sorry 7 reasons not enough for you to assimilate even one.

As for immigration policy,as I posted a while ago,I don't believe in unfettered immigration from outside the EU.We actually have pretty strong fettered immigration policies.I do agree with free movement within the EU.I do believe in complying with the 1951 UNHCR Refugee Convention in full,in spirit as well as the letter.

Enough.Cheerio

Edited by legaleagle (31 Jul 2015 11.27pm)

The 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees has created a system for providing protection to people at risk of persecution in their own countries. There are few countries willing to risk turning such people away. However it is unlikely than many governments would sign up to the Convention today. The problem with the Convention is that it was developed in and for a totally different era. Its focus is the resulting problems that have been identified since the late 1980s with the operation of the Convention in Western countries.
It is due to all the migration in the past few years that has caused or increased all the problems we have to day. Namely drugs, prostitution, slavery, gangland areas to name but a few. We have so many no go areas in our country due to religious issues and where immigrants just will not and do not mix in with our culture or our ways. Most of the immigrants coming from France now when interviewed on television admit in just wanting to get free handouts and have come just for that reason and their lives are in no danger as people would have us believe. Immigration has go t completely out of control and we should stand firm and refuse entry to any more until we sort out this mess we find ourselves in. Housing is short, hospitals are pushed to the limit, doctors and schools cannot cope and this is mainly down to immigration. Let one in and all the family turn up after a while and they all claim the works. I agree that some, but not many are in real need of help. I am afraid we are the soft touch of Europe and its about time we stood up and said Enough is Enough!!!!

Which is presumably why last year there were over 200,000 asylum applications in Germany,over 60,000 in France and a little over 30,000 here way below the figures 12 years earlier.in 2014,the UK granted (as opposed to refusing) asylum to just over 14,000 people (adding (i think!) well less than 0.02% to the population) .Asylum is granted to those qualifying under the Convention.

Enough is enough is what might reasonably be said about the triumph of hyped up myth over reality.

Edited by legaleagle (01 Aug 2015 4.16pm)

Thanks legal... I'll take that as some sort of agreement?

You are right I did leave out important factors - I completely underestimated the amount of building required to cope with our increased population after rampant immigration comes to fruition:-

As previously stated we will need hundreds of thousands new homes, schools, GP surgeries and hospitals.

What I omitted was new factories, offices, supermarkets, distribution centres, warehouses, car parks, train stations, places of entertainment and presumably bigger and bigger mosques?

After all these new arrivals will have to work, eat, be entertained and pray to Allah.

I ask you, or anyone else advocating wholesale immigration to the UK........ where is all the space to accommodate these people and the infrastructure needed to allow them to go about living their new daily lives?

I've already discounted the suggestion made by Serial Thriller who mistakenly believed we had 97% of UK land to build on - can anyone answer this simple question?

Not so much agree with your conclusions Hoof,but acknowledge that resources and planning are relevant factors for any society for the future.

Umm Hoof,if I have posted two days ago on this thread that I agree with immigrations controls re non EU nationals,quite how does that make me someone "advocating wholesale immigration to the UK".

Also,Hoof,do try not to let your other prejudices undermine your reasonable points in this context.Can make you look like a bigot rather than a person of objective reasonable concerns.I'd hazard the largest "religious group" that has come here in the past few years are catholics...who worship in...not mosques but churches.

In terms of population density,it does not seem to be the key factor in terms of economic success.Our's has been estimated at about 680 people per mile. Singapore's (doing very nicely economically thank you) is 19,731.

London's population in 1939 was 8.6 million.Today its 8.6 million.

Your place of residence,Bristol's was 422,000 years ago and is about 432,000 now.

Factually (as opposed to the "I hate immigrants per se" blind prejudice school of analysis) it seems that as of 2012 we had,for example,the largest amount of woodland in the UK since records began in 1924 and that 93% of the UK was not urban (the remaining 7% including roads and rural development) though 80% of us lived in towns and cities.. perhaps not quite as simple as your analysis.

So,not as simplistic as ignoring your points,but not as simplistic as only your points might suggest perhaps.

And how you view the future and needs and "level of concern might in part depend in some ways what one's starting points are:

1.Is it that immigrants have historically and can benefit our society and population diversity has positives or only negatives?

2.Is it that immigrants are and have been "bad" for us per se and have negatively eroded our "anglo saxon" society,which is a "bad" thing?

3.Has recent EU immigration been an economic negative or in fact on average an economic benefit?

3.The overall benefits of EU membership (including free movement of goods,services and labour) is positive for the UK or,alternatively is negative?

The starting points will perhaps very much influence perceptions of how to deal with resources and population numbers and distribution and the extent to which (and why) such are major problems.

As will questions as to why our housing and transport and education systems might not be what they would be.Is it because of "immigrants" or is it for other reasons stretching back decades with immigration being a nice "blame all" reason for other causal factors?

Not all the relevant questions, but I'd say as relevant as those you've posed.

Edited by legaleagle (02 Aug 2015 11.23am)