A Tale of Two Immigration Speeches: What Is Britain So Afraid Of?

As the details from David Cameron's long-awaited immigration speech leaked out Friday morning, the overall impression was one of insecurity, of an apprehensive leader who did not have confidence in his own stated policies.

"We have real concerns", Mr. Cameron insisted, declaring that British concerns about migration "are not unreasonable or outlandish". Here's a pro tip: self-assured premiers take for granted that their policies are rational and sound. They don't need to cajole the public into acquiescence. "We deserve to be heard", he maintained, declaring that "frankly", he just "will not understand" if a "sensible way forward cannot be found". A brave and uncompromising stance, Mr. Prime Minister. All the hallmarks of a fearless politician, innately comfortable in his own skin.

Britain's problems stem - allegedly - from an influx of legal migrants coming from other European Union (EU) countries. The threat is so grave that all three mainstream parties (Labour, LibDems, and the Tories) have become caught up the rhetoric, all desperately trying to out-Ukip Ukip, while Nigel Farage stands idly by, rubbing his hands with barely concealed glee. Having masterfully played the role of spoiler, he can just sit and watch while everybody else gets in touch with their inner alarmist. Regrettably, everybody is obliging with distressing enthusiasm: there has been talking of cutting benefits, forced repatriation and contravening EU laws on freedom of movement. Fortress Britain, indeed.

Never mind the fact that the proposed changes have little chance of being fully and effectively implemented before the next general election, so amount to nothing more than political posturing. Ignore, too, that some of the Prime Minister's proposed 'red lines' (such as the ones requiring European migrants to have a job offer before they arrive and threatening to chuck them out after six months if they can't find work) almost certainly flout long-agreed upon EU principles, are destined to result in drawn-out legal challenges and will wreak havoc at the border as agents try to determine whether EU or national laws are applicable.

Lost in much of the British debate about immigration is an acknowledgement that it works both ways: there are as many British citizens living abroad in Europe--2.2 million--as there are Europeans living in the United Kingdom. There are another couple million Brits living outside the EU, primarily in the US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. It is estimated that one million British subjects live in Spain alone, many of them retirees who do nothing to contribute to their adopted country's bottom line. One wonders if the Spanish authorities are anxious to hurry these freeloaders back from whence they came.

Migration is an emphatically inflammatory topic, touching as it does on national security, welfare, and jobs. It also invokes humanity's primal need to establish boundaries between 'us' and 'them'. Debates about immigration can provide an unfortunate staging ground for some of mankind's baser instincts, but it is understandable why this issue provokes such strong reactions, especially in the United Kingdom -a smallish island still recovering from an economic crisis. Great Britain, like any sovereign nation, has the right to control its borders, prioritize the needs of citizens, and manage its finances by limiting access to the welfare state.

If only any of the hype were true.

Migration to the UK is definitely up - dramatically so. Figures released yesterday indicate that there was a 43% increase in migrants coming to the UK between June 2013 and June 2014, with approximately 583,000 people arriving, adding to the 7.8million foreign born residents and citizens already here. Of course, approximately 323,000 people left Britain over the same period, leaving net migration figure of only 260,000, but that number is not nearly as provocative and almost certain to be ignored.

Approximately 42% of these new arrivals came for work, and about 30% came to study. So far, so uncontroversial. These are people that contribute to the country's coffers by paying taxes, renting flats, buying groceries and subsidizing British students though exorbitant tuition fees. A significant chunk of them are not eligible to access the NHS, meaning they also pad the pockets of private physicians. That leaves roughly 160,000 other migrants who have stormed the shores for apparently more nefarious purposes, such as the dreaded scourge of 'benefits tourism'. Conceivably, these theoretical layabouts could be a drain on the system and a drag on the economy - except for the fact they are far outnumbered by native-born occupants of Benefits Street.

Alas, it seems Britain's collective xenophobia is wildly misplaced: according to several reputable sources, there is 'little evidence' of people migrating for the express purpose of claiming benefits. Immigrants, it seems, are demonstrably less likely to be in social housing than native born citizens. The Telegraph reports that according to the UK government's own figures, in 2014, 4.9million (92.6%) working age benefit claimants were British while only 131,000 (2.5%) were EU nationals. The number of recipients from outside the EU was 264,000 (five per cent). This is not a typo: British nationals make up more than 90% of benefits claims, which is a thoroughly inconvenient statistic for politicians of all stripes, because who will they blame if they can't blame the immigrants?

However, seasoned British pols are not ones to let facts get in the way of hyperbole, and scaring your citizens is a great way to get them to vote, so we are unlikely to see a dialling down of rhetoric any time soon. This is an enduring shame, because the United Kingdom never seems more like an anxious, fading empire than when it is enacting fear-based, reactionary policies designed to placate the most extreme elements of its populace.

A confident country, comfortable with its place in the 21st Century, doesn't need to create straw men or scapegoats. A confident country takes one look at the tired, poor, huddled masses on its doorstep and says:

'My fellow Americans, tonight, I'd like to talk with you about immigration. For more than 200 years, our tradition of welcoming immigrants from around the world has given us a tremendous advantage over other nations. It's kept us youthful, dynamic, and entrepreneurial. It has shaped our character as a people with limitless possibilities - people not trapped by our past, but able to remake ourselves as we choose'.

That's right: Britain's preening, swaggering 'special friend' has upstaged it yet again, to great effect. President Obama's speech from last week was the polar opposite from Prime Minister Cameron's remarks today. It hit all the right notes in announcing unilateral executive action to tackle America's enduring immigration dysfunction. He admitted that the system is broken, challenged opponents for being obstreperous, and acknowledged the 'hypocrisy' of the middle classes for supporting a status quo where we're perfectly happy for the dreaded 'other' to 'make our beds and pick our fruit', so long as they stay in the shadows.

Were his remarks motivated by a complicated combination of political point-scoring, concerns about his legacy and frustration at the opposition's perpetual refusal to support any of his policies? Probably. But it doesn't matter. Because beyond the inspiring rhetoric was a clear-eyed assessment that even as his administration had carried out more deportations than any President in US history, 'tracking down, rounding up, and deporting millions of people isn't realistic'. And it isn't. Not just logistically, but philosophically: the President identified migrants of dubious legality as 'our classmates, our neighbours, our friends', and recognised that by and large, people do not leave their homelands 'in search of a free ride or an easy life'. They come 'to work, to study, to serve in the military and... contribute to America's success'. These people have become part of the everyday fabric of American life.

The United Kingdom's immigration concerns are different from those of the United States - the issue is not so much about being overwhelmed by irregular migrants as it is addressing the realities of a growing population and a shrinking economy. But the answer is not wild-eyed hysteria and barely concealed racism. The United Kingdom should be exulting in the fact that it has created a vibrant, thriving nation that proves irresistible to so many, not cowering behind the widespread dissemination of false information in a desperate attempt to cleave onto an obsolete notion of what being 'British' really means.

The modern world is multicultural - in Britain, in America, in Europe and beyond. Clinging to outdated nostalgia of a time when middle-aged Anglo-Saxon men ruled the roost is a recipe for disaster. Britain needs to stop romanticising 'us' and stop demonising 'them'. Britain needs embrace it immigrant hordes for the incredible resources that they are, and reclaim its rightful place as a power broker in the 21st Century. But first, Britain needs to stop being afraid.



http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/hilary-stauffer/uk-immigration_b_6224368.html?utm_hp_ref=uk


An excellent article, which backs my of the view points I have been debating on this

: "there are as many British citizens living abroad in Europe--2.2 million--as there are Europeans living in the United Kingdom. There are another couple million Brits living outside the EU, primarily in the US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. It is estimated that one million British subjects live in Spain alone, "


Yes but that's two million spread across Europe and two,million spread across other countries NOT on one tiny island!
Other than that I have no problem with the article per se.

I think the point in the numbers here and abroad was to state that without two way immigration the population wouldn't be much different. People forget immigration works two ways.

Eilzel wrote:I think the point in the numbers here and abroad was to state that without two way immigration the population wouldn't be much different. People forget immigration works two ways.

Hi les, no I don't forget - I've used it in many an argument on flap lol - it's just that NZ for example, can handle the influx.
We just can't. We can't. Not anymore.

eddie wrote:: "there are as many British citizens living abroad in Europe--2.2 million--as there are Europeans living in the United Kingdom. There are another couple million Brits living outside the EU, primarily in the US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. It is estimated that one million British subjects live in Spain alone, "


Yes but that's two million spread across Europe and two,million spread across other countries NOT on one tiny island!
Other than that I have no problem with the article per se.

The same applies abroad, they also have immigrants from other countries as well Eddie, not just Britain and being as there is around 6 million ex pats around the world nobody is telling them they cannot live new lives where they are.. For example nearly a million Brits are living in Spain, most of the retired, thus not exactly contributing to that country, but are you advocating they should not be allowed to live there based off an argument on infrastructure?

You see you are claiming we cannot cope, well the reason is because of shortfalls in infrastructure, which can be resolved and should not hinder immigration, which we still very much need being as we have a skilled shortage and the problem of filling lower paid jobs also that some Brits have the wrong work ethic and refuse to do so. We also have an age imbalance, which needs to be addressed, so it is no good going off one point, where it can be resolved without understanding the problems of attempting to stop immigration. As seen we are far from full, when the vast majority of our land is natural green.

I think this all stem from the world recognising that the populations is getting bigger and people are wishing to put barriers up in the attempt to isolate themselves from the est of the world, which will not resolve the growing population, it will only be a short term fix. We are not a tiny Island and it is these myths that are wrongly promoted that bring about these fears people have. How it starts to unfold.

But Eds, we have millions of British people living abroad, so the numbers are not as big as it appears when considering only inbound immigration. If we had had no immigration either way for the last 20 years would people still say we are overcrowded in spite of the fact the millions who left would still be in the UK?

Sorry guys. Where I live and the surrounding areas it is hard to hear English anymore.
I am not racists nor right wing but I do think we have had enough for a while and the gates needs closing.
You see, it doesn't matter what facts and figures say, (of which there are contradicting ones), it is what I live and see every single day.
It is the housing shortage (yes yes blame Maggie) it is the many many school places that are unavailabe to children round here due to overpopulation, it is the fact that I miss, yes I fucking miss!, hearing more englishims - because I like England, it's where I live.

I grew up in London and I have always known other cultures and creeds and I've never had a problem - I've dated and lived with many colours - but I don't want any more people let in!!! Sorry, but unless this problem touches you on a personal level then you cannot know what's happening in the real sense of the word.
What you both perhaps fail to realise is this: I've many friends of Bulgarian origin (love them to bits, lovely people) and even they feel the change over the last ten years has made their lifestyle worse. My Indian friends too! They've had enough!
Facts and figures do not take the place of living it.

eddie wrote:Sorry guys. Where I live and the surrounding areas it is hard to hear English anymore.
I am not racists nor right wing but I do think we have had enough for a while and the gates needs closing.
You see, it doesn't matter what facts and figures say, (of which there are contradicting ones), it is what I live and see every single day.
It is the housing shortage (yes yes blame Maggie) it is the many many school places that are unavailabe to children round here due to overpopulation, it is the fact that I miss, yes I fucking miss!, hearing more englishims - because I like England, it's where I live.

I grew up in London and I have always known other cultures and creeds and I've never had a problem - I've dated and lived with many colours - but I don't want any more people let in!!! Sorry, but unless this problem touches you on a personal level then you cannot know what's happening in the real sense of the word.
What you both perhaps fail to realise is this: I've many friends of Bulgarian origin (love them to bits, lovely people) and even they feel the change over the last ten years has made their lifestyle worse. My Indian friends too! They've had enough!
Facts and figures do not take the place of living it.

So your whole argument is the fact you do not know any languages which concurs with the fact many British people expect everyone to speak English. Sorry but basing a view on our own language where we are terrible at learning others, expecting everyone to speak English is poor on any level.
Countries change over time and if we have people here who's second language is English so what, it might actually help educate this country to be more diverse in their languages.
I was in Germany for a meeting the other day and do you know what language that was conducted in?
English.
For immigrants to come here and then wish to make a view they have had enough when they are lucky to have the chance to be here is complete double standards, because it was that welcoming belief that enabled them to be here in the first place. Just because they also share a selfish view Eddie does not make it right. People wrongly think they can deny people sharing this land based off their own selfish needs, it is ethically and morally wrong on any level I am afraid Eddie. Again if every country took this approach that you advocated their countries would suffer great being as we do not have the natural resources to support this nation. Also we have a current shortage of skilled workers, which by closing the gates you would effectively damage the economy, health, schooling, because many have skilled requirements, which there is shortages of. The building trade would also be affected greatly and people have no idea what such actions would bring about devastating consequences and all because they cannot live alongside people who do not have English as their first language.

Love you to bits Eddie, but  the views you are using are formed  from selfish beliefs that deny people a chance to live here. We are all humans and to make a view and divide us by such boundaries is hindering the world evolving.

You can't get a quart in a pint pot mate!

So what you're saying is Eds is its a matter of opinion. I have lived near Manchester all my life and seen immigration change things- not always for the better but not always the worse either. The numbers argument is disingenuous, since immigration is two way. You can't just close the door though, it doesn't work like that, life doesn't. You shut it one way would you shut it both? Or os Englush people going abroad ok?

Eilzel wrote:So what you're saying is Eds is its a matter of opinion. I have lived near Manchester all my life and seen immigration change things- not always for the better but not always the worse either. The numbers argument is disingenuous, since immigration is two way. You can't just close the door though, it doesn't work like that, life doesn't. You shut it one way would you shut it both? Or os Englush people going abroad ok?

Well les put it this way; if a country said "you can't move here Eddie Family because we've shut our gates" I'd accept because that's the way it is??
Simple.

People can't move to Australia willy nilly can they? They have to have so much in the bank and a skill to offer.
Seems wise to me.

eddie wrote:

Eilzel wrote:So what you're saying is Eds is its a matter of opinion. I have lived near Manchester all my life and seen immigration change things- not always for the better but not always the worse either. The numbers argument is disingenuous, since immigration is two way. You can't just close the door though, it doesn't work like that, life doesn't. You shut it one way would you shut it both? Or os Englush people going abroad ok?

Well les put it this way; if a country said "you can't move here Eddie Family because we've shut our gates" I'd accept because that's the way it is??
Simple.

People can't move to Australia willy nilly can they? They have to have so much in the bank and a skill to offer.
Seems wise to me.

that's only somewhat true and the same applies to moving to the UK for those not in the EU.
In our only EU-like relationship with New Zealand we have free movement and can go over and work and they can come here without visas
SO when we make the deal like the UK has with the EU we have the same rules, we have just only made it with New Zealand.

I never asked about other countries shutting their gates Eds; I asked would you be happy for us to stop people leaving if it meant stopping people arriving. Because a one way immigration policy would be an immense showing of double standards.