News that the ‘middle-classes’ feel culturally enriched by UK immigration is a funny way to describe it to say the least.

The problem we have with UK immigration at the moment is that messages and ideas are constantly skewed in order to address a perceived problem.

Multi-cultural society

I can only talk from experience, but in London we have what I would deem a multi-cultural society. We are also living in a city that is so built-up, and structured in such a way, that rich and poor areas stand side by side. For example Camden in North London or Ladbroke Grove in West London, both have incredibly expensive houses within spitting distance of low-level housing such as council estates. Some of these houses cost millions whereas across the road council flats are being occupied by the unemployed and unskilled.

Segregation?

So how can it be claimed that middle-class people are immune from all aspects of UK immigration? Most times in London it’s in front of their lovely big houses and within the shops and areas they frequent. The middle classes, as they are referred to by John Denham, are more than aware of the negatives to immigration, they just don’t feel that it is something to attach any blame to.

The area of society that moan about migrants taking a) their jobs and b) housing are simply people that have lived their whole lives on a ‘who can we blame for our situation,’ basis.

The reason this part of society are unemployed is because they can’t be asked to hold a job down and so flit from one to another, or just blame the system and remain unemployed.

These are the same people that when they came out of school with no qualifications blamed the teachers and the education system, well; it had to be somebody else’s fault. They don’t feel like they are culpable for their own actions in the slightest, and so when they find it difficult to get a job, after failing to sustain one for any period of time, look for somebody to blame.

I will say this now; the people in the UK who are blaming migrants because they can’t find a job are talking nonsense, what makes it worse is that we now have politicians pandering to these oiks in giving this oxygen.

Everyone is finding it hard to find a job-it’s called a recession!

UK immigration and the views involved are a difficult combination to mesh cohesively

I cannot possibly go into a better summing up of what different parts of society want to hear, that isn’t my job. So I applaud the government for attempting a synopsis of why people oppose immigration. However, you cannot wheel out the same-narrow minded view that is being spouted by these people.

How many English-born parking attendants do you know? Zero, do you know why? Because they won’t do this job, they are more than welcome to apply, and will easily land the position, yet don’t. Without immigrants for certain jobs they would never be filled. You just have to take a small segment of this occupation to realise that half of them can’t really speak English. Do you really think these people are taking your jobs? When hiring an employee would an employer not prefer somebody in such a position to be able to speak as good English as possible?

This is not a new phenomenon, the same thing happened in the 50’s when English-born citizens would not take menial jobs such as bus conductors.

This country, as do other countries, relies on immigration to fill shortages that the labour market has, nurses, engineers etc. However this is not what is being addressed here. Are there no jobs that this part of society can fill? Or will they just bemoan the fact that they will be better off staying on benefits then working for £6p/h?

Denham is right in one sense that society is divided in their opinion on UK immigration; this can be divided into two camps for me. The people that are intelligent enough to realise services and jobs are not being with-held from them in favour of immigrants and those that are fundamentally prejudiced and have little else to do but affix blame for most of their problems.

Have your say! Do you think that John Denham’s summing up of the problem is right or do you think he hasn’t really explored the real cause for people’s anxieties over UK immigration?

Well done Canada, you're number 1!

Canada immigration is soaring at the moment and today Canada has been named as the country expats rated the most highly, the survey questioned 5,000 expats, a reasonable number, about the countries they had immigrated to and how they had turned out for them. The survey, carried out by a well-known high street bank, took into account all the usual varying factors, such as health-care, crime, lifestyle, education etcetera etcetera etcetera.

The results of the survey have come to me as no surprise and I haven’t even been to Canada. The pre-conception of Canada as a land of snow, bears and mounted police is one I think we all have, I blame the show where the guy talked to his husky and never took his hat off. In terms of immigration, Canada however is clearly ahead of the game. Some critics of the Canadian immigration system throw the same sort of accusations that the UK government are now having to contend with, this however does not seem to phase the country or the Canadian immigration minister, Jason Kenney. The fact that immigration into Canada was at 250,000 people last year says it all really, this coupled with the fact that Canada has an immigrant population of 20 per cent should be telling the rest of us what the expats in Canada already know.

Why isn’t everyone immigrating to Canada

So why aren’t we all packing up and moving to Canada then? Well, too many reasons to write down in fact, a large one being the requirements for a Canadian visa. As although much easier to emigrate to then say the US, still not straight-forward and not applicable to everyone. The conditions are pretty much universal across the western countries, to be simplistic – if you have a skill or experience that can be put to use in the country and grow the economy then they want you. It’s called economic growth and every country wants economic growth!

What makes it interesting is that there are still people that fit the requirements to move, yet don’t or have no interest in doing so. The survey in question asked expats from 50 different countries, so to be ranked as number one is a pretty definitive statement. From what I have read and been told Canada is an accepting and friendly place, and the cities are as multi-cultured as you are likely to find anywhere in the world – half of Toronto’s 2.5million population were born outside of the country. From the information coming into this office it is also one of the top countries people want to move to.

Canada, although popular with people in the know seems to be a secret the rest of the skilled workforce in the UK are happy to ignore. Perhaps we are all guilty of laziness and a complacency of living, forward slash surviving, where we constantly complain about our wages, and deride the government for not doing what they are supposed to, all the while laughing at those people moving to Canada where it always snows and you’re likely to be eaten by bears that can also talk.

If you want Canada Immigration advice visit the main site for all the information on Canadian visas and requirements

English language colleges are regularly used as a means to get a UK visa and not to study.

English language colleges will now come under much stricter guidelines since it was discovered that most under degree level were simply being used as a means to gain a UK visa. The announcement to suspend UK visas for these colleges was made by Gordon Brown a few weeks ago; this was a precautionary measure while the problem was addressed.

However certain colleges have now raised concerns that they will be forced to close if the new measures put into place are too stringent. The Abacus College, based in Oxford, is one such institution. The owner, Jenny Wasilewski, claims that the UK is already losing students to countries such as Australia and Canada in the fight to attract students as it is already far easier to gain visas there.

This poses a difficult dilemma for Gordon Brown, as he will now have to consider the impact of losing out on students to other nations – considerably more importance is now placed on such economic consequences during the recession.

The problem that was, will no doubt still remain, if tighter guidelines are not introduced. The issue was actually identified a while ago and measures accordingly put into place to stop abuses of the system, these were however uncovered by the BBC, most probably why the government has paid such attention, as not working.

UK visa system not policed

Basically students wanting to study here were first to get sponsorship from an institution and then prove they had enough funds to support themselves while studying. This seemed a very sensible way of ensuring that these ‘students’ were not simply going to enter the country under the pre-tense of being a student when in fact this was not their intention. The flaws, however, were soon uncovered as all the measures put into place were verified in the students home countries and therefore impossible to police.

UK immigration was on record as saying they were seeing students arrive with sponsorship from institutions that were known to have awarded false qualifications in the past and there was little they could do about any of it. The problem it seems was typical of most in this country, a system over-burdened by the responsibilities laid out in order to operate effectively and without mis-use.

The UK visa system for students has long been held as a route for people wanting to enter this country without the hassle of a normal visa. I have personally even heard of people staying in the country for years enrolling from course to course in order so that they can remain, all the time working illegally and not attending the institution they were supposed to be studying with.

The government has one option when it comes to this problem and that is simple, come down hard and fast on institutions and individuals that exploit the system, no second chances. This again though, is easier than it might appear, it will require extra funding for spot checks on colleges and a new system put into place where the verification procedure happens in this country. It is either this or let the system continue in its imperfect state, as a route for fraudulent students as well as that of the bona-fide kind.

The calls by institutions proclaiming they will shut if new measures are put into place strike me as the death-roll of a creature that knows half the students paying their wages are not what the government would term as dedicated scholars, and in fact part of a relationship that works for both parties involved. The colleges have for to long seen a nice income from this market of student UK visas, it is no wonder they don’t want to see it go.

There is estimated to be 12million illegal immigrants currently in the US

In a few months time the US will be engulfed in the highly conscientious subject of US immigration reform. The controversial legislation is being prepared to be raised by Democrats in the House of Representatives, heavily backed by the Obama administration.

The subject has this month been brought back into the realm of debate by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. In giving a speech about US immigration reform in Washington DC she said that the legalising of undocumented immigrants would bring about great benefits to the economy, this has been heavily criticised by the Republican Party.

The reason this subject raises such high feelings is clear, and possibly why it failed in 2007, it is dealing with people. These are people’s lives and where the US constitution lies in relation to dealing with those people.

In her speech this month Janet Napolitano emphasised the need to approach this issue firmly and fairly, this perhaps epitomises Democrats concerns that already this has brought about some stark reactions among certain parts of America, a large part of which do not want to see illegal immigrants granted citizenship. To not just simply waive off this part of the US as racist rednecks, it is important to understand why these people would be against the US immigration reform.

What has to be found in this argument is middle-ground. Opponents of the reform are law-abiding, tax paying citizens who see the legalising of immigrants who have entered and stayed here illegally as morally reprehensible, however they are also victims of xenophobia and prejudices against the portion of society the bill aims to help.

What is clear is that some sort of reform has to take place; the US immigration measures that have been in place to date have been draconian to say the least, things are not working as they are, with conservative estimates putting the amount of illegal immigrants in the US at 12million.

Certain areas in the legislation will need to be addressed, the current unemployment rate is a bone that the Republicans will enjoy chewing on, and a work-around will have to be found. The screening of people entering the US will also need to be comprehensively shown to be working in preventing criminals from entering the country. The issue of security at the Mexican border seems to have been dealt with, being made fairly robust since 2007, with border patrol being increased to 20,000 and the security measures beefed up considerably.

The debate will continue and very likely progress considerably from what we see in front of us. The core of the situation will however remain, US Homeland Security can no-longer enforce the law as it is, and they have said so much. This emotional issue is about finding a path to legality for millions of people, how this is achieved is not clear, though I feel it will make the US a much better place for them, the country and the children of the country.

The US has seen rallies protesting for and against the new proposed immigration reform

UK immigration is a hot area of interest at the moment, commentators across all mediums are debating the subject and it is proving to be a very divisive topic. The debate is set to carry-on up until the next general election, as you can be sure that both the opposition parties will have something to say about Gordon Brown’s UK immigration proposals.

This week it was half-confirmed, by the US Homeland secretary, that US immigration reform will take place in 2010; by half-confirmed I mean it wasn’t a statement issued by the White House and it certainly wasn’t an assertion from the president. The comments made during a speech in Washington DC appeared to serve the purpose of reassuring sceptics that the new administration’s priorities hadn’t changed and US immigration reform would be imminent.

So with the US planning to legalise 12million illegal immigrants, what are the implications for this country?

The Director of this company last week called for a UK immigration amnesty, at the time I could not see how such a scheme would work or how the government would possibly implement it. Now as we enter an era where in the US they are planning on doing just that and giving the illegal citizens of their country the chance to become legal, is it time this country considered doing the same?

It is with no under-estimation that this would be a radical policy, the US last weekend seeing impromptu ‘tea party’ rallies in response to the reform proposed. Is this country really ready for such a revolutionary policy? The debate about ‘legal’ immigration seems to have stirred deep feelings within some parts of society already.

Would proposing a mass legalisation of people already here, illegally, not just equate to a metaphorical letter of resignation from the Prime Minister?

What are your views on the subject? Since calling for a UK immigration amnesty we have been inundated with positive comments. Do you think that in the Prime Minister’s current uncertain situation he could possibly introduce such an idea in the foreseeable future?

The new ID cards introduced by this Government will be hitting the shops in just over two weeks and will be on sale for the price of £30.

The total cost of ID cards will be £5billion, however the London school of Economics estimate the cost to be much higher at between £10bn and £20bn. So far the Government says it has spent £216million on the scheme, one that both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats say they would swiftly drop if they were to win the next General election.

UK Shadow Immigration Minister,  Damian Green, said yesterday that he thought the scheme ‘ridiculous’ and continued that his party see it as a total waste of money.

“I would advise anyone in Manchester not to bother wasting £30 on an identity card as a Conservative government would scrap this expensive, intrusive and unworkable scheme. The Government shouldn’t hoodwink anyone in Manchester that there are benefits to this card.”

Defenders of ID cards cite the fact that many people still go to clubs and pubs with their passports to prove they are of a legal age to consume alcohol, they say that the cost of this card, at £30, pales in significance when compared to replacing a passport at £77.70. Perhaps indicative of this country’s blasé approach to binge drinking, Meg Hillier, Home Office Minister, states that “People often take their passports to prove their identity, going to nightclubs and bars and the Passport Service sweeps these up every week.”

No mention is however made to the driving licence, this useful form of ID can be used for exactly the same purpose and is the same size as the new ID cards, it is however at the more luxurious end of forms of ID, costing £50, although it does have the benefit that you can use it to drive legally, a very helpful added feature, especially in Manchester.

The only apparent benefit to the new cards is that they can be used for travel within Europe, this allows passengers to travel without their passports, again a very dubious advantage considering carrying a passport is not akin to lugging an extra suitcase with you on your journey, and in the scale of travelling to another country is not to dissimilar in size to the new ID card.

UK immigration say the cards are of course biometric, meaning they hold fingerprints and an encrypted photo, this means that they will increase national security, however, when introduced nationwide in 2011 or 2012, they will not be compulsory. So the increases in ‘national security’ statements are presuming a mass mania of people viewing ID cards as the next must-have, similar to iPods except not as cool or no way as useful.

The new ID cards features explained

Following on from last week and Gordon Brown’s proposal for ‘managed UK immigration,’ we have seen a plethora of commentators on the issue take what Gordon Brown has said and throw disregard to Labours past policies.

It has been claimed by some that Tony Blair and Gordon Brown got together and conspired to create a United Kingdom that was an open door to immigrants, this they philosophise would create a country so full of immigrants and thankful to the Labour party that the Tories would never again win a general election.

This theory is being touted by many as a genuine incidence, and although interesting I feel it to be another fabricated bit of spin by those seeking to displace the current Government.

In this blog entry I would like to address the issue that I see as the main instigator for many people’s negative views on UK immigration.

The UK’s policy on asylum has to date been that of a tolerate nation to problems and plights that have been encountered by immigrants in their home country. The UK has not nor has it ever had an ‘open door policy to immigration.’ The bill for human refugee status is quite clear on the subject of asylum seekers, and I am confident that if a person has been granted such status in the UK it has been warranted.

It is clear to me that feelings about this small part of UK immigration, although important, are clouding the average persons’ idea of what ‘immigration’ is in this country. UK immigration is much larger than asylum seekers.

Certain areas of society feel they are being shifted along in order to make room for new arrivals to the UK, although not felt by other areas, this can no-longer remain unaddressed by the Government. Specific areas that have housed new arrivals have been ill-equipped to do so; they need injections into their public services such as schools and doctor surgeries, that have under the current system, had to bear the weight of more people without any increases in funding. The feelings around this issue have reached such a point that we have had two BNP MEP’s elected, this should have been dealt with a long time ago, however the Government now seems to understand that it can no-longer simply dump immigrants in areas and needs to ‘manage’ these arrivals.

For to long this country’s immigration policy has been susceptible to the over-burdening that this has resulted in. It is not just the area of asylum that it is being felt, since 2004 when nations such as Poland and The Czech Republic were granted into the EU state of nations we have seen an influx of immigrants but no measures taken to increase spending on the necessary infrastructure.

I understand the reasons behind the policy for workers, and am happy that the approach we have towards asylum seekers is fair and right. The gaps however have been widening for some time and they are the real reasons people are unhappy. Gordon Brown must now address the needs of the areas that are feeling the burden of new arrivals most heavily and regain peoples belief that they, as others, have access and rights equally to all aspects of their communities.

Chris Huhne MP, Liberal Democrats, criticises Gordon Browns proposals for changes to UK immigration policy

It didn’t take long for the Liberal Democrats to issue their thoughts on Gordon Browns speech yesterday, speaking of the new proposals for UK immigration, Chris Huhne says “It is far to easy to make a case for managed UK immigration, after it has been mis-managed for so long.”

The Prime Minister attempted to answer his critics on UK immigration today

Gordon Brown has today attempted to right the wrongs of previous mistakes, in a sweeping speech given in front of a packed conference room in West London, he forthrightly outlined what now must take place in order for the Governments’ policy on immigration to regain some respect.

Speaking at times mechanically and without the natural enthusiasm of his predecessor, at fleeting moments Brown seemed to be learning of the new proposals himself. For the reforms certainly came thick and fast. Every aspect of the system that has come under scrutiny in the past couple of months seemingly addressed.

As the bullish talk continued, in front of the worlds media, it seemed Brown’s line on UK immigration hadn’t so much as changed as mutated into a new approach to the issue, Brown again reiterated that ‘The economy had to grow’ and that ‘managed migration’ was the way to do that. At one point Brown pointed to the ‘immeasurable benefits’ that immigrants to this country offered, a phrase all too familiar with the party faithful. This was however aimed at an altogether different audience, the undertaking being to keep afloat his credibility as a leader and someone in control of the country’s policy on UK immigration.

The Prime Minister went on to tackle all the concerns we at this company have been voicing for weeks. He stated that UK student visas were being suspended, and went on to praise the University system and those foreign students that currently are enrolled in it, Brown cited institutions lower down the pecking order as those culpable for the abuses of the current student visa and vowed to tackle those that had exploited it.

The new UK points system was at the centre of his speech today, of which he said was changing to reflect the needs of the economy.

“This is a system not ready to deal with the changes in global trends,” And continued with the words that “Government must change to meet the new challenges put before it.”

He went on to say certain jobs will no longer be included within the system. He also outlined new guidelines for employers hiring foreign workers, stating that jobs advertised will now have to be made available for UK workers for a period of four weeks as opposed to the previous two, before employers look further a field to fill the vacancy.

The answers to questions raised about rules governing immigration were wheeled out one after another. In what seemed to be a retort for Tuesday’s news, of the arrests in Manchester of illegal workers, he put forward a plan to raise fines for employers hiring such workers, saying that the government was ‘passionate’ about such an issue and had long fought for a fair wage for everyone.

Also in the raft of new proposals was the measure of imposing a probationary period for migrants of between 1-5 years, after which time they will be judged on what they have achieved and whether they warrant staying in the country. This was a very clear resolution to critics that cite immigrants as doing nothing but draining the state of hand-outs and benefits. With the new system put in place all immigrants would be entitled to benefits, they would however be used when they are needed most and not as a long-term living mechanism.

Brown said that there would be “More expectations put on people that want to stay here permanently.”

He mixed this new policy with a Labour line borrowed from the Tony Blair years, saying he wanted “…to strengthen what it means to be British.” Perhaps a little optimistically proposing that migrants to the UK will be expected to contribute to the communities in which they live, in the form of community service and volunteering.

This certainly was a speech packed with plans and changes, Gordon Brown answering every criticism of the immigration system in almost categorical style. Certain changes were needed and the abuses of the system that were taking place have today been addressed, what is now clear is that the Prime Minister does not want the British public to feel that he is not listening, or at least his advisors have been. Policy is being adjusted to change with a changing world Mr Brown said today, this is of course true, and one feels that he has provided an adequate appraisal of what’s wrong and what to fix.

However, ‘Words’ as one satirist once put it ‘are cheap’ and Gordon Brown’s speech encompassed so much of the UK immigration problem, that how he plans to implement the changes were not touched on. Today he has set-out his stand-point on the issue of immigration, this being the first major speech on the topic since arriving in office, this it seems is his working manifesto on the subject.

The feeling that this is just a build-up to the general election is tangible; the issues covered today serving as a necessary pre-emptive attack against the Tories, on what remains a core issue to many voters.

Recently on this blog a UK immigration amnesty was called for from the director of Global Visas, Liam Clifford, today we learn of a raid on a warehouse where 21 arrests were made in Manchester. It is clear that people in this country are working illegally and the point made concerning lost revenue for the country is a valid one.

If you are in a country illegally you cannot claim any sort of government handouts, fact, and the notion that there are people working in the country that could be supporting the economy, like the rest of us, is frustrating to say the least. The figure quoted by Mr Clifford of 400,000 adds up to a lot of revenue slipping through the hands of the chancellor, in fact I would put the amount of people in this country working illegally as much higher.

The argument for a UK immigration amnesty seems a little futile, however, the principle remains when you consider there are unscrupulous people benefiting from this unregulated labour market. Added to that is the endless list of services being used but not paid for in taxes. Who is winning out of all of this?

The life of an illegal immigrant is not a very pleasant existence; the people arrested today are probably scared out of their wits with anticipation of what will happen to them. The same month a human trafficking awareness campaign is kicked off in the US, we see the end result of the process in the UK. The people arrested yesterday are not the real criminals, if the government want to blame anyone they should look at the people traffickers and the people that use this cheap form of labour to their advantage.

You could blame the macro-economics of the society we live in today, for pushing down the prices of everything we buy, from chickens and milk, to sweatshirts from Primark. The western world is pushing this ideology of throw-away goods, think of all the food wastage we as a nation are guilty of-2 for the price of 1 anyone? Why not make the labour force from the same mould, it costs peanuts and is easy to replace.

Until the country and government sit up and actually take notice of what is important in our society, instead of jumping from policy to policy, with no real interest or intent of fully solving the problem, the country will remain in the over-stimulated and over-burdened state it is at the moment.

This month it is a furore over comments made about horse-riding and the dangers of drugs, the next something entirely new, a common thread however persists. The systems in place for some of the most crucial elements of society are not working, look at the amount of benefit fraud this country currently has a yeat, 4billion at the last count, why is the system not catching these people? The prison system, constantly in the news but not adequately managed. The list could go on and turn into a very depressing appraisal, however, the facts remain that systems are not working and solutions are not forthcoming.

How long does it take to make sure one aspect of society is functioning at an optimum level and depressing mistakes are not constant? The subject of immigration is of course massively vast, but to think that 21 arrests are only the tip of the iceberg and the problem goes a long way further, a solution or plan needs to happen. I think considering the current chaos and lack of initiative in solving such an issue an immigration amnesty in the UK seems an extremely plausible remedy.