Rishi Sunak is under huge pressure to act on legal migration into the U.K. today after figures showed that a record 1.2 million people arrived in 2022, driving a net increase of almost three-quarters of a million people in a single year. The Mail has more.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) drastically revised its figure for the year to December up from 606,000 to 745,000, an increase of 139,000, almost the same as the population of Cambridge.
The figures for the year to June 2023 hit 672,000, up from 607,000 in the previous 12 months but slightly down on the revised December record, driven by a fall in humanitarian arrivals, including those from Ukraine and Hong Kong.
The ONS said immigration is now being driven by non-EU “migrants coming for work”.
Though the level has fallen thanks to the revision, it is likely to lead to renewed anger on the Tory Right and calls for a clampdown before the country heads to the polls – which could be as early as May.
The New Conservatives group on the Tory Right has called for ministers to close temporary visa schemes for care workers and cap the number of refugees resettling in the U.K. at 20,000 as part of an effort to slash net migration to 226,000 by the time of the election expected next year.
The 2019 Conservative manifesto promised the “overall numbers will come down” on migration.
Former Cabinet Minister Sir Simon Clarke said: “This level of legal immigration is unsustainable both economically and socially. There is no public mandate for it, it is beyond our public services’ capacity to support and it undercuts U.K. productivity and wages by substituting cheaper foreign labour.
“We need an urgent change of approach. The earnings threshold for visa applications needs to be raised significantly. The shortage occupations list needs to be radically descoped. As set out by the Chancellor, we need to ensure more Britons are supported into work.”
Net migration takes into account the number of people arriving in the U.K. on a long term basis minus those who leave. Most of the recent surge has been driven by arrivals from countries such as Ukraine and Hong Kong.
The ONS’s Jay Lindop said: “Net migration to the U.K. has been running at record levels, driven by a rise in people coming for work, increasing numbers of students and a series of world events.
“‘Before the pandemic, migration was relatively stable but patterns and behaviours have been shifting considerably since then.”
“Relatively stable” at 200,000-300,000 – still a long way from the oft-repeated but never-fulfilled Conservative pledge (first made by David Cameron when he came to power in 2010) to get net numbers down to under 100,000.
Given the number of times the Tories have made this or a similar pledge to a public desperate to cut the number of people arriving each year to manageable levels, and the shameful fact that when the Tories reformed the system they liberalised it to make it easier to come rather than harder, with the predictable (and predicted) results, they deserve to lose an election on this issue alone. Sunak wrongly decided that illegal immigration in the form of the small boats crisis was what the public really cared about, and has focused on that to the neglect of legal migration – though following last week’s Supreme Court ruling he has failed even to make headway on that tip of the iceberg.
In the end, the Conservatives came to power in 2010 with a mandate to bring immigration down to the tens of thousands and reduce taxes and shrink the state. Thirteen years later they have presided over record immigration and a tax burden at historic highs shovelling billions into an even more bloated state. The scale of the failure – and betrayal – is difficult to express. But many people will do so with their vote – whether for an insurgent party like Reform, for Labour out of desperation (though it will surely be worse) or by not voting at all.
Stop Press: Leading figures on the right of the Conservative Party have warned Rishi Sunak that he faces a ‘do or die’ moment. The Mail has more.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I love my Kawasaki Versys.
I also have a really good heavyweight SDS+ hammer drill by Kawasaki. Corded, of course.
The motorbike is not corded.
Principally Makita for me, two drills and a jigsaw although I do have a Bosch drill over thirty years old.
All corded.
I don’t think Makita make motor bikes.
You should check.
I had no idea Kawasaki made power tools.
Kawasaki make a very wide range of products, including at one time aircraft during WWII.
Corded motorbikes could be useful for the 15 minute cities… need quite an extension still though!
Here’s a clever person taking his ebike battery up in a lift to charge it in his flat: https://kaotic.com/video/27a78606_20240724225342_t
Well that’s one way to have a barbecue
Bloody hell! Poor man.
Imagine the same, but on wheels, driving along a motorway, in your brand new Tesla.
In fact, you don’t need to imagine it. Plenty of recorded events like this.
Horrific. Poor man, I hope it was swift.
I wonder what set off the reaction. I thought it was charging that caused this, but this was disconnected.
Any damage to the battery or a poorly manufactured cell can cause this. The cells can also have sharp metal crystals that puncture the separator and short out that cell causing it to heat up and then adjacent cells are subject to thermal runaway. The electrolyte decomposing gives off oxygen and that’s why these fires are so difficult to extinguish.
E-bay .leading where the govt should be going. Why aren’t ebikes classed as motorbikes (at least the petrol fueled variety aren’t prone to bursting into flames)?
I don’t think that all e-bikes should be classed as motorbikes if that means they need registration and mandatory insurance. There is (and should be) a class of vehicle which is driven (ridden) at the driver’s risk. A pedal cycle rider who causes injury through recklessness or negligence is always liable for any injury or damage caused – it does not matter if they do not have insurance to pay any compensation, that’s effectively a decision they made. With the greater potential for serious injury the state has mandated that the drivers of certain more powerful vehicles must have insurance to pay any compensation claims and to enforce that these classes of vehicle must be registered, and recognisable through a visible registration plate and with a known ‘keeper’ and limited to certain qualified drivers.
Sure, put a limit on what’s allowed without registration (oh, they did already). Maybe even (shock!) have the police stop some e-bikes or scooters which seem to be over-powered or otherwise exceed the limits. We could even arrange that footpaths are reserved for foot traffic (controversial)!
As for the risk of fire from these things. I have no problem if bringing explosive or otherwise dangerous things into a building is banned by the building owners – as long as they enforce the ban. There’s no point in banning something and then ignoring the fact that people are breaking the rules (this reminds me that voicing support for Hamas is illegal in the UK – but almost nobody is arrested for the offence).
I’d say eBay leading on anything is a bit strong – their ‘business sellers’ are almost guaranteed to sell tat as well, same as Amazon, it’s just they get paid more
Lithium batteris are you having a laugh. Puff on a vaping pen, use your laptop or phone. Just be aware that these things are more volatile than you like to believe. And the fire is rather difficult to put out.
It is disgusting. Imagine you bring the bike in your house and you set your kids and granny on fire for the sake of some not very impressive novelty technology. We need to come down hard on these devices because you can be assured that all over the world these batteries are blowing up likely with rapidly increasing frequency given the short life and volatility of these monstrosities.
If it’s your own house then it’s up to you to take the risk. If it’s an apartment in a block of flats or HMO then it’s up to the building owner (and their insurer). Despite the horrific video linked above, I say leave the decision on risk to the owner of the property. That said, people need to know and understand what the risks and consequences are.
Just as well I sold mine last year then.
It was being kept in the garage, along with a year’s supply of bio-ethanol, and I deemed the fire risk was too great.