20+ years of lighting our hair on fire over immigration and we still have no idea who is in the country.

Telemakhos 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Starmer addressed this a while back, accusing the Tories of campaigning on reducing immigration while actually running an experiment in open borders. Having made this statement, he then proceeded to do nothing about immigration himself.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2024/nov/28/keir-...

It seems to be a bipartisan thing in the UK to recognize that the electorate really doesn’t want immigration, and then not to fulfill the will of the electorate. Instead, the politicians use that will to accomplish unrelated goals like imposing a national digital ID.

▲

bluGill 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> the electorate really doesn’t want immigration

Is that the case or is there just a significant minority that cares and the rest are happy enough as things are and would get mad if there was change - thus making their approach rational: get the votes of those who care but don't do anything because then you will be voted out next term.

I don't know myself, but this is something that I've wondered about a lot of issues that I care about where nothing happens. (I've long been on the side of more immigration)

▲

roelschroeven 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Politicians like campaign on reducing immigration because it's an easy thing to campaign on. They don't like to actually do anything about it because (1) it's hard, especially when you want to comply with laws and treaties and (2) effectively reducing immigration could hamper the ability to campaign on reducing immigration.

▲

shrikant 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

He's done plenty (https://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-coming-collapse-in-immigration/), following on from the changes Sunak made, which are already showing up in the early numbers this year.

But of course it's never going to be enough for the noisily anti-immigration lot.

▲

mschuster91 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> It seems to be a bipartisan thing in the UK to recognize that the electorate really doesn’t want immigration

Usually, it's not an "inner wish" of the electorate, but the electorate gets manipulated to feel that way by mass media, especially tabloids. Outrage sells, after all, especially when it can be laced to make it more effective.

The problem at the core is that immigration is vital for societies, especially the low-pay-hard-labor segment. Has the UK found a replacement for Ukrainian and Polish farm workers yet [1]?

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/15/pounds-6...

▲

eru 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Usually, it's not an "inner wish" of the electorate, but the electorate gets manipulated to feel that way by mass media, especially tabloids. Outrage sells, after all, especially when it can be laced to make it more effective.

As you say, the tabloids sell what people want to read. Who's manipulating whom?

> The problem at the core is that immigration is vital for societies, especially the low-pay-hard-labor segment. Has the UK found a replacement for Ukrainian and Polish farm workers yet [1]?

Immigration is also good for the would be immigrants.

Though if you are only interested in cheap labour (and giving foreigners jobs which are better than what they can get at home), you can run a guest worker programmer without giving them the right to stay. Singapore has a few successful programmes like that.

Ie you can have cheap labour without permanent immigration.

I'm in favour of open borders; but if for political reasons you can't have permanent immigration, guest worker programmes are better than completely closed borders.

	▲	nani8ot a day ago \| parent [-]
		I think people who are against immigration usually also are against guest workers. They've negative sentiment towards seeing people not looking like them, without knowing whether they are permanent residents or only here for six months. It's a gut feeling based on stereotypes and prejudices not facts.

▲

pbhjpbhj 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

GCHQ has metadata on all digital communications - even among homeless and immigrant populations have near 100% mobile daily usage.

"We" surely have pretty good information about number of adults in the UK, and if the security services are worth their salt we know their names and associations.

Heck, the main supermarkets can probably tell you within a percent or two what the live demographics of the country are.

	▲	2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	eru 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Well, that's what you get for not running a totalitarian country. By and large, it's a feature, not a bug, that the government isn't sharing all the information it has between its various parts. Eg GCHQ has lots of information it has (ostensibly) for keeping the country safe, but that doesn't mean that the prosecution in a criminal case should get access to all the same information. Of course, that's a bit inefficient and duplicates efforts. But such is a price for restrained government.