Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

I'd take any policies to be honest.

It is not a surprise in most ways but I am astonished at how little Johnson has done with an 80 seat majority. I feel like the big issues aren't even Tory policies - there's a few bits of legislation they have/will pass - but the level of sclerosis and inability to do anything.

I think that's probably the thing that haunts Tory MPs actually that they had their biggest majority in 30 years and did nothing with it because they chose as their leader a chancer with no personal policy agenda/priorities or attention to detail/focus. It's like some Tory MP got their hands on a monkey's paw.

[Zanza]

He got Brexit done. 

[Sheilbh]

That is, ultimately, his one achievement - and having just read Corbyn's piece in Jacobin on Ukraine () you'd probably have to add keeping Corbyn out of office.

Separately I've posted about this before but interesting Economist piece on third phase of migration to the UK:

Britain has entered a third phase of post-war immigration
The first was post-colonial, the second European. This one is global and middle-class
Apr 7th 2022

LAST MAY Raymond Padilla, a former journalist from the Philippines who arrived in Britain in 2005, was elected to Gloucester City Council. Filipino reporters called his victory historic; it also seemed improbable. Gloucester, in the west of England, is not hugely diverse. At the time of the most recent published census, in 2011, only 14% of its inhabitants were anything other than white and British. The city does not even have a Filipino restaurant. When immigrants want a taste of home, they make do with Thai food.
Listen to this story. Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.

But the number of Filipinos in Gloucester is growing. That is largely because of its hospital, where Mr Padilla works as a nurse. "We're all over the place because hospitals and care homes are all over the place," he says. And that growth hints at a profound change in the pattern of immigration to Britain.

Since the second world war Britain has gone through two big phases of immigration. First came migrants from former colonies such as India, Pakistan and Jamaica, who often availed themselves of free movement within the empire and Commonwealth, just as the British colonists had done. As the Sri Lankan writer and activist Ambalavaner Sivanandan put it: "We are here because you were there."

Then came a European phase. In 2004 Britain was one of only three EU countries to open its labour market to citizens of the Baltic and eastern European countries that had just joined the bloc. In the two decades to 2020-21 the European-born population in Britain rose from 1.5m to 3.9m, and from 35% to 41% of the foreign-born population, according to the Labour Force Survey.

The European phase ended in December 2020 when Britain enacted a new, post-Brexit immigration system. Free movement to and from continental Europe ceased. But Boris Johnson's government made work permits easier to obtain.

Companies no longer had to prove that they had tried to hire a native Briton for a role, and the salary threshold that skilled migrants are required to clear was lowered from £30,000 ($39,000) to £25,600. For health-care workers the threshold is even lower, at a mere £20,480. In another change, foreign students in British universities are now allowed to work for at least two years after graduating, restoring a right that they had held under the previous Labour government.

Sixteen months into the new regime, the consequences are clear. Despite the many disruptions of covid-19, Britain is issuing more work and study visas (see chart). The vast majority are not going to Europeans. In 2021 people from India received almost 99,000 study visas, up from a low point of 16,000 in 2015. Nigerians were granted 10,000 skilled-worker visas and 43,000 study visas—about as many as in the previous four years put together.



Filipinos received almost 10,000 skilled-worker visas, putting them in third place behind Indians and Nigerians. The country has become an essential source of nurses (the picture shows a training session in Manila). In the six months to September 2021, fully 3,040 Philippines-trained nurses joined the National Health Service. That is more than the number of new NHS nurses trained in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales put together. Britain's covid-19 vaccination drive began in December 2020 when a Filipina matron, May Parsons, injected Margaret Keenan.

Britain's third phase of immigration looks in some ways like the first, post-imperial phase. As well as Indians and Nigerians, Britain is issuing more skilled-worker visas to people from Kenya, Pakistan and Zimbabwe—all former British territories. But the rising number of visas going to Filipinos and others with scant historical ties to Britain, such as Brazilians, reveals the difference. If the first phase of immigration was post-imperial, and the second European, this one is global and middle-class. Britain smiles on nurses, coders and students from everywhere, and on fruit-pickers from nowhere (although they are eligible for temporary-worker visas).

Filipinos are likely to keep moving to Britain, at least for a few years. The government has pledged to hire 50,000 nurses by 2024, points out Billy Palmer of the Nuffield Trust, a health-care think-tank, and "we're not going to get it from our domestic supply." An American economist, Michael Clemens, has shown that emigration from a country tends to rise until it reaches a level of income equivalent to about $10,000 per person at purchasing-power parity, before declining. The Philippines happens to be near the peak of the curve.

Another reason to think it will continue is that Britons, who showed their dislike of free movement from Europe by voting to leave the EU, seem happier with the focus on skilled immigrants. Polling by Ipsos MORI shows that the proportion who want to see immigration reduced fell from 67% to 42% between February 2015 and February 2022. Three-quarters of Britons favour letting immigrants take health-care jobs (asylum-seekers coming across the Channel are less popular; see Bagehot).

A bigger problem in the next few years might be attracting enough skilled immigrants. Real wages have stagnated and sterling is weak, reducing the value of remittances. And now that Britain is trying to recruit the global middle class, it is up against other rich, English-speaking countries. "Australia, Canada and Britain are all trying to compete for those skilled workers," says Kate Hooper of the Migration Policy Institute in Washington, DC. So is America, when politics allows.

In Gloucester, Mr Padilla is doing his bit—and not only by helping new immigrants settle. Sometimes when he rings a British customer-service helpline he is put through to a call centre in the Philippines. Recognising the accent, he switches to speaking Tagalog. At the end of a call, the call-centre worker tends to ask: so, is life better in Britain? He tells them it is.

I saw one British African writer note that all the African people he knew who voted Leave did so because they wanted more immigration (from outside the EU). There's polling that it was a simmilar motivation for British Indians and other Leave voters from minority communities (who generally were more pro-Remain). They're probably the only Brexiteers who got exactly what they wanted - which is a little unexpected

I imagine people who are very attached to their Remain identity will slightly struggle to acknowledge this shift is even happening, but there we are.

There's been interesting work by British Future think tank on this because attitudes to immigration have shifted really significantly since 2016 (both in terms of people basically being happy with current levels or wanting more, and also caring less about it as an issue). I'm not sure politicians are responding to this yet because they were socialised in an era when immigration was a big issue and unpopular.

[Richard Hakluyt]

This line in the article interested me :  "At the time of the most recent published census, in 2011, only 14% of its inhabitants were anything other than white and British"    .

Probably an indicator of the London-centric stance of the writer, nevertheless only 14% minorities 11 years ago being noteworthy is an indication of how diverse the country is becoming.

[Sheilbh]

This line in the article interested me :  "At the time of the most recent published census, in 2011, only 14% of its inhabitants were anything other than white and British"    .

Probably an indicator of the London-centric stance of the writer, nevertheless only 14% minorities 11 years ago being noteworthy is an indication of how diverse the country is becoming.

Yeah I think that's in line with the national average in the last census. And for where Gloucester is in the country, astoundingly diverse. But I always think about it in terms of just how non-diverse/homogenous we actually are as a country because I think in US terms that would mean we're basically South Dakota.

We'll need to see at the next census but I think the latest ONS estimate (from 2019) is that the national average is now probably 22% is "anything other than white and British" (so we're probably now Connecticut) - but about 55% in London. But I think there's a chance we're under-counting minorities, I keep mentioning it but especially given that the ONS thought about 3.5 million Europeans were eligible for settled status when, in fact, 6 million received it. I don't think everyone who was eligible necessarily applied and I don't think an extra 2.5 million people turned up between 2016-20.

I also think it's another point that the ONS really needs to start breaking down the "White Other" category in their stats because those are significantly sized communities just being lumped together.

[Josquius]

That article doesn't tell the whole picture.
It's often forgotten quite what an immigration system reliant on work permits tied to particular jobs means.
These workers are effectively indentured labour. Very hard for them to fight for their employment rights and they can't just up and switch job if they don't like the one they're in.
It's sad this is being painted as somehow more fair than European free movement. It sells well in theory - you need a job before you can move over? Great! But the practice has its major down sides too.

The most annoying reaction to this kind of thing I see is quitlings gloating about it in a sort of "see how you like it now" at their imagined metropolitan Liberal elites who they presume are now the ones being undercut. Not that anyone was really being undercut to begin with.

[Sheilbh]

If you've got a skilled worker or a student visa you can change job and employer. The biggest employers sponsoring skilled workers are the NHS and the Big Four.

There's definitely problems with the system - especially the Home Office making an 80% margin on the cost of processing documents which is a disgrace - but it's not indentured labour. It was never indentured labour but the system has been significantly relaxed and it shows in the stats.

[Josquius]

If you've got a skilled worker or a student visa you can change job and employer. The biggest employers sponsoring skilled workers are the NHS and the Big Four.

If you pay 2000 quid and jump through a lot of hoops. There's a fair bit of paperwork involved that means it's very difficult to do for anything less than the biggest of companies.

[Sheilbh]

The form for an employer apparently takes about 30 minutes to fill in and from my understaning you only need to apply once to become a sponsoring employer. It will favour the bigger organisations, of course, but that's true of most compliance.

There is hoop-jumping, of course, because it's a visa system. But it is significantly simpler and more open than it was just a few years ago - which is reflected in the numbers.

This is sort of what I mean though That some people will not acknowledge that the new immigration system is functioning (applications are processed quickly), largely more open/simple and means that immigration hasn't declined (and is in fact increasing) but switched from Europe to the rest of the world and particularly India, Nigera, the Philippines and China. And that it's happened with public opinion showing record low levels of concerns about immigration and higher support than ever previously recorded in the polls.

[The Larch]

The country has become an essential source of nurses. In the six months to September 2021, fully 3,040 Philippines-trained nurses joined the National Health Service. That is more than the number of new NHS nurses trained in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales put together.

It will never cease to amaze me how incredibly dependant of foreign manpower the NHS is.

[Sheilbh]

It will never cease to amaze me how incredibly dependant of foreign manpower the NHS is.

It is - and it isn't

It's absolutely dependent on foreign manpower, there's no doubt of that. But overall the foreign-born workforce in the NHS is about 15% (when known) which isn't a million miles from the latest ONS estimate that about 14% of the UK population was born overseas. So it's as dependent as the wider UK is. Though both stats are a little dodgy/estimates.

Although I'd guess it varies by country - for example I'd be willing to bet that Filipinos are disproportionately employed by the NHS (I think for that reason they were proportionally one of the worst hit by covid in the first wave).

[Josquius]

The form for an employer apparently takes about 30 minutes to fill in and from my understaning you only need to apply once to become a sponsoring employer. It will favour the bigger organisations, of course, but that's true of most compliance.

There is hoop-jumping, of course, because it's a visa system. But it is significantly simpler and more open than it was just a few years ago - which is reflected in the numbers.

This is sort of what I mean though That some people will not acknowledge that the new immigration system is functioning (applications are processed quickly), largely more open/simple and means that immigration hasn't declined (and is in fact increasing) but switched from Europe to the rest of the world and particularly India, Nigera, the Philippines and China. And that it's happened with public opinion showing record low levels of concerns about immigration and higher support than ever previously recorded in the polls.

I'm going off the first hand experience of non-eu people I know who are dealing with it.
It may be working to keep the public calm but it certainly isn't working for the workers themselves and maintaining their rights.

It doesn't matter that you say the form is just 30 minutes of work. That's 30 minutes a small employer won't spend. The 2000 cost is also off putting even if the employee promises to pay it all themselves.
Maybe it's a matter of perception rather than facts which is leading them to act in this way: I definitely had troubles with that myself in Japan. But the way things are now they're not great for non EU workers.

[Jacob]

Although I'd guess it varies by country - for example I'd be willing to bet that Filipinos are disproportionately employed by the NHS (I think for that reason they were proportionally one of the worst hit by covid in the first wave).

One of the Philippines biggest exports is healthcare workers. They're a big proportion of foreign born health care workers in the US and Canada (and, I'd wager, Australia - and probably also in the wealthy parts of the Middle East).

[Sheilbh]

One of the Philippines biggest exports is healthcare workers. They're a big proportion of foreign born health care workers in the US and Canada (and, I'd wager, Australia - and probably also in the wealthy parts of the Middle East).

Yeah - I dated a Filipino nurse for a while. I had no idea but he explained there's this huge Filipino healthcare diaspora all over the world including the existence of this massive Filipino NHS community that, if you're not in hospital, you'd probably neveer realise existed.

[Sheilbh]

The Met showing its unerring ability to read the room with this honour guard for Cressida Dick on her last day:
https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1512372118830436356?s=20&t=gqPmwXhWXJak-R5GrZuVcg

She's also warned about the risks of policing being "politicised" in response to having to stand down after being told by the mayor that he no longer had confidence in her

This is a little bit like my blood on the carpet views on politics, but I think it's probably a bad sign if the leader of a large public sector organisation is basically cheered out. A lot of issues with her tenure seems to be exactly that she is a copper's copper. I generally think the head of the Met (or any public organisation) should be focused on making them serve the public not internal vested interests and probably quite unpopular internally