Not a hope in hell’s chance of building the homes needed

MIGRATION WATCH UK

The focus of attention this week has been the Chancellor’s spending review. With regard to housing, the Deputy Prime Minister’s department was promised £39bn over ten years for social and affordable housing in England. On the face of it, a boost to Angela Rayner’s plans to build 1,5 million homes in the lifetime of this parliament.

Here’s what David Coleman, Emeritus professor of demography at Oxford University, (whose population projections in 2010 suggested the White British would become a minority in about 2066) wrote in a letter to The Times (13 June) about the government’s plans:

“The housing announcements in the spending review, and the target of 1.5 million homes in this parliament, do not reflect the needs of the resident population but instead arise in large part from the inflation of demand by those arriving from overseas. The 2021 census indicated that 79 per cent of additional households formed since 2011 were headed by people born abroad. Migration in the four years 2021-24 alone amounted to 2.3 million people, or about one million extra households needing shelter. Put another way, migration even at the much lower annual level of 320,000 implies about 700,000 additional households from migration by Labour’s target date, almost half the intended housing increase. To that degree the government is running an international housing policy.”

In other words, half the 1.5 million homes to be built are already needed for those who’ve arrived in the last four years and the bulk of the rest will go to those still to come – and that’s assuming net migration continues to fall to around an annual 320,000 from 2029 as the ONS expects. Don’t forget, according to Centre for Cities, we are already 4.3 million homes short.

Any wonder that hundreds of thousands of migrants make their way here both legally and illegally? Here is a table illustrating the growing number of asylum applications now even higher than they were 20 years ago following the fallout from the Balkan wars.

Of course, the result is more and more costs being piled onto the British taxpayer. One of the most egregious ways the government spends our money is on hotels for asylum seekers who have illegally crossed the Channel. Again, this is a powerful incentive – knowing that when you arrive in Britain you will immediately be given accommodation, potentially for years. Migration Observatory has projected this is an implied subsidy of £133 per migrant per night, or £3 billion in 2023/24.

One might think that removing the subsidy would remove an incentive. But the Chancellor isn’t promising to remove it; instead, she has made a vague commitment to move asylum seekers into properties rented from the private sector. In other plans hinted at by the government, it seems the Home Office is now contemplating buying hotels to accommodate asylum seekers. Presumably, so that they can argue that they have kept to their promise of moving asylum seekers out of hotels. What a sham.

Illegal migration

A relatively quiet week in the Channel, after a record-smashing 1195 migrants crossed on a single day last week. 452 migrants crossed the Channel on the final two days of this week, bringing the total number this year to 15212.

Way ahead of 2024 and still heading towards 50,000 crossing the English Channel illegally by year’s end.

X Posts of the week

Paul Embery shares new guidelines issued by Prevent suggesting that “cultural nationalism” – defined as believing “Western culture is under threat from mass migration and lack of integration” – could be grounds for referral to the authorities under anti-terrorism legislation.

We shared some excellent research by X user JUICE on demographic change in London since 1961.

GB News Political Editor Christopher Hope points out that Treasury minister Darren Jones lied to the public on Question Time on Thursday when he claimed “the majority of people [illegally crossing the Channel] are children, babies and women. The government’s own stats show that 70% of arrivals are adult men – rising to around 90% this year.

MWUK in the media

Our Chairman, Alp Mehmet, was quoted in an excellent article in the Daily Mail about the NHS’s scandalous failure to recoup the costs of caring for foreign patients – with just £29.5 million billed to healthcare providers in Europe last year, while the NHS paid out over a billion to its European counterparts.

“Alp Mehmet, chairman of Migration Watch UK, said: ‘The problem lies in our total inability to monitor non-UK nationals’ use of the NHS, a scandalous failure to secure payments due, and naivety when dealing with the EU which has so often taken us for a ride.’“

Alp also appeared on Ben Habib’s Great British PAC Twitter Space earlier this week. You can listen to a recording of the Space here.

Migration Watch’s research was cited in an editorial in the Pimlico Journal about last week’s forecast that White Britons would become a minority in Britain by 2063.

“In 1997 net migration was 48,000 however it rose extremely rapidly, almost trebling in one year to 140,000 in 1998; it was not to fall below 100,000 again. Between 1997 and 2010, the New Labour years, net migration averaged 200,000 per year, five times higher than under the Major government of 1990-1996.

It is now clear that net foreign migration between 1997 and 2010 was 3.6 million, while nearly a million British citizens emigrated giving total net migration of 2.7 million. The rate of inflow between 1997 and 2010 equated to one migrant arriving every minute.”

Our esteemed demographer, Professor David Coleman, had a letter to the Times published this week:

Sir,

The housing announcements in the spending review, and the target of 1.5 million homes in this parliament, do not reflect the needs of the resident population but instead arise in large part from the inflation of demand by those arriving from overseas. The 2021 census indicated that 79 per cent of additional households formed since 2011 were headed by people born abroad. Migration in the four years 2021–24 alone amounted to 2.3 million people, or about one million extra households needing shelter. Put another way, migration even at the much lower annual level of 320,000 implies about 700,000 additional households from migration by Labour’s target date, almost half the intended housing increase. To that degree the government is running an international housing policy.

David Coleman
Emeritus professor of demography, Oxford University; Oxford

Our articles of the week

Twin articles in the Telegraph this week – one by Annabel Denham on Britain’s faltering national cohesion and the risk of social unrest or even civil conflict, and one by Sam Ashworth-Hayes on the dangerous myth that Britain was “built by immigration”.

”From 1066 through to the end of the Second World War, the population of Britain has been marked by relative stability. As a crude illustration, as late as 1951 the total non-White population of Great Britain was estimated at about 30,000 people, or about 0.07pc of the population.

Today it’s roughly 20pc, and on course to pass 50pc by the end of the century. In other words, the population changes induced by migration over the past seven decades are essentially without parallel in 1,000 years of British history.”

The Guardian reports the Migration Advisory Committee – an unaccountable Quango which gives the government recommendations on immigration control – has released a report suggesting the government could cut the minimum income threshold for migrant worker visas to just £23,000. This would mean migrants could come to the UK to work for below minimum wage.

“The panel has suggested scrapping a Tory plan to raise the minimum income threshold for family visas to £38,700, saying it would conflict with human rights laws.

The committee gave some options, including that a threshold of £24,000 to £28,000 could give more priority to economic wellbeing, such as by reducing the burden to taxpayers, than to family life.

It also suggested a threshold of £23,000 to £25,000 could ensure that families could support themselves without necessarily requiring them to earn a salary above the minimum wage.“

Dr Jake Scott has written about Prevent’s new guidance labelling people sceptical of mass migration as potential terrorists on Rookery Review.

”No doubt Prevent will now be inundated with complaints about nearly 85% of the country who want immigration to be below its current levels. Polling only tells half the story – the numbers – about an issue, and without exhaustive qualitative data about the opinions of respondents, it’s nearly impossible to tell if the vast majority of Brits object to mass immigration because it will lead to “Western culture” being “threatened”. At the very least though, we know that most Brits do not want the current levels of mass migration.”

What can you do?

Thank you for being a subscriber to our newsletter. We exist because of your generosity, and we hope to continue our work – please consider supporting us with a donation.

TAKE ACTION NOW

☑️ Write to your MP NOW

☑️ Forward this article to a friend

☑️ Make a donation NOW

SOURCE: Migration Watch UK newsletter

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.