Overcrowding - could it be due to migration into this country?

[physics34]

Yes, partially.

The people saying no are just blinkered!

But this is also down to poor planning, short term solutions and decisions made too late (such as thameslink 2000).

It was obvious the population is rising, things shouldve been done earlier.

Places such as London VIctoria seem to now be very busy ALL day long. THis didnt use to be the case 10 or so years ago. This is also down to alot more tourists to though.

 

[67018]

Well, firstly, the quoted figure for numbers living in the UK not born here is fairly meaningless, as it ignores emigration which reduces the net effect, and combines a huge range of people into one figure - everyone from someone who moved here as a child after the war to someone who arrived last week.

The ethnic mix of rail passengers isn't much of a guide given that many non-white people will have been born in the UK.

There may be some effect, but it's likely to be far smaller than things like employment trends, house prices, improved services, cost of driving for young people, and a change in attitudes to public transport versus car ownership.

Congestion may be even worse today without immigration, since half the transport system in London may have shut down in the 1960s without importing labour!

Also the person who said "migration keeps the economy going" raised an interesting point. If you mean "migration ensures that top executives salaries continue to rise whilst zero hours contracts are rife" then yes, it does keep the economy going.

Most studies have shown this has minimal or zero effect. Google 'lump of labour fallacy'.

 

[Julia]

I'm more surprised that noone connects it with the tendency for city-centre residential property - especially London - to be bought by either the wealthy or investment funds, and deliberately kept empty purely to take advantage of price inflation without the bother of having to look after us plebs as tenants. Remove the population from Zone 1, push the workers to the outer fringes.

 

[Rapidash]

I am sure some of you will read this next bit wrong and jump on your high horses but I am going to post it anyway-
Looking at the ethnic breakdown of the people waiting for my trains (both at my previous employer and now) the vast majority are white British looking people, not a lot of coloured or eastern European people so no, immigration has not added to overcrowding!

Not gonna get on my high horse but your location says South West, hardly a hot-bed of immigration is it? Try various locations around London, Birmingham and Manchester and you may change your opinion.

As a pasty white passenger on his trains, I would agree the vast majority of people using the service are natives, along with a splash of Black British/Asians and Eastern Europeans, and also a healthy variety of foreign students. I quite enjoy listening to them talking, as whatever nonsense they may be talking about, I can atleast not understand it, unlike my fellow countrymen

However, I would dispute your assertions that Devon is white as snow. There are thousands of students from abroad studying at Exeter and Plymouth universities, as well as Marjons, the Medical school and College of Art. They all live here, and they regularly use public transport.

Wasn't there a study a few years back, that suggested that the majority of racism comes from people who live in areas with no ethnic diversity whatsoever?

Also, dare I mention the mass migration of Brummies to the area?

 

[jopsuk]

Wasn't there a study a few years back, that suggested that the majority of racism comes from people who live in areas with no ethnic diversity whatsoever?

Less a "study", more simply comparing demographics from census data versus votes for UKIP/BNP/other "send them home" parties. The correlation is clear.

 

[Agent_c]

When discussing all the reasons for trains being so busy these days, I never hear anyone say that one of the many reasons is the high level of migration into this country. With eight million people in this country not having been born in the UK, there must be an awful lot of space used up that otherwise would not be taken. This is not a racist question, but I am surprised that I never hear anyone say that it is a contributor to the problem of overcrowding. Please discuss calmly and rationally.

Is there anything these days people don't try to blame on Migration? My Chips are cold... Must be Immigrants taking all the hot chips. No fork on your table at a restaurant? Immigrants must have taken it. Too many rainy days? Immigrants stole the sunshine.

If anyone is pedaling an "easy answer" to a problem, like blaming "the other", They're almost certainly wrong.

 

[bramling]

When discussing all the reasons for trains being so busy these days, I never hear anyone say that one of the many reasons is the high level of migration into this country. With eight million people in this country not having been born in the UK, there must be an awful lot of space used up that otherwise would not be taken. This is not a racist question, but I am surprised that I never hear anyone say that it is a contributor to the problem of overcrowding. Please discuss calmly and rationally.

I think it provides a partial explanation in the London area, simply because of the way house prices have risen out of step with the rest of the country - rising population in the London area equals rising demand for housing, which basic economics dictates will push up house prices. The effect of this is people less able to afford to live near their work, or choosing to live further out in order to be able to secure a bigger property. As this effect happens more and more, so people move further and further out. This then makes it hard to increase capacity on lines where every peak service is now busy almost from its origin. You then also have another group, those on lower incomes who have literally been priced out of rents in London, some of which have moved to cheaper places like Stevenage, Peterborough, Northampton, Milton Keynes etc.

This is not a full explanation however, as it doesn't account for increasing usage outside the London area, but it possibly explains why the London area is that bit more than everywhere else.

Certainly I think there's some truth that today's generation are more willing to use trains. My parents (50s) and perhaps more surprisingly their parents (80s), don't like using public transport at all. For them the 'default' mode of transport is the car, and they see it as odd that anyone could even consider the train offers a better standard of travelling. In fact, they even have a view that being seen by others leaving home on foot is somehow bad.

 

[misterredmist]

I think it will be very interesting to visit the poster's question again in 5 years time....

 

[455driver]

One other point; you clearly not aware of this but its considered offensive call a black person coloured. Not only that but can all black / Asian people be considered to be immigrants?

Who considers it offensive, I am white which last time I checked was still a colour, just as black, yellow, brown, purple with orange spots are all colours.
Only a few years ago it was considered offensive to call them black, of course if you ask a black person who it was that was offended they couldn't tell you because they didn't actually care.

Maybe we should have a sticky with this week's offensive terms so I don't get it wrong again! :roll:

 

[bramling]

Is there anything these days people don't try to blame on Migration? My Chips are cold... Must be Immigrants taking all the hot chips. No fork on your table at a restaurant? Immigrants must have taken it. Too many rainy days? Immigrants stole the sunshine.

If anyone is pedaling an "easy answer" to a problem, like blaming "the other", They're almost certainly wrong.

That's no reason to dismiss it though. There's absolutely no doubt that migration has increased demand for housing in certain areas, and that automatically creates rising house prices - with many negative consequences. You can mitigate against this by building more houses, but is there room for this, and can it (or should it) be done without reducing living standards all-round? Recognising that we do have a problem is the first step towards addressing it, current and recent governments don't seem to have made any real progress at addressing the issue of rising population size, in any way - either trying to control it or trying to provide for it.

 

[Rapidash]

That's no reason to dismiss it though. There's absolutely no doubt that migration has increased demand for housing in certain areas, and that automatically creates rising house prices - with many negative consequences. You can mitigate against this by building more houses, but is there room for this, and can it (or should it) be done without reducing living standards all-round? Recognising that we do have a problem is the first step towards addressing it, current and recent governments don't seem to have made any real progress at addressing the issue of rising population size, in any way - either trying to control it or trying to provide for it.

Ah, thats because the Market Will Provide!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just a quick question, as a train driver who I'm guessing has little interaction with your passengers how can you differentiate between a white English person and a white eastern European person purely on looks?

It isn't overly difficult - while you can't do it with absolute certainty, there are certain noticeable features of people from different parts of Europe.

One other point; you clearly not aware of this but its considered offensive call a black person coloured. Not only that but can all black / Asian people be considered to be immigrants?

Apart maybe from Welsh and Scots, we are a nation of immigrants, whatever our race. As for "coloured", it's an old term which used to be considered the right phrase (but no longer is) so I'm not surprised to hear it still used occasionally.

 

[me123]

When discussing all the reasons for trains being so busy these days, I never hear anyone say that one of the many reasons is the high level of migration into this country. With eight million people in this country not having been born in the UK, there must be an awful lot of space used up that otherwise would not be taken. This is not a racist question, but I am surprised that I never hear anyone say that it is a contributor to the problem of overcrowding. Please discuss calmly and rationally.

Didn't Nigel Farage once claim to be late for a campaign meeting in Cardiff because of all the "bloody immigrants" causing traffic jams on the M4? I'm inclined to agree with Agent_c - immigrants are an easy (and, frankly, lazy) target to blame for just about everything.

The railways are provided as a commercial service. As long as the people on the train have paid the appropriate fare for their tickets, I do not care about their sex/gender/ethnicity/nationality/age/voting intention/shoe size/hair colour/pet ownership status/other characteristics.

 

[34D]

No I don't think so, it is people's desire to work in Large Cities (for the extra money) but live in the Country, or the fact that there is a lot less employment outside of cities now than there was 20 years ago.

This.

It then gets compounded by the local people of that city finding it harder to find a job, and so reverse commuting elsewhere.

Indeed, the number of people who travel to Euston to then catch a train to MK is staggering.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed, the number of people who travel to Euston to then catch a train to MK is staggering.

While MK has a significant commuter outflow, the commuter inflow is actually greater. Wouldn't surprise me if Slough was the same.

 

[Cambus731]

One of the eight million living here that was born outside of the UK is Emma Watson. I certainly don't wish her to be sent back.

 

[The Ham]

My opinion is yes, of course they have contributed to overcrowding, how can it not do? There are of course many other factors but where the number arriving means means we have to build a new city every year, then you have have to question the policy.

Although the population may well be rising at the rate of a mid sized Urban area (Plymouth) due to net migration that doesn't mean that we need to build that many houses to accommodate them.

As in simple terms the "native" population is ageing meaning that there are more likely to be single people or couples in larger properties, as those people leave those larger properties they are more likely to be occupied by either a family or become house shares. In doing so the number of houses has remained the same but the number of people occupying each house increases.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Who considers it offensive, I am white which last time I checked was still a colour, just as black, yellow, brown, purple with orange spots are all colours.

Many, if not all black people consider it offensive to be called coloured, not that this appears to be a concern of yours.

 

[radamfi]

The culture of using public transport is an interesting one. I spent my formative years in Surrey and Birmingham, and from the age of 17 owned a car and used it for most travel. By the time I was 18, I knew no one who couldn't drive.

I know that if I lived in exactly the same place in Birmingham now, I wouldn't have a car, as the train service (and to a lesser extent, bus service) is considerably better. In some of the larger cities in this country (London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham) it feels like there is a whole generation growing up with the principle that they don't need a car. I'm still surprised when we get new graduates at work who can't drive, and that number is increasing proportionately.

The phenomenon of young people driving less than previous generations is becoming more and more well known. The concept has been dubbed "peak car" and occurs in many developed countries, not just the UK. Per capita driving in the UK peaked around 10 years ago, whereas train use and public transport use in London and certain other cities has increased dramatically.

The theory is that young people are less interested in cars and acquiring driving licences as they are considered "old tech". They would rather get an iPhone than pay for driving lessons. Young people also prefer to live in urban areas where car use is less useful. A lot of young professionals now live in city centre apartments where car use is a big hassle.

 

[RichmondCommu]

It isn't overly difficult - while you can't do it with absolute certainty, there are certain noticeable features of people from different parts of Europe.

Would you care to list them?

 

[tony_mac]

Maybe we should have a sticky with this week's offensive terms so I don't get it wrong again! :roll:

There is some history with the word 'coloured'.

Historically, the word is associated with segregation, especially in the US, where black people where kept separate from white people - on public transport, or at drinking fountains which were described as "coloured-only" for example.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/30999175/warning-why-using-the-term-coloured-is-offensive
It's not exactly a new issue this week, but has been around for decades. Perhaps you also use some old terms for describing Jewish or homosexual people that you don't realise are offensive now?

(Having said that, I don't take what you say at all seriously; I assume it's a bit of an act for your own amusement, but I think it's still worth a sensible reply every now and then).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would you care to list them?

Difficult to describe and very subtle, but facial features are often a clue. Google some photos of people from various European countries and have a go.

It isn't 100% successful 100% of the time, but then nor is working it out based on skin colour or anything else.

The biggest giveaway is often found when someone speaks.

 

[RichmondCommu]

The biggest giveaway is often found when someone speaks.

I concur. However 455driver was suggesting that it was easy to identify whether an individual was from Eastern Europe purely on looks.

 

[bramling]

Although the population may well be rising at the rate of a mid sized Urban area (Plymouth) due to net migration that doesn't mean that we need to build that many houses to accommodate them.

As in simple terms the "native" population is ageing meaning that there are more likely to be single people or couples in larger properties, as those people leave those larger properties they are more likely to be occupied by either a family or become house shares. In doing so the number of houses has remained the same but the number of people occupying each house increases.

That's not universal. In my road, in what could be described as a commuter town, the family-sized houses are tending to shift from being occupied by familes, to middle-aged childless couples. The house next door to me now has a professional couple from London, who previously lived in a one-room flat. That's two people living in a 7-bedroom house. Not the only house where this has happened.

 

[The Ham]

The phenomenon of young people driving less than previous generations is becoming more and more well known. The concept has been dubbed "peak car" and occurs in many developed countries, not just the UK. Per capita driving in the UK peaked around 10 years ago, whereas train use and public transport use in London and certain other cities has increased dramatically.

The theory is that young people are less interested in cars and acquiring driving licences as they are considered "old tech". They would rather get an iPhone than pay for driving lessons. Young people also prefer to live in urban areas where car use is less useful. A lot of young professionals now live in city centre apartments where car use is a big hassle.

It's not just that the number of miles per car has peaked but the average numbers of cars per household has flatlined and the total number of miles driven as a nation as fallen since the peak in 2008 and is slightly less than that seen in 2003.

The Dft publish traffic growth rates for where they think traffic volumes will be going forward, these have been lower than the low range given for the 1989, 1997, 2008 and 2011 figures, which each subsequent prediction setting the growth rate lower than the previous versions. That means that road traffic is lower now than it was expected to be in 2000 by the 1989 model.

Part of it is people are realising that for many people (excluding purchase costs and before driving a single mile) a car can easily cost £500 (for a very cheap to insure car, with low car tax and low maintenance costs) and for most will be closer to £1,000 (£100 tax, £200 service and MOT and £700 insurance). Add to that the purchase costs (which can easily be another £1,000 a year, or for an older cheaper car it often then pushes up the maintenance costs resulting in the same overall figure) and that is quite a few uses of a car club car, taxi journeys and train or bus tickets before fuel start to come into play.

Of course there are other "costs" with owning a car such as needing somewhere to park it at or near home (either in the form of the cost of a house with a drive, garage or some other space, alternatively needing to have a residential parking permit) and/or needing to park it at/or near work (car park charges).

 

[ScotGG]

Yes it's a factor but you'll rarely hear sensible discussion about it from any side. On the one hand you have people claiming it's not an issue, despite recent years seeing some of the highest levels in the EU according to EU stats (that's economic migrants). Of course more people has an impact. Then there's the other side who claim it's the cause of all ills. Nope, it's a contributory factor amongst others (employment and housing changes to name two big ones) and not helped by a lack of investment and expansion to cater for increases.

The numbers entering are 300k+, mainly into the south east of England, which EU stats (all on the eurostat website) show has now exceeded the Netherlands as the densest populated area in the EU (on a regional basis - not looking at small islands like Malta). This clearly has an impact, but exacerbates government failures on a range of issues dating back many years, where they have delayed schemes, not spent sufficient money and done the bare minimum with infrastructure investment. See also housing, energy etc.

 

[455driver]

Many, if not all black people consider it offensive to be called coloured, not that this appears to be a concern of yours.

Next time I see or speak to some of my non white (is that okay) friends I will ask them!

That's me out if this thread which will no doubt degenerate as these threads awaits do

 

[Geezertronic]

Blooming migrants - coming over here, using our trains

 

[The Ham]

That's not universal. In my road, in what could be described as a commuter town, the family-sized houses are tending to shift from being occupied by familes, to middle-aged childless couples. The house next door to me now has a professional couple from London, who previously lived in a one-room flat. That's two people living in a 7-bedroom house. Not the only house where this has happened.

It's not universal, but in the case you have given the cost of the one room flat in London could be comparable to the family home that they have moved into, as such the "normal" measure of getting the best out of the value of the changes.

It also depends on other factors, such as what the local schools are like and where catchments fall (if your road falls outside of a catchment for a good school families will avoid living there).

Alternatively the only people who can afford to move into such a property could be those who have two good incomes and no children. Where I live four bed properties tend to start at £500,000 whilst 3 bed properties are £300,000 to £400,000, meaning that to gain an extra bedroom is a lot of extra money to find, meaning that those with the extra expense of children would find it hard if not impossible.

 

[67018]

It's not universal, but in the case you have given the cost of the one room flat in London could be comparable to the family home that they have moved into, as such the "normal" measure of getting the best out of the value of the changes.

Exactly. Moving out of London might involve a more expensive commute, but the savings on house costs means it more than pays back. A lot of this is driven by London's relative success, which has proved difficult to spread round the country despite the strenuous efforts of governments of all colours over several decades.

In addition, better rail services make commutes possible where they couldn't be done (or were very unpleasant) before, aided by technological developments which provide the ability to work, watch a DVD or play a game on the journey.

And green belt planning policy has the perverse effect of forcing a lot of people further out. Some commentators are calling for the relaxation of such policies around London and some other cities to ease the housing pressure, something that of course is highly controversial on environmental grounds.

Then there's the fact that it takes a long time for infrastructure investment to catch up with increased usage and growing population, which have only happened in recent years. (Population growth was slowing until recently and London has only recently got back to the size it was pre-war, and the impact of assumed static or declining rail use up to the mid 90s has been debated to death on other threads)