Eighthours wrote:Economically speaking, mass immigration has been shown to be the opposite of bad - the evidence is that there is a net benefit to the economy. However, in terms of housing stock and community cohesion/integration, it has caused problems that are hard to deny. The charge of 'racism' as soon as a simple discussion is proposed on immigration has been incredibly unhelpful, and while the parties other than UKIP have made strides in this area, it's clear that more needs to be done to allay people's fears without insulting them.
Being in the EU means that we have to commit to the principle of free movement of people.
It actually means we're signed-up to the principal of the free movement of labour
. It's an important difference. Of course, the way that the directive has been interpreted by incompetent Government means that most people do, indeed, think our membership of the EU actually means a free movement of people (a 'borderless Europe' - as per the EU political agenda). That was not the original intention.
Dan. wrote:It doesn't mean we have to provide instant benefits and housing to those people, though! We can change our system and stop incentivising massive low-skilled migration without having to reconsider our EU membership. This government has had five years to do this; what's stopping them? What stopped Labour? Why won't they make the requisite changes?
The Conservatives have already attempted making changes to the way the benefits system works in regard to EU immigration, but when it's obvious that those changes are not making a dent in the net influx (because the 'free movement of people' now supplants the original intent (labour) and the net figures just keep rising), something has to be done or we face an ever-increasing net influx of immigrants from the EU. UKIP want to impose a points-based immigration system; one based on skills.
With regards to the various academic studies and reports that are quoted back at me. I've already conceded that the vast majority of them do indeed suggest that immigration is a net contributor to our economy. I can't argue that point because the reports speak for themselves. As I have said, many times, I favoured UKIP for their anti-EU stance and their anti-CAGW stance. I also favoured their points-based immigration proposal (modelled on the existing Australian system). I didn't vote for them on May 7th because, right now, it's more important to get the EU referendum from the Tories.
I have no idea what the reasons were for the nearly four million who did
vote for UKIP: you'd have to ask them. I'm sure there are many different reasons. It would be simplistic and erroneous to think that every vote for UKIP was somehow racist. UKIP appeal for different reasons to different people, including, it now seems, a lot of disenfranchised ex-Labour voters.