UK Population increase

All this is starting to make an independent Scotland a better looking prospect.
New school being built in my village at a cost of nearly £1m.
For 26 pupils.
The fabric of English schools was a disgrace 20 years ago, god knows what it is like now.

A bigger disgrace but the problem is demand outstripping supply.
 
There were 1.85 Million families on the waiting lists for social housing last year.

The National Audit Office have said there needs to be another 250,000 school places made available next year.

Please read this article from the Telegraph from 2010: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/educatio...s-crammed-into-overcrowded-state-schools.html

Are you telling there are £1.85m families living on the streets or do they have a home somewhere? I think you may find a large percentage are in private rentals paid for by state benefits, technically they are in social housing in all but name.

Your article is 3 years old, hardly relevant now and I'm glad you point to the national audit office report which not only says we need 256k spaces but it also says there is capital funding for new school places.

As I said earlier, they are trying to address it.
 
Are you telling there are £1.85m families living on the streets or do they have a home somewhere? I think you may find a large percentage are in private rentals paid for by state benefits, technically they are in social housing in all but name.

Your article is 3 years old, hardly relevant now and I'm glad you point to the national audit office report which not only says we need 256k spaces but it also says there is capital funding for new school places.

As I said earlier, they are trying to address it.

I never said these people were living on the streets, I said they are a waiting list. Some may be on the streets, i guess some are living with families, some in unsuitable rented accommodation, who knows. All I know is the situation is not getting any better and is becoming worse as the population grows at a rate that services cannot keep pace with.

The article three years old shows a situation which is worse now. Just browse the net and see the reports on overcrowded schools and unsuitable school buildings for the numbers of children. I believe the situation is easier in Scotland but look around Cities like Birmingham and London and you will find a very different and worrying picture.

http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2013/06/28/overcrowded-primary-schools-will-affect-childrens-learning/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-21798086

http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle...ass-crisis-facing-london-schools-8670959.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12198429
 
Easier maybe but not perfect by any means up here, if anything we now have less classrooms than we did 10 years ago particularly around Lanarkshire where non demoninational schools and catholic schools became joint campuses.

I guess we have addressed the where do they all live situation then, waiting lists are easily manipulated, ask the NHS ;)

The bottom line, we'll always get by regardless of the population.
 
I find this type of 'scaremongering' daft.
The people who write and talk about it nearly always live in cities and drive on motorways.
They do not have a clue about life in the country or wild places. The world is massive and I think someone once said 98% was unpopulated.
 
I find this type of 'scaremongering' daft.
The people who write and talk about it nearly always live in cities and drive on motorways.
They do not have a clue about life in the country or wild places. The world is massive and I think someone once said 98% was unpopulated.

Most people live in Cities and towns and drive on motorways. I still dont see what you are getting at, the country and wild places are like this because they are either producing food (and not enough of it for us to live) or are not suitable places for people to live. Surely you dont suggest we turn over the whole of the countryside to housing. This debate is about the UK not the world by the way.

So please explain your plan to move the masses out into the wild places?
 
Not my plan just one that has been going for over a century, New Towns and Garden cities.
As I said in an earlier post the wild places were once quite well populated until the cities came along.

Build a new hub airport at Mapplin Sands instead of a fourth runway at Heathrow would be a start.
If we have to have cities build new ones, don't make the existing ones bigger.
The 'whole' of the countryside is only sparsely populated.
 
I dont blame people for accepting benefits, why should they not accept what is on offer. My issue is with Government giving child benefits in times when the country doesn't need increases in population, there were periods in the past when the population was in decline and there were not enough people to fill jobs.

I agree - but we get into the murky and very contentious area of human rights. As in it is every woman's human right to have children (no limit?). And then it is every child's human right to have a reasonable life. And if the only way (as it seems to be) these days for a child to have a reasonable life is for the mother to get money from the state to provide for that child - then that's where we are.

I do not have a strong view on the above or on immigration (other than on the matter of non-British born domiciles of Scotland get a vote in the Scottish referendum when non-doms are excluded - but I won't there). I have MUCH more of an issue with poor governance of 'benefits' - who, how much, and for how long. Were any government to properly get to grips with that then concerns about birth rate and housing etc would diminish as there would be more taxpayers money available for housing and job creation.
 
Most Councils already have huge waiting lists for social housing and visiting a GP is now taking much longer

And for that we have - in part - Mrs Thatcher and Keith Joseph's Right to Buy scheme. It was so obvious to all at the time that forcing coucils to sell there housing stock there would be future big problems. And so many ex-council houses in my part of the world are now being sold for £250K-£300K - and the rest. Prices that today's incarnation of the original occupants can't get to within a million miles of.

And as far as GPs at weekends. My local health centre has three large GP practices and none of them are open on a Saturday or Sunday. I actually think this is completely unacceptable. Since when did illness and infirmilty have the weekend off.
 
Last edited:
13 pages and counting and so much more heat than light.

FWIW, which is not a great deal, iI think there is serious demographic problem and that is the growing imbalance between you g and old. The elderly population is growing fast and birth rate is not keeping up. So we have the balance of taxpayers (who fund the pension pot) to non-taxpayers (and pensioners) going the wrong direction. Immigration tends to reduce the rate of acceleration of this process because they tend to be you get and working. They also tend to do the jobs that locals won't do. The UK is still a reasonably spacious country with a few obvious exceptions and in my opinion many of the anti-immigration arguments are obviously false and motivated by racism or cynical political pandering.
 
13 pages and counting and so much more heat than light.

FWIW, which is not a great deal, iI think there is serious demographic problem and that is the growing imbalance between you g and old. The elderly population is growing fast and birth rate is not keeping up. So we have the balance of taxpayers (who fund the pension pot) to non-taxpayers (and pensioners) going the wrong direction. Immigration tends to reduce the rate of acceleration of this process because they tend to be you get and working. They also tend to do the jobs that locals won't do. The UK is still a reasonably spacious country with a few obvious exceptions and in my opinion many of the anti-immigration arguments are obviously false and motivated by racism or cynical political pandering.

Good post.

The bit in bold is the only thing I'm going to 'add' to the debate. There is such a high percentage of industry / houses / amenities in London that it is becoming increasingly 'full' and house prices are going through the roof.

If we were to see more big companies moving out of London (a la BBC) then houses and amenities would follow. However, I think it's probably gone too far past that happening now and those with firm roots in London aren't going to move any time soon. Plenty of towns in t'north with good transport links and room for expansion, but speaking as someone who works for a big company in London, the stubbornness of those at the top would prevent many companies from moving out.

Don't have a solution to the over crowding. Don't think the government should be able to control how many children you should (n't) have. However, do think that potentially too much is given to those who claim for multiple children who aren't putting money back into the pot through income tax etc.
 
If we were to see more big companies moving out of London (a la BBC) then houses and amenities would follow. However, I think it's probably gone too far past that happening now and those with firm roots in London aren't going to move any time soon. Plenty of towns in t'north with good transport links and room for expansion, but speaking as someone who works for a big company in London, the stubbornness of those at the top would prevent many companies from moving out.

Others here will be able to attest to the fuss that was made by London-based MoD staff in the late 1970s when it was proposed that the MoD moved to Glasgow. We even knocked down the fantasic St Enoch Station. And it didn't move. So move the MoD to Birmingham - at least then you have a rock solid rationale for HS2.
 
Others here will be able to attest to the fuss that was made by London-based MoD staff in the late 1970s when it was proposed that the MoD moved to Glasgow. We even knocked down the fantasic St Enoch Station. And it didn't move. So move the MoD to Birmingham - at least then you have a rock solid rationale for HS2.

Personally, think the government have a bit of an obligation to create some of their jobs on the HS2 route. They can't build a trainline at that sort of cost, with the amount of displeasure it has created and not aid the economy at the other end.

A train that travels a little faster between London and the north/midlands won't create jobs in itself. There needs to be something in the towns for the people to get on the train for in the first place. Furthermore, with the increased cost of living in London, the expense of traveling by train in and out of London and the generally lower salaries outside of the capital, it won't make sense for people to be doing this journey for their daily job.

Surely the 'x' billion would have been better spent improving all transport links in and around Birmingham / Leeds / Manchester etc rather than just putting in a trainline to London?
 
And for that we have - in part - Mrs Thatcher and Keith Joseph's Right to Buy scheme. It was so obvious to all at the time that forcing coucils to sell there housing stock there would be future big problems. And so many ex-council houses in my part of the world are now being sold for £250K-£300K - and the rest. Prices that today's incarnation of the original occupants can't get to within a million miles of.

And as far as GPs at weekends. My local health centre has three large GP practices and none of them are open on a Saturday or Sunday. I actually think this is completely unacceptable. Since when did illness and infirmilty have the weekend off.

I assume all of the houses that were sold off are being lived in so how did that create a housing shortage?
 
I assume all of the houses that were sold off are being lived in so how did that create a housing shortage?

Only in that they are no longer available as social housing. Councils' social housing stocks were massively depleted and not replaced. I make no other observation other than were it still about the governments 'downsizing' via the 'bedroom tax' might have not been required and even if it had - there might have been more smaller council housing for teneant to move to.
 
Personally, think the government have a bit of an obligation to create some of their jobs on the HS2 route. They can't build a trainline at that sort of cost, with the amount of displeasure it has created and not aid the economy at the other end.

A train that travels a little faster between London and the north/midlands won't create jobs in itself. There needs to be something in the towns for the people to get on the train for in the first place. Furthermore, with the increased cost of living in London, the expense of traveling by train in and out of London and the generally lower salaries outside of the capital, it won't make sense for people to be doing this journey for their daily job.

Surely the 'x' billion would have been better spent improving all transport links in and around Birmingham / Leeds / Manchester etc rather than just putting in a trainline to London?

The MoD didn't go to Glasgow for many reasons - but I expect 'it's not London' was one, and as also I expect 'distance from London, family, relatives, friends etc' was one. Now if HS2 makes the commute time from Central London to B'ham about the same as that from where I live in Surrey to Central London (just over an hour) - then we are left with 'it's not London'. And no B'ham isn't London - but neither is Bristol and MoD Procurement moved there (just over an hour from Bristol to Paddington). One significant impetus for growth and employment around the UK is for government to move more major departments out of London. Reducing continuing pressure on housing etc demand and prices in London, and stimulating growth elsewhere in the UK.
 
13 pages and counting and so much more heat than light.

FWIW, which is not a great deal, iI think there is serious demographic problem and that is the growing imbalance between you g and old. The elderly population is growing fast and birth rate is not keeping up. So we have the balance of taxpayers (who fund the pension pot) to non-taxpayers (and pensioners) going the wrong direction. Immigration tends to reduce the rate of acceleration of this process because they tend to be you get and working. They also tend to do the jobs that locals won't do. The UK is still a reasonably spacious country with a few obvious exceptions and in my opinion many of the anti-immigration arguments are obviously false and motivated by racism or cynical political pandering.

Ah! the 'Racist' card is drawn again as a blunt instrument to bludgeon anyone who who has concerns with population growth. I agree racial hatred is very wrong but wanting to reduce immigration is not racial hatred, the reductions would affect people from all countries or races (other than EU citizens who are currently immune). If I suggested we have too many people coming to the UK from eastern Europe then I woud probably not be labeled a racist. If I made the same claim for people from Pakistan, India or Africa I would be, due to their skin colour, this form of accusation is unfair as we need to reduce numbers from wherever they originate.

From my point of view we have plenty of people in this country that can fill job vacancies and be trained for the required skills, importing labour to do jobs while paying existing inhabitants to do nothing is mindless. Stop rewarding idleness, this is the best route forward for prosperity.

Regarding the demographics of age, the fears of there being too many old people in the future will probably not happen, a report today suggests that many of our young people will not reach old age due to their obesity, lack of exercise and poor diets.
 
Last edited:
I recently had an interesting conversation with a young (late 20s I'm guessing) Polish colleague of mine. She despaired and was disgusted at how some Poles that she knew were playing the system; getting housing and housing benefit; child benefit; and generally ripping us (she and I) off. The immigration card get's a little complicated when immigrants are complaining about other immigrants.
 
Ah! the 'Racist' card is drawn again as a blunt instrument to bludgeon anyone who who has concerns with population growth. I agree racial hatred is very wrong but wanting to reduce immigration is not racial hatred, the reductions would affect people from all countries or races (other than EU citizens who are currently immune). If I suggested we have too many people coming to the UK from eastern Europe then I woud probably not be labeled a racist. If I made the same claim for people from Pakistan, India or Africa I would be, due to their skin colour, this form of accusation is unfair as we need to reduce numbers from wherever they originate.

From my point of view we have plenty of people in this country that can fill job vacancies and be trained for the required skills, importing labour to do jobs while paying existing inhabitants to do nothing is mindless. Stop rewarding idleness, this is the best route forward for prosperity.

Regarding the demographics of age, the fears of there being too many old people in the future will probably not happen, a report today suggests that many of our young people will not reach old age due to their obesity, lack of exercise and poor diets.


Sorry, the demographics have already moved massively with a great number more elderly people sure to be around in generations to come. Obesity and lack of exercise will have a minor effect on that. The stable door is flapping in the breeze on that one.

As for having plenty of indigenous workers available, perhaps. But they won't do the low grade badly paid work needed to provide food, power and water. This is a universal story for immigrant populations in many countries and a common rite of passage of sorts for new immigrant groups.

You may moan at the accusations of racism, but sadly blind xenophobia is often at the root of this, with some elements of ignorance fed by the hate rags. Why do you think UKIP are so big on this issue?
 
Top