy

redtapestyl wrote: »

We're not allowed to have negative opinions on immigration I'm afraid.

Oh but you are. The usual suspects say it on each and every thread that even remotely pertains to immigration, multiculturalism, foreigners, Muslims etc etc.

It's as predictable as night follows day.

FTA69

Cathal Cloch wrote: »

Unfortunately immigration debates tend to attract racists, the stupid, the unreasonable, the dim, the angry at everything, the 'knows-what-they're-against' but not what they're for types.

Bad weather? Blame the immigrants.

Soup too salty? Blame the immigrants.

Shoelaces come undone? Blame the immigrants.

"I see the PC Brigade has arrived...."

"Why is the term "racist" used to silence discussion?"

"None of you college lefties live in the real world."

"Rabble rabble rabble"

old hippy

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Not sure would that be a bad thing, will it not give Britain more control on the amount of people allowed to enter their country?

Immigration was handled badly here IMO, in 2004 we basically went from having little or no migration here to the floodgates being opened in a matter of months and I'm not sure the country was ready for that.

Floodgates, you say?

Guyanachronism

I think the headline "Torygraph narrative effectively misinforming public opinion" would have been more fitting.

Their biggest concerns were the idea of migrants claiming benefits or using public services without having contributed in return, and added pressure on schools and hospital, the poll published in The Sunday Times found.

British public wrong about almost everything

Benefit fraud: the public think that £24 of every £100 of benefits is fraudulently claimed. Official estimates are that just 70 pence in every £100 is fraudulent - so the public conception is out by a factor of 34.

Immigration: some 31 per cent of the population is thought to consist of recent immigrants, when the figure is actually 13 per cent. Even including illegal immigrants, the figure is only about 15 per cent. On the issue of ethnicity, black and Asian people are thought to make up 30 per cent of the population, when the figure is closer to 11 per cent.

Immigration is not a drain on public coffers, OECD report shows

Even the Telegraph reiterated the point that migrants contribute more than they take out:
Immigration and the British economy: the awful truth is revealed

Cee-Jay-Cee

woodoo wrote: »

You don't hear any real debate on the radio, on current affairs programs, in the Dail, in the papers etc either?

Because this country has gone so far into the PC way of approaching subjects that they are afraid of their lives to say anything as next thing they know they're being added as deponents in civil claims by these people and with the way the country is the plaintiffs (immigrants) would no doubt win.

We cannot afford any more immigrants coming here and draining the SW system. We should adopt the Dutch program and if they haven't found work within 6 months, they're sent home.

Galwayguy35

old hippy wrote: »

Floodgates, you say?

Yeah, maybe you don't remember.

Galwayguy35

CJC999 wrote: »

Because this country has gone so far into the PC way of approaching subjects that they are afraid of their lives to say anything as next thing they know they're being added as deponents in civil claims by these people and with the way the country is the plaintiffs (immigrants) would no doubt win.

We cannot afford any more immigrants coming here and draining the SW system. We should adopt the Dutch program and if they haven't found work within 6 months, they're sent home.

Ha!

Can't see the lefty liberals in Labour pushing that one through.

old hippy

CJC999 wrote: »

Because this country has gone so far into the PC way of approaching subjects that they are afraid of their lives to say anything as next thing they know they're being added as deponents in civil claims by these people and with the way the country is the plaintiffs (immigrants) would no doubt win.

We cannot afford any more immigrants coming here and draining the SW system. We should adopt the Dutch program and if they haven't found work within 6 months, they're sent home.

These people, you say?

We should, you say?

old hippy

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Yeah, maybe you don't remember.

Tell me about it. These floodgates.

munchkin_utd

old hippy wrote: »

Floodgates, you say?

indeed, the man is correct.
Ireland had one of the most liberal immigration policies in the world. There was more vetting in America in the days of ellis Island than in Ireland during the boom!

ANYONE from anywhere in the world could get a work visa simply by having an employer vouch that they couldnt find someone in the EU to fill a position.

It was very very badly handled by the FF government who firstly created the housing bubble through their mad tax incentives and then had to open the doors to all comers to deal with a labour shortage, and they couldnt manage that properly either.

Galwayguy35

old hippy wrote: »

Tell me about it. These floodgates.

You know what no I don't think I will because unless you were living under a rock back in 2004 you would know what I am talking about.

steddyeddy

Immigration is good if the people who enter the country has the desired skill set for a country. I plan to immigate to Germany soon but I would be ashamed to turn up without word one of German.

_Kaiser_

It's very simple really...

This country is broke and living on borrowed money, and we have enough people on the streets or struggling without taking on more. Charity begins at home.

If someone wants to come here that's fine, IF:
- They're here to work and contribute
- They integrate into their new home and adapt to the social norms, customs and language

Turning up off the plane/boat without a job to go to, or money to see them through, or expecting the locals to bend over to accommodate every cultural idiosyncrasy they bring with them - that should earn them a one-way ticket home.

(Awaits all the "racist"/"xenophobe" trolling :rolleyes:)

_Kaiser_

steddyeddy wrote: »

Immigration is good if the people who enter the country has the desired skill set for a country. I plan to immigate to Germany soon but I would be ashamed to turn up without word one of German.

And I bet you wouldn't expect to get very far without it either.. and so you'd learn and adapt.

(ie: the correct approach to moving to another country)

old hippy

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

You know what no I don't think I will because unless you were living under a rock back in 2004 you would know what I am talking about.

I want you to tell me about these floodgates, no weasel words.

wendell borton

redtapestyl wrote: »

We're not allowed to have negative opinions on immigration I'm afraid.

....and if you do your a racist.

steddyeddy

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

And I bet you wouldn't expect to get very far without it either.. and so you'd learn and adapt.

(ie: the correct approach to moving to another country)

No I wouldn't at all. I would feel it insulting to the native people to expect them to suit my needs rather than vice versa.

Guyanachronism

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

It's very simple really...

This country is broke and living on borrowed money, and we have enough people on the streets or struggling without taking on more. Charity begind at home.

If someone wants to come here that's fine, IF:
- They're here to work and contribute
- They integrate into their new home and adapt to the social norms, customs and language

Turning up off the plane/boat without a job to go to, or money to see them through, or expecting the locals to bend over to accommodate every cultural idiosyncrasy they bring with them. That should earn them a one-way ticket home.

(Awaits all the "racist"/"xenophobe" trolling :rolleyes:)

What about somebody who came from say Poland in the midst of the boom, worked in construction until the crash all above board, he has paid tax, prsi etc. during his years of work. but has ended up unemployed but wants to remain in Irland, because he has laid down roots. Should he get social welfare?

I know these putting or own first, charity begins at home etc. hyperbole gets a knee jerk nodding agreement. But I would feel better about giving welfare to a foreigner who has worked and has ended up unemployed than an Irish person who is a social welfare scrounger, never having worked a day in their life.

Now I believe everyone on welfare should have limits and should be looking for work, so obviously if he becomes a scrounger not looking for work he should be cut off, but not before the life long dole scrounger.

Does that make me PC brigade lefty to think that? Is it so awful to think that welfare and such should be based on the contribution and situation of the individual rather than where they were born?

That or respond to the facts of the matter in my previous post.

Also no one, from other EU member states or outside have an automatic right to welfare on arrival, they have to fufill the habitual residency conditions. They also have no right to remain in the country after 90 days if they aren't working, studying, self sufficient or dependent family member of one of the other categories.

_Kaiser_

steddyeddy wrote: »

No I wouldn't at all. I would feel it insulting to the native people to expect them to suit my needs rather than vice versa.

Exactly.. I actually lived in Holland myself for a few years as a kid in the 80s.
My mam learned Dutch (as did the rest of us), went to work under their employment laws and we lived according to their social norms.

The idea that we could just turn up and expect to setup "little Ireland", sit on welfare and insist everyone deal with us in English would have been unheard of.

It actually was a great benefit as a kid I think as we got to see this different culture/cultures (back then their schools were where we are now with regards to immigration) and how they did things in general, I do think it's a big part of the reason why I have so little tolerance for some of the nonsense that goes on in this country as a result.

Galwayguy35

old hippy wrote: »

I want you to tell me about these floodgates, no weasel words.

There was an influx of immigrants into Ireland over a very short period of time when the Eastern block countries joined up.

Very little opportunity for the country to get used to what was happening, when the country went bust while many went home others didn't and remain on social welfare.

enda1

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

There was an influx of immigrants into Ireland over a very short period of time when the Eastern block countries joined up.

Very little opportunity for the country to get used to what was happening, when the country went bust while many went home others didn't and remain on social welfare.

I wonder if there are more foreign citizens in Ireland on social welfare or more Irish citizens abroad on social welfare. I'd hazard a guess at the latter.