Clearly a sensitive issue, I find it worrying that the media are ignoring the figure of 572,000 in favour of the lower figure of 234,000, being the difference between migration and immigration.
Similarly, the very low percentage arriving to fill a pre arranged job vacancy.
Anybody at the sharp end of delivering basic public services will know the tremendous increase in pressure that uncontrolled population growth brings.
Education, health, social care, housing and employment; we are failing to provide an adequate service in the last four of those and the jury is still out on education.
My grandaughter, aged 5, started school in September 2010, where out of a class of 28 only her and another child spoke English.
The government wants to relax planning laws to allow developers to build houses to accomodate the millions of new arrivals but have not the economic environment in place to create sufficient emplyment fot the indigenous population.
Phew! Where do we go from here?

Try this from the ONS in May:

In the first quarter of 2011, around 1 in 5 workers, or 20.6 per cent, in low-skill occupations were born outside the UK. This figure has increased from around 1 in 11 workers, or 9.0 per cent, in the first quarter of 2002.

This represents an increase of 367,000 non-UK born workers in low-skill jobs, with 666,000 in the first quarter of 2011, up from 298,000 at the start of 2002.

Over the same period there was little change in the number of workers in low-skill jobs in the UK, which stood at around 3.2 million. However, the number of UK-born people in low-skill jobs fell from 3.04 million to 2.56 million.

There were also increases in the percentage of non-UK born workers in each of the three higher-skill groups, although the increases there were not as large as that in low-skill jobs.

Low-skill jobs are those that need a basic level of education and a short period of training, while high-skill occupations normally require a university level of education or extensive work experience.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=901

Why don’t they just stop counting people from within the EU in the migrant figures?
They are free to come and go – and do exactly that. They are not really migrants any more than Brits working on buliding sites in Germany 20 years ago were migrants to Germany.

Also, using dry figures about absolute numbers is a bit disingenuous as it doesn’t describe what is replacing what. Do a thousand white British people moving to Australia permanently ”equal” a thousand alylum seekers from Somalia coming to replace them?

The answer can be ”yes” I suppose.

Yay, more moral panics.

Never mind we have half the number of immigrants on a percentage basis than the other Anglophile countries, and with the concentration of them in London, much of the country is mono-racial…

@4: “Yay, more moral panics.”

And with good reason, given this news from a few days ago about NEETs:

The proportion of 18 to 24-year-olds in England not in employment, education or training (Neet) has risen to 18.4%, official figures suggest.

The figure from the Department for Education is the highest for the second quarter since 2006, and is up from 16.3% last year.

Nearly a million (979,000) 16 to 24-year-olds were Neet between April and June this year, the figures show.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-14644613

Didn’t Gordon Brown say something about British jobs for British workers?

@5 – Guess what? That means the government needs to create jobs, not slash university access, flatline the economy and work in favour of the rich. Oh, and things like removing the retirement age? Yea, not a good time to do it.

Let’s crack down on, oh, overtime. British people work an immense amount of it, reducing the job supply and harming work/life balance…

Demonising large parts of the population – and I’m a third gen immigrant, thanks for your slam against me – isn’t a good idea.

@6: Leon

But the problem is here and now and the static number of unskilled jobs being taken mostly by non-UKborn workers.

Few of the NEETs are going into higher education because they lack the basic entry qualificiations to do so, especially at a time of acute demand pressures for uni places – because of the rise in uni fees next year.

We need to start worrying more about the just under half of 16 year-olds who don’t have those 5 GCSEs A*-C grades, including maths and English. They will be looking for unskilled jobs at a time when the unemployment rate for young people is about twice the ILO unemployment rate for all ages.

The other important issue is about why employers evidently prefer employing non-UKborn workers.

“The other important issue is about why employers evidently prefer employing non-UKborn workers.”

That’s their prerogative in a free market economy.

@8: “That’s their prerogative in a free market economy.”

That is a statement of the effing obvious, isn’t it?

The substantive issue is WHY do employers evidently prefer to employ non-UKborn workers to UKborn workers – given the huge differences in employment rates shown in the ONS report in May qoted @2?

A couple of points stand out here.

Firstly, when did the immigration debate ever have anything to do with net migration? The key figure (if hardly the sensible one) has always simply been the immigration figure.

Secondly, “Work isn’t the key issue (of 575,000 people entering the country for the long-term, less than 20% were coming for work)” was interesting – what the hell were the other 460,000+ entering the country for?).

If it was study, are they really migrants? If not, I am somewhat worried by that figure.

The other important issue is about why employers evidently prefer employing non-UKborn workers.

I tend to go with the fact that either a) they have the skills needed or b) they are less difficult and more reliable than many British workers (and often speak better English).

“If it was study, are they really migrants? If not, I am somewhat worried by that figure.”

We have to assume that it’s all immigration, including EU. So a portion will be “ex-pats” from other countries, maybe some even just returning to the UK as job markets collapse around the EU. Then you can probably take at least 10% as families of those that are there for full time work, as I imagine that’s how the statistics work. Doesn’t mean that they won’t look for work, just that it isn’t the reason they’re moving.

“Firstly, when did the immigration debate ever have anything to do with net migration? ”

Since ever. I don’t think the migration debate has ever been focused around just who is moving in alone.

@11: “I tend to go with the fact that either a) they have the skills needed or b) they are less difficult and more reliable than many British workers (and often speak better English). ”

I think that is the most credible substantive explanation – and also one of the likely motivating factors for the recent riots.

If so, those are powerful reasons for concerns about why so many unskilled jobs are going to non-UKborn workers. Those same reasons could also account for the warnings in the press, attributed to business interests, about the adverse consequences of curbing immigation too sharply, too soon.

@7 – Those jobs are being replaced with automation. They *will not* be there.

We need to adapt to this as a society.

(And there’s a distinct difference between people from other countries who come over here for a limited period, live very cheaply and save up money to take home, where it’ll go further, and the same job being a dead-end for someone young here…)

And no, “fewer” NEET’s have been going into higher education because the number of places has been falling as a percentage of the population. And of course, from next year there will be a drastic drop, especially among the brighter groups.

Since ever. I don’t think the migration debate has ever been focused around just who is moving in alone.

Only if you have a sensible and balanced view (or are complaining the island is overcrowded, which may be the opposite…). The ‘debate’ has basically been about numbers and integrations. Which makes the headline figure, especially if it includes returning expats, families of Europeans with jobs and people moving in from backward Pakistani villages (not a racist slur – I used to work in a school where this was a regular occurence in some families and caused huge tension in the local community), rather pointless since it tells us nothing about who is coming or going anyway…

Perhaps that is the point though – much of the so-called debate over immigration is gut feeling and numbers of no great value on their own.

Again, Bob, what rot.

If you come here from another country, live in a cheap single room in a house with 20 other people and save up to go home, you’re going to view those jobs very differently from someone who is looking at those jobs being the only thing ever available to them.

Bob B,

I think that is the most credible substantive explanation – and also one of the likely motivating factors for the recent riots.

I’d suggest the ability to riot like that for personal gain kind of would explain the view I was jokingly referring to. There are idiots who believe they are entitled – but how many of the rioters were actually unemployed adults? It is hardly sufficient to say that they were rioting because foreigners were getting their jobs (the BNP did not organise any rioting…), when many were clearly not. And I never heard one rioter say they were doing it because of that – they just thought they could have free stuff without consequences and show the police who was boss (there were some interesting soundbites on the radio at the time).

“The substantive issue is WHY ”

Because they’re better for the business.

@18: “Because they’re better for the business.”

Evidently so – but why? We need better analysis of why employers are opting for non-UK born workers over UKborn workers for unskilled jobs. Some of it, possibly, is employment in the catering trades, but how much?

@19 – Again, it’s simple – if you’re doing a job for a few years to build up some cash before you take it home and start a business or similar, you’re going to be more motivated than someone who has nothing better to look forward to!

(Hence the need for a clear career path in all jobs)

Evidently so – but why? We need better analysis of why employers are opting for non-UK born workers over UKborn workers for unskilled jobs.

A sense of entitlement fostered by 15 years of political pandering.

What’s needed is a politician with the arsehole to tell the unskilled – compete or don’t, but stop expecting the state to protect you.

Hardly a wide ranging study, but indicative (as was the response to it) – http://stagevu.com/video/mdswbzvkuvtx

Possibly some insights into the job market:

In my immediate neighbourhood, there are several well-to-do black families. The patriarchs drive expensive cars, dress well and the siblings go to local grammar schools. I assume the guys are in business or work for embassies or the public services, such as the civil service, teaching or the NHS. But I’m mainly focused on the other end of the market for skills.

Within 250 meters of where I sit is the small neighbourhood shopping centre, including the local medical centre and a pharmacy. There are 4 convenience stores/news agents, 2 Indian restaurants, a Chinese restaurant, a Chinese take-away and a Thai take-away. All are run by ethnic Asians, some of whom to my knowldege, were born and raised here. To all appearances, there are no local black-run businesses.

The checkouts of the supermarkets I go to are staffed by the united nations. There are Asian guys and women, black women and white guys and women. But no black guys.

I’m puzzled by the under-representation of black guys in small local businesses and at supermarket checkouts.

@22 Well why don’t you go ask them then? Quite why we’re supposed to know why Black men are under-represented in low-skilled service jobs in your local area when you don’t is beyond me. On the industrial estate I work on in the north west they’re represented quite well.

Thanks for that comment, Cylux@23, but my casual observation of local ethnic employment in businesses in my neighbourhood seems to roughly accord with this report by a think-tank about ethnic unemployment rates from January last year:

Almost half of black people aged between 16 and 24 are unemployed, compared with 20% of white people of the same age, a think tank has claimed.

The left-leaning Institute for Public Policy Research said a survey of 7,200 young people showed a wide variation in unemployment by ethnic group.

Black unemployment had risen 13% since March 2008, compared with 8% among white people and 6% among Asians.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8468308.stm

Try this in the official publication Social Trends 2006, from well before the financial crisis and recession, reporting on unemployment rates by ethnic group in 2004 – Figure A.4 in:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/social_trends/ST36_overview.pdf

The highest unemployment rates shown are for Black Carribean and Black African.

Almost half of black people aged between 16 and 24 are unemployed, compared with 20% of white people of the same age, a think tank has claimed.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8468308.stm

Campaigner Lee Jasper says the latest figures showing the black unemployment is rocketing mean it’s time for affirmative action.

http://operationblackvote.wordpress.com/2010/01/21/young-black-and-betrayed-black-youth-unemployment-is-through-the-roof/

Bob B @ 9

The substantive issue is WHY do employers evidently prefer to employ non-UKborn workers to UKborn workers

I believe the answer is obvious; immigrants tend to be the more motivated, higher skilled and more mobile of the population. People move for lots of reasons and those with least reason to stay in poorer Countries tend to move. Poles from the top and middle of their labour bell curve are likely to out-compete people at the bottom of our labour bell curve. Why employ a British 45 year old angina sufferer when you could just as easily employ a nice, young, fit, healthy Pole with no ties to his own land who would sooner be a shelf stacker here than a shelf stacker in Warsaw? No doubt the Polish have lazy people and others who happen to fall out of the labour market in their inner cities, but they never come here to be judged, do they?

That is neither surprising nor an attack on the people who happen to be at the bottom of the labour market heap. I am sure that the top and middle of our bell curve will out-compete the bottom of the bell curve in Poland or Australia for example.

In fact, millions of Brits live all over the World out-competing the locals. I bet the British living in Egypt or Libya are earning more than most of the indigenous in those Countries and I bet there are unemployed in those Countries too, but if I attempted to compare every Ozzie with the standards of the British who emigrate and attempt to draw comparisons between the respective workforces I think that would flawed.

@13: Jim

I can go along with much of that except that it doesn’t account for the different unemployment rates by ethnic group nor why we can see around us so many Asian businesses.

Also, it’s not immediately self-evident why businesses evidently prefer to employ young non-UKborn workers, whose first langauge is not English, in preference to UKborn workers, whose first or everyday language is very likely to be English. And we are talking about unemployment rates of young black in Britain being somewhere around twice the average unemployment rate for young people.

Bob B @ 27

I can go along with much of that except that it doesn’t account for the different unemployment rates by ethnic group nor why we can see around us so many Asian businesses.

Well you need to look at where these ethnic groups are sitting on the labour bell curve? If you have a higher percentage of a given ethnic group higher up the bell curve then it stands to reason you are less likely to be affected with a large increase in unskilled labour are you?

Why ethnic groups are placed into the labour market in significant groups is of course a completely different thread and not really relevant here, is it?

Also, it’s not immediately self-evident why businesses evidently prefer to employ young non-UKborn workers, whose first langauge is not English, in preference to UKborn workers, whose first or everyday language is very likely to be English.

I do not think it matter much to the employer what language a hospital cleaner speaks, it may matter to the paitents, vistors and medical staff, but to the employer he is paid to clean the wards, not talk to visitors and therefor does not affect his bottom line, one way or another

@Bob B
Both linked articles mention socio-economic status having a negative effect, plus the BBC article also mentions that discrimination still provides a barrier to employment in low skilled industries.

Given newspapers like the Mail’s choice of what stories to feature those “of the dusky hue” in, should we really be surprised to discover that Black men are not the first choice (or probably the second or third) for employers when it comes to customer service jobs? Never mind in the construction and engineering industry.
I mean we just had David Starkey on national television equating being black with being working class and a criminal gang member*, and being white with being middle class and well educated, which he clearly thought was a perfectly acceptable thing to say, then followed by many trying to claim that what he said wasn’t actually racist and was worthy of debate! I put it to you that this underlying racism may well be common among those of Starkey’s class, who are of course more likely to be prospective employers. That would skew the figures somewhat.

* Sort of like a real life version of this Onion parody.

@10. Watchman: “If it was study, are they really migrants?”

Yes the figures are puzzling. And, yes many people have entered the UK on the false basis that they intend to study. Hopefully enforcement agencies have a grip on fake learning institutions.

Of “the other 460,000+ entering the country”, some will be marrying or reuniting with family who live here.

If you have been around any university town in recent weeks, you may have come to the conclusion that 90% of students are Chinese. Universities run foundation courses for them over the summer months and you can’t help bumping into the students. As recently as 15 years ago, Chinese students at UK universities were post grads, predominantly male in plain white shirts, conducting tech research. Today Chinese students are under grads, very mixed. I spotted a Chinese Goth the other day.

I’m not suggesting that there are 400,000 Chinese students in the UK but their number is sufficient that I would not try to guess. And most will return home after their studies are over. Ditto for others of different nations.

—
The thing about employing illegal immigrants is that the business has to pay them. For a cash business (eg a cafe), this seems very simple on the surface. But a cash business has to run a till to stop the customer facing workers from robbing the shop, and if there is a till there is a record. If the business doesn’t run a till or maintains poor records, an assessment agent will observe discrepancies.

If government thinks that off-book employment is a problem, government should employ accountants to sort it out.

@28: Jim

When I was a good deal younger in the 1970s, the late Professor Eysenck got into a great deal of trouble for saying that, on the evidence of IQ tests, the Bell curve of one ethnic group could be different from that of another ethnic group. And he wasn’t on to a white supremacist kick either because he was saying that some Asian ethnic groups, especially the Chinese, showed a higher average ability than Caucasians in IQ tests. That was a hot topic for several years. Eysenck was much abused at the time in his lectures and seminars to the extent where rational discussion of the issues became impossible.

@29: Cylux

I don’t take Starkey seriously – he is “controversial” about almost any subject IMO because he knows that is a way to get repeat invites to appear on TV discussion programmes. But I’m impressed with this evidence in The Economist:

“Though white children in general do better than most minorities at school, poor ones come bottom of the league (see chart). Even black Caribbean boys, the subject of any number of initiatives, do better at GCSEs”
http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14700670

@27. Bob B: “Also, it’s not immediately self-evident why businesses evidently prefer to employ young non-UKborn workers, whose first langauge is not English, in preference to UKborn workers, whose first or everyday language is very likely to be English.”

My guess is that whilst English is not the first language of many workers educated outside the UK, they have the ability to fit in. Many of them were well educated in their home country so picking up another language was just what they do. At the same time, there will be Polish and Estonian speaking construction sites in the UK where the common language is German or Russian.

The workers got the job because they were happy with the pay and conditions. That scenario may change a little if the common language on a construction site becomes not-English. But Not-English is the norm for UK construction workers employed across the EU.

—
There was a remarkable interview on the Today programme a few days ago with a young Portuguese woman. In almost perfect English, she defined the lack of job opportunities at home and discussed migration options: Angola, Brazil and Australia. Sadly, not UK.

@28: “I do not think it matters much to the employer what language a hospital cleaner speaks, it may matter to the paitents, vistors and medical staff, but to the employer he is paid to clean the wards, not talk to visitors and therefor does not affect his bottom line, one way or another”

The effectiveness of hospital cleaners and cleaning became a highly sensitive issue with the MRSA and C-Diff epidemics in some hospitals a few years back. Having been hospitalised last year, I got to watch cleaners on their round and some were more meticulous about nooks and crannies than others. Almost all were black. In case that is deemed racist, so was my prescription nurse.

A few messages back I mentioned not seeing black guys in supermarket checkouts which are otherwise almost representative of the united nations. On a related theme, almost all supermarkets and chain stores around where I live have uniformed security guards nowadays – sign of the times. By my observation, these security guards are invariably well-built black guys to the extent where that seems to be a regular specification in the job description.

@32: “My guess is that whilst English is not the first language of many workers educated outside the UK, they have the ability to fit in.”

I have a relating story about that and telephone banking.

As a convenience for depositors, my bank opened a “telephone banking service” based in remote call centres, which I found nightmarish to use, not least because of the security hoops. I tried to take this up with a senior manager in my local bank branch. He interrupted me to say that he had already been in touch with headoffice to advise them to close the call centre in India.

I replied that the call centre in India was the least trouble as it was staffed mainly by bilingual graduates. The real nightmare was the bank’s Glasgow callcentre where the dialect spoken was often completely impenetrable – a view shared by friends who have banks with Glasgow callcentres. The upshot was that I was finally given a hot phone number to contact my local branch direct.

The Dell Computer helpline is run from an Indian callcentre and I’m deeply impressed with its service, especially by some of the women techies there.

@21 – Yes, a politician who is willing to let people starve in the streets, as he cuts jobs and kills the economy. The sort of bloody butcher you worship.

You really ARE psychotic scum. *spits*

And again, people, you’re over-thinking this. To repeat; If you’re doing a job for a few years to build up some cash before you take it home and start a business or similar, you’re going to be more motivated than someone who has nothing better to look forward to!

(Hence the need for a clear career path in all jobs)

@36: “(Hence the need for a clear career path in all jobs)”

Agreed – and it’s none too clear what prospects are ahead for a hospital cleaner unless it’s a cleaner overseer.

From my experience when hospitalised last year, in post-op recovery, I was looked after by a Chinese nurse. After that, I was routinely moved on to a general orthopaedic ward where I was received by a charge nurse, who was a back guy. My prescribing nurse – a nurse with prescribing authority is way more qualified than a SRN nurse – was a young black woman from west Africa. A few days later, I had a longish chat about the state of the world with one of the ward sisters, an Indian guy from Mauritius. General surgery wards in modern hosiptals are often very large but divided up into small sub-wards to prevent cross-infections – intensive care wards are differently arranged so a night nurse can oversee all patients all the time. Ward sisters in general wards have a significant management function in assigning staff with duties to the sub-wards. The nursing auxiliary was English and white. The surgeon was Greek. The anaesthetist was Indian. That’s the NHS.

@36

Take your racism elsewhere, we expect everyone else to compete for our custom (sorry coal miners, Norway is doing a special on natural gas) yet demand we be protected from the same mechanism?

Fuck that supremacist drivel, we’re not special, the sooner the low skilled wake up to that fact, the better for all concerned.