Vocal Voices

The director of the CBI says that in order for the UK economy to grow it needs more migrant workers. No explanation, just that it needs more.

However, Sunak claimed that the focus should be on British workers and Starmer says that it needs a pragmatic policy to end "cheap labour" and end immigration dependency.

No guessing which views I support.

However, to be able to go down the politician's route there needs to be a massive overhaul in how Jobseekers' allowances work. If the idea is to strong-arm people into work It has to be made easier for them to move around the country to where the jobs are, with travel help and setting up a new place to live. It also has to be accepted that a lot of the work will be on temporary contracts so that when one ends the former claimant can go back on JSA immediately and not have to wait six weeks.

There are issues with what Sunak and Starmer are saying, but with a bit of will they can be overcome.

Ditto, but with the caveat that we've heard this before.

Growth engendered by immigration is basically growth by consumerism; it doesn't neccessarily mean we're any better off.
More people = more consumption. More food is sold, more cars bought, more houses must be built, more white goods sold.
But this doesn't mean that as a nation we are producing any more or getting any better off; business makes money out of it, yes, but that's all.

Plus if the newcomers are low skilled and end up in low pay jobs or no jobs, then it is state money - taxpayers money - that is subsidising the increase in consumption.

We'll have to wait and see.

At the risk of being controversial, I'd like to see these illegal immigrants arriving by boat being given the option of:

(a) immediate deportation with no legal interference, or
(b) a permit to work as a basic paid labourer (supervised), either agricultural or otherwise but mainly the former, for (say) 6 months, after which - given they'd fulfilled their conditions of employment - they'd be allowed to make an asylum claim.

There were pre-Brexit plenty of rural immigrant "caravan camps" for agricultural workers dotted around the Midlands (i.e. Staffordshire, Vale of Evesham) which could be used .... a bit like the old prison farm system but updated to modern conditions.

Workingman wrote:However, to be able to go down the politician's route there needs to be a massive overhaul in how Jobseekers' allowances work. If the idea is to strong-arm people into work It has to be made easier for them to move around the country to where the jobs are, with travel help and setting up a new place to live. It also has to be accepted that a lot of the work will be on temporary contracts so that when one ends the former claimant can go back on JSA immediately and not have to wait six weeks.

There are issues with what Sunak and Starmer are saying, but with a bit of will they can be overcome.

This has always been the case and always will be the case until someone gets a clue. So far the restrictions on getting into JSA are used as a tool to try and force people to accept any work, no matter how bad, rather than claiming.

Help when unemployed is built into the system. Otherwise we should pay way less tax and be forced to use that money for a personal plan to replace JSA where workers have worked for at least a few years.

The government wouldn't like that though. They get loads of tax money on the basis of providing support but reneging on it at every opportunity. They wouldn't want companies offering unemployment assurance to rake that cash in.

As for "migrant workers". When they can show 98% employment they can have migrant workers..... This running around trying to get workers on the cheap simply doesn't work.

Mind you there would need to be some changes. You can't have some of the most expensive workers in the 1st world and then expect them to do jobs where the end product sells for less than they get paid.