There's a huge new migrant issue unfolding. So why isn't there any real debate about THIS one?

[cyril evans awaydays]

I thought the article was rambling but not racist. It seems to shout that all this noise about asylum seekers and Rwanda is drowning out the real issue but then gets scared of the audience and shouts that's really important as well.

Immigration was perhaps the major driver for many working class people who voted for Brexit. There was little discussion at the time that half the immigrants came from non-EU countries over which we had control of movement already. The article suggests that the overall net numbers have not shifted, just the balance of where these people came from.

I never got the sense that the libertarians driving Brexit worried too much about immigration. It was just a useful vehicle for their own ends. In other instances those from existing migrant communities may have voted to leave to increase the chances of people from their ancestoral homes coming to the UK.

I tried and failed to find details on where recent migrants have come from, though the article does explain that the expansion of student numbers is a major contributor. Slightly ironic in the week that Liz Truss is encouraging us all to wean ourselves off China that the ability of the Home Office to issue visas to Chinese students shows no sign of slowing.

How the Daily Mail starting to blow the horn on wider immigration will play with its readers will be interesting. They could ask for instance who has been in power whilst hordes of people have been "swamping" the country.

It will also be interesting to see when new post-Brexit trade deals come on stream how much easier it will be for people wanting to work and study in this country to be able to do so, further increasing numbers. Trade deals by their very nature (the EU one excepted) involve a loss of sovereignty as goods, capital, services and more pertinently, labour cross barriers more easily.

Not much discussion on whether all this migration benefits the UK at all, certainly not in the article itself, but I guess that's the nature of this particular beast.

[Citizen's Nephew]

I thought the article was rambling but not racist. It seems to shout that all this noise about asylum seekers and Rwanda is drowning out the real issue but then gets scared of the audience and shouts that's really important as well.

Immigration was perhaps the major driver for many working class people who voted for Brexit. There was little discussion at the time that half the immigrants came from non-EU countries over which we had control of movement already. The article suggests that the overall net numbers have not shifted, just the balance of where these people came from.

I never got the sense that the libertarians driving Brexit worried too much about immigration. It was just a useful vehicle for their own ends. In other instances those from existing migrant communities may have voted to leave to increase the chances of people from their ancestoral homes coming to the UK.

I tried and failed to find details on where recent migrants have come from, though the article does explain that the expansion of student numbers is a major contributor. Slightly ironic in the week that Liz Truss is encouraging us all to wean ourselves off China that the ability of the Home Office to issue visas to Chinese students shows no sign of slowing.

How the Daily Mail starting to blow the horn on wider immigration will play with its readers will be interesting. They could ask for instance who has been in power whilst hordes of people have been "swamping" the country.

It will also be interesting to see when new post-Brexit trade deals come on stream how much easier it will be for people wanting to work and study in this country to be able to do so, further increasing numbers. Trade deals by their very nature (the EU one excepted) involve a loss of sovereignty as goods, capital, services and more pertinently, labour cross barriers more easily.

Not much discussion on whether all this migration benefits the UK at all, certainly not in the article itself, but I guess that's the nature of this particular beast.

Balanced, fair and what I wish I had written. My deep loathing of the DM spilled over (just in case anybody hadn't noticed). JamesWales can still f*ck off though! At least until after lunch.