Green Party aiming to "do a UKIP"

[angos]

Er no, you're putting two and two together and getting five. They are saying that people should be discouraged from economic migration by better opportunities at home. They are also saying that some migration is desirable, which it obviously is. Entirely reasonable policy.

 

Building of more houses is required anyway, even if the population stopped increasing. We have a clear crisis in housing affordability and provision.

 

Having said that I totally agree that their policies need to be clearer and better joined up.

 

The Greens can't sort the world, and their policies rely on it being sorted. Unless the world is sorted the Greens policies can't work, so they will just continue the way we are, increasing the population, building more house over our green country and destroying the environment.

 

A total paradox.

 

They need to sort the UK first, consumption in the UK needs to fall and that won't be achieved by increasing the population.

[gamezone07]

I think the Britsh electorate has enough common sense to see them for the niave, simplistic, obsessive, liars that they are.

 

If that vacuous idiot "Ms." Lucas is the best that they can produce, I can't see them being a threat to the Monster Raving Looney Party, let alone Labour or the Conservatives.

 

The only reason she has a seat at all is because Brighton is populated almost exclusively by hummus enthusiasts and homosexuals.

 

Why on earth do you think 'homosexuals' all vote for left wing parties?

 

---------- Post added 15-09-2013 at 12:33 ----------

 

"And if you're saying what about health care etc., take a look at Hong Kong's position in the world healthcare league table:

 

Hong Kong tops global health index

 

Hong Kong is ahead of us in education as well [LINK]

 

And a whopping 20 places above us in life expectancy [LINK]

 

So if people want "new answers" how about this. Instead of making the state bigger and bigger, and taxing people more and more, do the opposite. Trust people to spend their own money, to run their own lives. This is not just a theoretical concept, it works. In Hong Kong.

 

If you say it can't work here well I guess you're admitting that those industrious orientals are just plain better than we are. "

 

 

You small state supporters need to be more open with the facts, HK has a population of 7m, and is a key banking and finance centre with money(including laundered money) from around the world, bit different than say northern parts of the U.K.

__________________

[Xt500]

Stopping mass immigration isn't possible?

 

The Austrailians seem to have done ok!

[jfish1936]

(Stopping mass immigration)

 

The Austrailians seem to have done ok!

 

Well, first we did. Then we elected a compassionate government which reversed much of our draconian policy, so "the boats" came again.

This was beneficial to our Indonesian neighbours, as desperately fleeing people paid them big money for a seat in an unseaworthy crowded boat to Australia.

Now, there's talk that the measures our new government proposes may stop the traffic again.

 

Right now we are rejoicing in the defeat of a government which did not have a majority in Parliament, but gained office by an agreement with the Greens.

The Green tail then proceeded to wag the Labor (sic) dog!

The prime Minister lost public support by legislation she had not foreshadowed -- but it was the price of Green support.

 

With our preferential voting system, I was able to put the Greens at the bottom of my voting paper.

[Hairyloon]

Can't see it myself. Not for the Greens anyway. There simply aren't enough far left voters out there.

 

I don't think the Greens are far-left, just further left than most of the other parties.

Since they are all too far right for a lot of people, that is probably not a bad thing.

 

They need to distance themselves from the yoghurt weavers to get my vote though.

 

Er no, you're putting two and two together and getting five. They are saying that people should be discouraged from economic migration by better opportunities at home. They are also saying that some migration is desirable, which it obviously is. Entirely reasonable policy.

 

Yes indeed. Immigration is a global problem and more needs to be done to tackle it at source.

[angos]

 

Yes indeed. Immigration is a global problem and more needs to be done to tackle it at source.

 

It doesn't appear to be, out of 194 countries only 37 have a foreign born population over 1,000,000,

102 countries have a foreign born population less than 200,000.

187 countries have lower immigration than the UK despite many of them being significantly bigger.

[I1L2T3]

It doesn't appear to be, out of 194 countries only 37 have a foreign born population over 1,000,000,

102 countries have a foreign born population less than 200,000.

187 countries have lower immigration than the UK despite many of them being significantly bigger.

 

Thanks for the stats. They only prove the point that outflows from the poorest countries to rich ones are excessive. That is what the Green policy is identifying - opportunity in the poorest countries needs to be improved. I'm not sure how anybody could rationally argue against that aim.

 

In contemporary domestic politics the focus for that particular bit of the debate is around foreign aid. It's clear much of the aid we currently give is poorly targeted and wasteful but what if it could be targeted better and have the impact of preventing people wanting to migrate. That would be a good thing right?

[Hairyloon]

It doesn't appear to be, out of 194 countries only 37 have a foreign born population over 1,000,000,

102 countries have a foreign born population less than 200,000.

187 countries have lower immigration than the UK despite many of them being significantly bigger.

 

It is the rate of immigration that is significant, not just numbers.

[angos]

It is the rate of immigration that is significant, not just numbers.

 

What is the rate of immigration for the UK compared to the other countries of the world?

 

---------- Post added 15-09-2013 at 21:12 ----------

 

Thanks for the stats. They only prove the point that outflows from the poorest countries to rich ones are excessive. That is what the Green policy is identifying - opportunity in the poorest countries needs to be improved. I'm not sure how anybody could rationally argue against that aim.

The problem is that the Greens want to be elected into UK government, not a global government, they can't do anything about the poor countries and they claim immigration will continue until the world is fare, so the UK population will continue to increase under the Greens which isn't very good for our environment.

 

 

In contemporary domestic politics the focus for that particular bit of the debate is around foreign aid. It's clear much of the aid we currently give is poorly targeted and wasteful but what if it could be targeted better and have the impact of preventing people wanting to migrate. That would be a good thing right?

 

We can't afford to pay people not to come here, their are only about 24.1 million tax payers in the UK, they don't contribute enough for the services we use, there are billions of very poor people on the planet and many would love to come here, we can ban them from coming here but we can't make their lives that good that they choose to stay were they are.

[I1L2T3]

What is the rate of immigration for the UK compared to the other countries of the world?

 

---------- Post added 15-09-2013 at 21:12 ----------

 

The problem is that the Greens want to be elected into UK government, not a global government, they can't do anything about the poor countries and they claim immigration will continue until the world is fare, so the UK population will continue to increase under the Greens which isn't very good for our environment.

 

 

 

We can't afford to pay people not to come here, their are only about 24.1 million tax payers in the UK, they don't contribute enough for the services we use, there are billions of very poor people on the planet and many would love to come here, we can ban them from coming here but we can't make their lives that good that they choose to stay were they are.

 

The UK population will increase anyway because of increasing longevity, natural population growth and EU policies. I'm not sure what your political persuasion is but if you support any of the three main parties you will know they are in the pockets of big business and will therefore continue to be supportive some level of mass immigration over the long-term.

 

There are Green parties in many countries, some much more successful that our Green party, and they have pretty much the same aims on this issue in terms of improving prospects in all countries and reducing the need for economic migration. So it's not really valid to try and argue that the UK Greens if elected are seeking to single-handedly fix the world. They would be just a part of a coordinated response.

 

It's not about paying people not to come. It's about giving them opportunities. Some will still want to come here regardless, like people from other rich countries still seek to come here despite great opportunities at home. But we can play a part in improving things. It isn't just about foreign aid because that by itself will never be enough. There are other angles to it like tackling expoitative multinationals and predatory financial institutions that hold back sustainable development.