Brexit, for once some facts.

[flecc]

Is it that long? 8 years?
I remember you started the debate about EVs on here.
I discussed EVs with my wife now and then. She knows I wanted to buy an ev. Her objections went from it's expensive, few garages would know how to service it if outside the main dealer, expensive replacement batteries, insufficient range for our needs, fire risks leading to high insurance premium. She is now happy for our next car to be electric.

Yes, time flies, especially as one get's older, it was beginning of March 2018, so seven years and six months ago.

The objections have some validity, but also balancing factors:

Expensive? Yes, but the gap is closing and long life reliability means changing cars far less often. I bought mine as the last car I'll ever buy.

Few suitable garages? Yes, but I haven't used one one for the first seven years, for lower mileages no servicing necessary despite what the makers and trade say and certainly annual services are unnecessary. Any MOT station can do the MOTs from 3 years on.

Expensive replacement batteries? No longer as true and they don't need replacing as much as many feared. Buy the right EV and charge it it sensibly and they last well into a second decade.

Insufficient range? Only true for very long distance drivers which means ultra rapid charging and Li-ions resulting shorter battery life. For the moment and until the new generation batteries they should stick with IC cars.

Fire risks? Never been true for most e-cars. Mainly earlier Tesla and some car makers inexperienced with EV and rushing to catch up too late, Mercedes for example.

High insurance costs. Very true but mostly unjustified due to not taking note of each models actual risks, so taking advantage for illicit profit. Nissan Leafs have an impeccable record, very far better than IC cars fire risks, yet still that isn't reflected with their high premiums. We need one insurer to break ranks and charge according to actual fire risk performance, they'd clean up by gaining the market for all the better established makes and models.
.

 

[jonathan.agnew]

The threat of Farage winning the next election is not very high but high enough to destabise the UK economy. ChatGPT suggested to me:

• Maintain higher allocation for UK stocks against French stocks but favor:
  • Dividend stocks (FTSE 100).
  • Domestic-focused companies (FTSE 250) over multinationals sensitive to trade policy.
• Be ready to hedge GBP if Farage-style populism increases volatility.

Rumour was, with the previous blip, that starmer wanted to bump her off, find a more generous popular chancellor, which wouldn't please international investors. But one can't deny that it's also about new Labour's self inflicted dilemma - it won't tax big tech, tax havens, can't tax the middle-class small-medium business more without serious, repercussions, and can't cut benefits so we're stuck in a negative net international investment position.

 

[jonathan.agnew]

I've continued to do my annual checks on the range of my Nissan Leaf, easy to do without anywhere near emptying the battery since tests have shown the dashboard indicated range has been very accurate. That odometer initially shows a loss of 4 or 5 miles after charging to full, then maintains accuracy for the whole capacity until the end when it recovers a little extra bringing the range to precisely the initial indication.

Now well into its eighth year, the new WLTP range of 168 miles of its 40 kWh battery it lived up to. In the second and third years summers that often increased to indicate a little over 170 miles. It then settled to the 160s in subsequent years and this year two checks without using the air-con have indicated 164 and 165 miles, effectively meaning I've lost nothing meaningful. Even by the standard of the Leafs that is remarkable.

It never had any service or garage attention until this year, but since it had a recall notice which I'd ignored for years since it was for an aspect of cruise control which I never used, I finally booked a service. This uncovered that it had also missed six, not compulsory, recall battery checks, a total of four hours work needed, all the recall work being no charge to me. A benefit was that this confirmed how good the condition of the battery is.

I put the battery performance down to the charging routines I established from the outset:

Virtually total avoidance of Rapid and Ultra Rapid chargers, easy since I bought a car with sufficient range to cover all my intended journeys. In fact its only been connected to a rapid charger twice with just one of them a full 80% charge to check how these performed, that in the car's second year.

Charging in the warmer half of the year, when dropped below 40% charge, alternating between the normal 6.6kW charger and 2.1 kW slow charger (13amp socket) every other charge, both ready for use at all times in my garage.

Charging in the colder half of the year when temperatures below 10 degrees C and battery dropped below 50% charge, being only with the slow charger. This only takes 10 hours so easily done overnight.

Clearly my charging regime has paid off handsomely, this battery will last me for life, given that I'm within days of my 89th birthday.

Turning now to the service and recall, I booked that with my South London Nissan dealer. At 9 am on the appointed day a driver turned up and left a Nissan Micra at my home when he drove my car away. At 4 pm the dealer rang me to check if I would be in to bring the car back and the same driver brought it back. It had all the work done and had been washed, leathered and valeted internally, Accompanying it was a beautifully itemised list of all the work done, including the measured wear proportions of front and rear brake disc pads, and of course the MOT pass certificate.

The total charge a very reasonable £246, not bad being the only service cost in seven and a half years motoring!

On learning this a friend with a Honda Civic looked unhappy. He'd had to take that in for service and the bill when he collected it was almost £700.

No doubting the benefit of electric car ownership when due care is taken to buy the right EV for the job in the first place!
.

I've had similar experience, lately many entry level ev's even (ironically) come with lifepo4 which, unless one totally abuse it (leave it completely discharged for months) last 5000 or more cycles, ie a lifetime. And if one has the space solar has become ridiculously cheap (£90 for 400w panels, £600 for 5kwh lifepo4 - a setup that can charge an ev can cost less than a few thousand)

 

[Woosh]

Rumour was, with the previous blip, that starmer wanted to bump her off, find a more generous popular chancellor, which wouldn't please international investors. But one can't deny that it's also about new Labour's self inflicted dilemma - it won't tax big tech, tax havens, can't tax the middle-class small-medium business more without serious, repercussions, and can't cut benefits so we're stuck in a negative net international investment position.

I watched her shedding tears at PMQ. Was it genuine tears? I don't know but TBH, it's a great title but often thankless porfolio as you already pointed out the dilemma, taxes and spending. There is still the QE magic tree. UK is in need of a centre right party to create a proper opposition to Starmer's centre left position. Ed Davy and the Libdems don't seem to want the job.
I reckon Starmer in his bumbling, flipflopping manner on economics will defeat Farage at the end because we will be more or less ok with his boring but pretty safe handling of the economy even if the 7 year cyclical stock market correction arrives before the next election. If that does happen, people would reluctantly vote for a known quantity.

 

[Tony1951]

Who knew?

Labour peers Lord Blunkett, Lord Glasman and Labour MP Graham Stringer are also fascists and far right extremists!!!

Or is it just that the people who consider it right and proper and humane to allow thousands of deliberately undocumented law breakers to swarm into the country, are deluded fools, who are totally out of touch with the great mass of the British People?

Suspend ECHR to pave way for migrant deportations, Blunkett tells Starmer

Sir Keir Starmer should suspend the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in order to deport thousands of rejected asylum seekers housed in hotels, Lord Blunkett has said.

uk.news.yahoo.com

I think come the next General Election, we will see who it is that is delusional about where the public stand on these matters.

It may well lead to even more inept government than we have already had. I doubt that Reform will be able to recruit enough high quality candidates, but to be honest, the current crop of MPs of all parties show a conspicuous lack of practical skill in creating and managing policy.



Remember this:

All of the people entering the country require housing, medical care, dentistry and resources and we are currently not able to provide these in adequate measure for our existing population, so all of these undocumented people who arrive in breach of our laws (1971 Immigration Act, Section 24a) are in competition with the British Public in many areas of life.

Details on the offence:

• The Offence: Knowingly entering the UK without being granted leave to do so.
  
  
• Definition of "Entry": A person is considered to have "entered" the UK once they have disembarked from a ship or aircraft and have left the immigration control area.
  
  
• Legal Basis: This offence stems from a breach of section 3(1)(a) of the Act.
  
  
• Penalties:
  • Summary Conviction: Imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or a fine, or both (depending on the jurisdiction).
    
    
  • Conviction on Indictment: Imprisonment for a term not exceeding four years, or a fine, or both.
    
• Application: This offence is typically committed by a person who is not a British citizen.

 

[Woosh]

It may well lead to even more inept government than we have already had. I doubt that Reform will be able to recruit enough high quality candidates, but to be honest, the current crop of MPs of all parties show a conspicuous lack of practical skill in creating and managing policy.

You can probably see that in your region. Reform controls local government. How well do they do in your opinion?
The problem of the time is the masses misunderstand what democracy is. It's not giving absolute power to those elected who thought they have the mandate to be Kings.

 

[flecc]

Details on the offence:

• The Offence: Knowingly entering the UK without being granted leave to do so.
  
  
• Definition of "Entry": A person is considered to have "entered" the UK once they have disembarked from a ship or aircraft and have left the immigration control area.
  
  
• Legal Basis: This offence stems from a breach of section 3(1)(a) of the Act.

At least they've entered peacefully. More than can be said for the British when they invaded countries all over the world, stealing them and their resources, renaming them and treating their peoples appallingly with extreme violence and even enslaving them. What is happening now with unpermitted immigration is scarcely a crime in comparison.

• Penalties:
  • Summary Conviction: Imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or a fine, or both (depending on the jurisdiction).
    
    
  • Conviction on Indictment: Imprisonment for a term not exceeding four years, or a fine, or both.
• Application: This offence is typically committed by a person who is not a British citizen.

How? We cannot even provide prison spaces for our own criminals.

We'd have to double our prison capacity and its cost to do as you suggest, and the immigrants don't have any money to pay fines and mostly aren't allowed to work legally to earn the money.
.

 

[Tony1951]

You can probably see that in your region. Reform controls local government. How well do they do in your opinion?
The problem of the time is the masses misunderstand what democracy is. It's not giving absolute power to those elected who thought they have the mandate to be Kings.

First sentence :

Absolute nonsense - as usual.

Northumberland (pop 320,000) had a local council which was Conservative until the last election. It is now in a position of no overall control with Reform. It was Conservative for a very long time.

Newcastle upon Tyne (pop 300,000) has been Labour for several years and was Lib dem before that for a long period. It has no Reform councillors at all.

Durham used to be Labour, but now has 65 Reform councillors and 4 Labour and 15 Lib Dem. Durham council has been Labour for a long time, but slipped into a position of no overall control in 2021, and has been Reform since 2025.

It is far too early to pass judgement on the governance of Reform yet. You can not decide in a few months whether a political body will be more or less successful than others who had decades to prove their worth.

However - you seem to think that I am advocating for Reform. I AM NOT.

I am simply pointing out that when politicians ignore the wishes and the well-being of electors, they will be voted out of power. The arrogant stupidity of treating electors as ignorant fools whose wishes and needs should be ignored - a position regularly advanced by you and the other fellow from London - both considering yourselves somehow more important and worthy than the people you disagree with, leads to revolt and replacement of political representatives.

That is what I have been saying, and have been called an extremist and a fascist. Anyone who has even a feeble grasp of language and logic can see who is right. I have repeatedly said that I don't like Farage, and that I doubt that Reform will be able to recruit enough clever and talented people to run central government well and to bring about the needed reforms to law and policy. Local government is usually not stuffed with talent anyway, so I expect it will be little different in the standard of governance than it was before, but central government is a bigger problem.

Your final point is both arrogant and stupid. It is you who has no grasp of what the concept of democracy is about and the reference to absolute power is bewilderingly off point. There is no 'absolute power' anywhere in British politics. Your use of the term in the context given makes it clear that you have no understanding of the concept, just as you don't have a clue what democracy means. It seems that you think democracy is a system in which law makers patronise the people, regarding them as large children who have no understanding of what is in their own best interest, who must be patted on the head and ignored. You obviously find it intolerable that people with a different view of the world to yours should ever gain power and be able to make changes which the majority want. It is YOU who are the undemocratic one, not me. I did not vote Labour, but I accept the mandate of the Labour Party. I wished them well right after the election and expressed hopes that they would do well and solve some of our many national and local problems. I have praised some of their policies - in particular on the need for planning reform and the building of more homes. If they can do these things I will acknowledge their success. In other areas I think they have hopelessly dropped the ball.

You seem to think that 'absolute power' is what happens when a party you dislike gains control of policy and can carry out the wishes of the majority of the people who voted.

You need to look up the meanings of such terms. Putin has pretty much absolute power. Kim in NK has absolute power. They are there, come what may and anyone who opposes them gets the chop. The fact that Durham County Council has a large majority of Reform councillors, put there by the people, will not affect the cycle of elections and offer an opportunity to throw them out in due course. No one will be murdered or imprisoned for opposing them.

 

[Tony1951]

How? We cannot even provide prison spaces for our own criminals.

We'd have to double our prison capacity and its cost to do as you suggest, and the immigrants don't have any money to pay fines and mostly aren't allowed to work legally to earn the money.
.

It is very simple.

Anyone who lands on a beach or stows away in the back of a truck to enter the UK should immediately be deported. If the country they embarked from or the country they originated from refuses to cooperate, we have several overseas territories where they can be sent and accommodated in uncomfortable camps.

This is what Australia did when it was being swarmed from South East Asia. The moment they brought in and began carrying out the policy, the flow of such illegal migrants stopped.

The purpose of such a policy is not to imprison vast numbers of people but to stop the flow of tens of thousands through imposing a severe deterrent. It works.

Try entering Canada, Australia, New Zealand, or the USA without papers and see what happens.

The post you were responding to featured remarks made by some Labour peers and an MP concerning certain sections of the 1998 Human Rights Act which have been used repeatedly to prevent the deportation of the very worst of foreign criminals and the requirement in that act to take heed of the rulings of the ECHR.

We have the choice of whether to put the rights of criminals above those of our people or not. Blunket - a one time Labour Home Secretary who no doubt voted for the original form of the act makes a sensible suggestion. He unlike some, is capable of changing his mind. He brought in the horrible indeterminate sentences policy, and now has sought to have it repealed since it is having consequences he did not foresee when he brought it in. THAT is what sensible people do. When circumstances show a policy is not fit for purpose, it must change.

 

[Tony1951]

At least they've entered peacefully. More than can be said for the British when they invaded countries all over the world, stealing them and their resources, renaming them and treating their peoples appallingly with extreme violence and even enslaving them. What is happening now with unpermitted immigration is scarcely a crime in comparison.

How far back do you want to go? Should I demand compensation from Italy because I am 'triggered' by living a mile from Hadrian's Wall?

None of us invaded the colonies.

I see you are one of those people who are constantly denouncing our nation's 'shameful past'.

I don't do that. It wasn't me, and anyway - it is arguable that many of the places invaded were savage kingdoms with atrocious and far worse government than what was imposed by colonisation.

Those demanding that the UK compensate chancers who are the decedents of enslaved people always omit to point out that by 1807, the slave trade was outlawed by our parliament and that for the next fifty years, the Royal Navy spent an absolute fortune patrolling the Atlantic to intercept and prevent foreign powers from shipping people to the America's - mostly those powers in Europe that you and Woosh think are so civilised and blameless.

Was it a bad thing that the British forced Indians to stop burning widows on their husband's funeral pyres? How about the pursuit of the followers of the Thuggee cult and so many other reforms made by the Raj? We are often blamed for the slaughter of partition. It wasn't us. Bankrupted by WW2, and on our knees as an economy, we acceded to the demands of Indian campaigners and left, but only after after exhausting all possible negotiations to stop Ali Jinner and his two nation theory from gaining ground. It could not be done.

NO British were involved in the slaughter, neither did any British politician seek the conditions which allowed it to happen.

Were the people of the past prone to make mistakes? Of course.

Was the period long ago of British colonisation all bad? No.

Were conditions under British rule better or worse than what went before? Better - probably always.

Would anyone alive now recommend that we colonise those countries now? No.

Are you and I responsible? No. Not even you are old enough to have been alive. And even if you were, you had no power.

Should interlocutors on political debates suggest that the supposed sins of the past should affect our willingness to take swarms of illegal migrants as you just did? No,

 

[Woosh]

Should interlocutors on political debates suggest that the supposed sins of the past should affect our willingness to take swarms of illegal migrants as you just did? No,

What have you done to your sense of proportions?
There are permanently some 8 millions plus asylum seekers in the world. I am sure you don't want to deny them their right to seek protection. So what is the rough number of asylum seekers should we take on every year? Where do we put them? How would we integrate them?
The best solution is surely to work out long term solutions to aborb a reasonable number of asylum seekers. Previous governments did not deal with that issue, preferring that they just disappear into the general population. That's where we were until Farage made something structural into a national crisis.
The manner of their arrivals matters but surely their rights matter more, don't you think?

 

[Tony1951]

What have you done to your sense of proportions?
There are permanently some 8 millions plus asylum seekers in the world. I am sure you don't want to deny them their right to seek protection. So what is the rough number of asylum seekers should we take on every year? Where do we put them? How would we integrate them?
The best solution is surely to work out long term solutions to aborb a reasonable number of asylum seekers. Previous governments did not deal with that issue, preferring that they just disappear into the general population. That's where we were until Farage made something structural into a national crisis.
The manner of their arrivals matters but surely their rights matter more, don't you think?

Dublin Agreement.

We absorb what in my view, are FAR too many, given our problems in providing a home for all of our present, vastly over dense population.

When i can walk into the centre of Newcastle any day and find homeless men of respectable character sitting in sleeping bags in shop doorways, men who are in their sixties and seventies who have simply been unable to afford a house or a flat after their private rental agreements were terminated summarily, i say we can accept NO asylum seekers who did not arrive in a controlled manner.

You may not know it, but the dispersal policy, disproportionately puts illegal migrants in ordinary housing in the north because of cost savings. Newcastle has 40 asylum seekers for every 10,000 population. The uk average is about 15.

North East asylum seeker accommodation search paused

The Home Office says it believes it has enough properties in the region for asylum seekers.

www.bbc.co.uk

No. YOU care nothing for the population we have now, but prioritise people from afar. My concern is for the dispossessed we have here now.

AGAIN i say to you. The avalanche of support for parties which oppose this is a democratic surge in response to people in power who think like you do.

I note that you gave no answer of any relevance to the post i made above.

 

[Woosh]

We absorb what in my view, are FAR too many, given our problems in providing a home for all of our present, vastly over dense population.

We are where we are because we voted for the two party system.
I follow very closely US politics because of the many similarities and parallels and also because of the stock market. The chaos that MAGA has created can easily follow us here. If you think France is much different, on MAGA, it isn't. Both countries face the same challenges: consequences of past colonialism, ageing populations, slow birth rate, de-industrialistaion, widening wealth gap, growing poverty of those relying on state aids, re-birth of nationalism, rise of the far right.
If MAGA follows us here, and I would be dead and gone before I could see the world after Trump and Farage, it would be possibly too late for my chridren and grandchildren.

AGAIN i say to you. The avelanche of support for parties which oppose this is a democratic surge in response to people in power who think like you do.

I don't doubt the pull of reform. We have seen it in the brexit votes. Remain was going to win then Farage waved the fish on the Thames: defend our fish! He turned a tiny economic issue into the symbol of sovereignty and an identity crisis. Everyone understood the idea. Same with that poster of Syrian refugees. 1 million turks were going to invade England.
9 years later, when the dust settled, the majority now think it was a mistake. Farage of course blamed the failure on someone else.

 

[Tony1951]

I have no interest whatsoever in the MAGA movement, though it may have some features which align with the discontent fuelling support for Reform (which again - I do not support).

What I am interested in is that UK government policy actively engages with the problems of the people around me. People of what was once called, the working class' have seen decades long loss of living standards, and decent working conditions. The costs of their housing has more than doubled in real terms in the time since I bought my first home. Their wages have been suppressed by mass migration of lower skilled people from afar. The numbers of migrants have been huge and of a never before seen scale.

People used to say, 'Ah, but we always had migrants'. Yes - but they were in numbers and in proportion to the population that was absolutely tiny by comparison to what we see now and for the last thirty some years.

One set of my own great grandparents on one side of my family, came from Italy. I still bear their surname. They arrived legally in 1895, penniless, uneducated and young. They were about 18. Only one of their descendants as far as I know (there are many of them, since they had about 8 children, and their grandchildren also had large families) has ever been in trouble with the law and that was a comparatively minor offence.



My migrant Italian great grandparents in middle life.


On the other side of my family there were migrant Irish people - they were great great grandparents who probably arrived about 1875 - 1880.

At the time of these migrations when of some of my ancestors arrived, the population of the UK was about 42 million. It is now very much larger - probably at least 70 million, and the numbers arriving each year are massive - worst of all under the last government.

The 1891 census recorded about 350,000 foreign-born people in England and Wales, rising to 475,000 in 1901. At the present time, the 2021 census shows that 10.7 million of the population was foreign born. The difference should be pretty obvious to any but the terminally dim.

In 1891, 1 person in 120 of the UK population was foreign born.
In 1901, 1 person in 87 of the UK population was foreign born.
in 2021, 1 person in 6.3 was foreign born.

Since 2021 we saw the greatest ever numbers. The proportion will now be even more skewed.

Those supporting continued large scale migration always emphasise the benefits gained by the UK population from the work of highly trained, and well educated foreign doctors, engineers and scientists. I don't argue against that.

What I do argue against is the massive proportion of low skilled migrants we have taken. Migration Watch say that 60% of the recent migrant population are employed in low skilled / unskilled work. This particularly affects the life chances of the uk population who would have been employed in such activities.

When my ancestor migrants came here - they were unskilled. The Italian fellow - Salvatore, set himself up in Fulham as an ice cream seller, making ice cream in his backyard. In winter he pushed a barrow with hot chestnuts. He supported himself and his large family and never had a penny of assistance until he was over 65.

The Irish side Michael Sweeney worked in construction as an unskilled labourer. I doubt he got any input from the state. There was no such thing in the 1870s.

People in the UK population who are unskilled or semi-skilled have been drastically affected by unskilled migration. The numbers are large and the mindset is to accept any work, under any conditions at any price. Those who would have had to compete for such work, are either poorer because of this, or they are unemployed - sometimes because they prefer to collect benefit rather than to work under such a regime as is available. Unskilled farm work, warehousing, meat processing, goods distribution, hospitality, and other such businesses have a high proportion of foreign born workers and it is indisputable among honest interlocutors that their presence in the labour market has lowered wages and conditions.

The other serious impact of mass migration of course, and a constant theme with me is that the numbers of new citizens and irregular migrants who are not citizens has vastly increased the cost of housing for all of us who do not already own our homes outright.

The first term of my schoolboy economics course back in 1968 taught me about the effect of supply and demand on price. I won't labour the point, because it is obvious that concerning any necessary commodity, increased demand and limited supply cause very large increases in price. This is true for rented or owner occupied property.

The real terms cost increase since I bought my first home is well over 100%. We also see such an insufficiency of housing that homelessness is increasing, much of it disguised. Flecc has pointed out in the past the large hidden component of housing shortage, outside the official figures in which every scrap of space is occupied by dwellings often converted from garages, gardens and sheds. He spoke of this in relation to London. We have an increase in more typical, but also disguised homelessness such as 'sofa surfing' and conversion to HMO property of ordinary dwellings by extension and internal reorganisation into tiny bedrooms. The conditions people live in and our environment generally are diminished. How coudl it be otherwise?

For these reasons I utterly oppose namby pamby dogooderism of the sort that YOU evince at every post on the subject. People coming from safe countries such as France (which has a quarter of the population density of England and is a free, modern and civilised country) HAVE NO RIGHT AT ALL, TO TURN UP ON A BEACH HERE AND DEMAND ASYLUM.

I and probably about 70% of the population firmly hold this opinion, and because of the idiocy of the main 'respectable' parties, we will see more and more movement towards the alternative on offer - that is true whether we like it or not, and whether they will be competent to govern or not.

Just wait and see... Unless there is a total turn around on this and the impediments in certain sections of the 1998 Human Rights Act which prevent deportation and ensnare government in endless legal appeals, you WILL SEE far more right wing parties in government here.

My family some of them migrants have from teh start integrated fully and have fought for this country. This was true of the first generation of British born sons who fought in WW1 and were wounded and it is true of the last generation of suitable age - my nephew who performed his duties as an infantry captain for three tours in Afghanistan. This can not be said for many of the newer migrants we have accepted. Many of whom are far from integrated, far from self supporting and far from loyal to any acceptable concept of Britishness.

 

[Woosh]

What I am interested in is that UK government policy actively engages with the problems of the people around me.

What are they, really? Living cost, jobs, education, health care, pension. The number of asylum seekers remains pretty static, around 25 to 50,000 per annum for years, with or without Farage making a national crisis out of it. Are you saying that if they don't settle here, our problems will go all away?

 

[jonathan.agnew]

At least they've entered peacefully. More than can be said for the British when they invaded countries all over the world, stealing them and their resources, renaming them and treating their peoples appallingly with extreme violence and even enslaving them. What is happening now with unpermitted immigration is scarcely a crime in comparison.



How? We cannot even provide prison spaces for our own criminals.

We'd have to double our prison capacity and its cost to do as you suggest, and the immigrants don't have any money to pay fines and mostly aren't allowed to work legally to earn the money.
.

When were not stripping the third world of much needed professionals as part of legal migration. I was recently referred by a Pakistani optometrist to a south African opthalmologist who referred me to an Iraqi endocrinologist, the latter two excellent NHS clinicians. The last nominally native British I met sold me a car. Lovely chap, but evidently not the stuff growing an economy is made off.

 

[Woosh]

A few days ago, I watched on TV a lady in her late 50s early 60s being interviewed. She runs an English bar in Benidorm. Her bar was festooned with a few large union jacks on the walls. She was asked: why did you move here? She answered: there are too many immigrants in England.

 

[Woosh]

When were not stripping the third world of much needed professionals as part of legal migration. I was recently referred by a Pakistani optometrist to a south African opthalmologist who referred me to an Iraqi endocrinologist, the latter two excellent NHS clinicians. The last nominally native British I met sold me a car. Lovely chap, but evidently not the stuff growing an economy is made off.

That is the world I feel most at ease in.

 

[Tony1951]

When were not stripping the third world of much needed professionals as part of legal migration. I was recently referred by a Pakistani optometrist to a south African opthalmologist who referred me to an Iraqi endocrinologist, the latter two excellent NHS clinicians. The last nominally native British I met sold me a car. Lovely chap, but evidently not the stuff growing an economy is made off.

This tragic situation is the result I am ashamed to say (since I voted for them) of the policies of the previous series of governments. They took the view that it was cheaper to import ready trained professionals than to train them here. This is a pretty diabolical policy for various reasons, one of which you mention - the pillaging of trained people from other economies.

It has also been the policy at other skill levels. The eponymous 'Polish Plumber' is merely a placeholder for a whole class of occupations. Skills training budgets are tiny, and encouragement to train young people except at universities in often pointless courses as far as employment is concerned, is pretty much non-existent.

This is not the fault of potential British workers - it is the result of government policy for decades. Apprenticeships have dwindled and the new system encourages very poor providers to step in and offer training which is of very poor quality and dubious practical use. I know people who have offered such courses and were paid for doing so.

Part of this was the truly awful Blair government policy of increasing the numbers of young people at university without guaranteeing that the quality on offer would be anything like as good as it had been before, classes are huge, seminars are next to non -existent numbers of lectures are reduced, and the policy imposed no control on less vocationally oriented courses. Tens of thousands are doing 'Sports Science' and will end up working in gyms for £15 an hour on a less than forty hour contract, or many other economically dubious courses.

Huge numbers are studying Law without enough places to go to move on after university and the same is true of forensic science. In 2008 5664 students were studying Forensic Science. There are fewer than 4000 forensic scientists required in total in the UK. Every three years another almost 6000 youngsters qualify. Their employment prospects are dubious in the extreme. Even in medical training, we have far more students studying medicine than there are places for them to move on to for the practical placements in hospital after their five year degree.

Numbers of apprenticeship students declined as a reciprocal of the numbers entering university training - but about half of those were unlikely to ever secure decent wages after their study - not to mention their massive debt burden.

However - not all British born UK workers are at the level of car salesmen, needed as those people may be. I could describe the careers of my sons, and my partner's daughters and son, all of which are employed in high value high salary occupations from developing AI tools to running businesses to medics, architect practices to pharma manufacturing and bio-security.

None of that detracts from the point you make, but merely tempers the last sentence a bit.

 

[Tony1951]

That is the world I feel most at ease in.

What? You think pillaging African specialists from impoverished economies is a good thing? You're more comfortable with that and the neglect in training British talent.