Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Andrew Sparrow

Liz Kendall says Labour should champion wealth creation - Politics live

Liz Kendall
Liz Kendall Photograph: Paul Hackett/Reuters

Liz Kendall at the press gallery - Verdict

Liz Kendall will be pleased with her press gallery outing this afternoon. Most journalists here probably aren’t Labour party members, and won’t be voting in the leadership contest, but over the next four months they will be writing many of the stories that shape how the candidates are viewed, and therefore it’s best to leave a good impression. Kendall certainly achieved that. Here’s the Evening Standard’s political editor, Joe Murphy.

Personally, I think Murphy’s over-stating it. I spoke to quite a few colleagues after the event, and while some thought she came over very well - here are some who went public ....

... others were more in the “unconvinced” camp. I was struck by how Kendall’s opening speech certainly came over better when I was reading it on paper afterwards than it did when she was delivering it. At times Kendall sounded a bit woolly - is really giving hope for the future the answer to the challenge posed by Ukip? (see 2.08pm) - and she probably isn’t quite as willing to adopt “difficult” positions as she suggested. (If she was, she would have answered the Tony Blair question - see below.) But she has probably been braver than her two principle rivals, Andy Burnham and Yvette Cooper, in rejecting parts of the Ed Miliband agenda. We saw that in her Andrew Neil interview on the Sunday after the election, and we saw that again today.

Kendall has also received the Lord Ashcroft endorsement. (Ashcroft wasn’t there, but he tweeted after the event was over. Perhaps he was reading my blog?) Ashcroft’s “Smell the Coffee” analysis of why the Conservatives lost in 2005 is essential reading for anyone interested in how unpopular parties get back into power, but he’s a Tory and no doubt he is being mischievous too.

The main news lines were in Kendall’s opening speech (see 3.15pm), but there were some interesting lines in the Q&A. Here they are.

  • Kendall said Labour had “no God-given right ... to exist” and that things could get even worse for the party. Boundary changes, Ukip and the Lib Dems could all pose further challenges for the party, she said. (See 2.08pm.)
  • She said people did not believe Labour would deliver its proposed energy price freeze.
  • She at one point expressed sympathy for the idea that there should be a “break clause” allowing the new leader to be replaced in 2018 if he or she is deemed to be under-performing, but, when pressed on this, she backed away from the proposal.
  • She refused to say whether or not she would welcome an endorsement from Tony Blair. Asked if she liked being described as a Blairite, she said that label belonged to the past.
  • She refused to say whether she would share a pro-EU platform with David Cameron in the EU campaign.
  • She indicated she was not in favour of making the Scottish Labour party independent. Internal reorganisation was not the solution to the party’s problems, she said.

That’s all from me for today.

Thanks for the comments.

Updated

Liz Kendall's press gallery speech - Summary

Liz Kendall’s campaign team have sent out a text of her opening remarks. She departed from the script slightly, but I’ll use the quotes anyway.

Here are the key points from the speech. I will post the key points from the Q&A separately.

  • Kendall said that she wanted Labour to champion wealth creation.

I want to lead a Labour party that’s genuinely as passionate about wealth creation as we are about wealth distribution.

I want Labour not just to ‘understand’ business but be the champion of people who take a risk, create something, build it up and make a success of it ...

I want a good society – with great schools, decent homes and safe streets - but every pound that pays for these comes from having a dynamic, successful economy.

Saying this should not be news. The fact that it might be says something about where we’ve been for the last few years.

But it’s not enough just to say it. We have to really mean it.

  • She said Labour should commit to spending 2% of GDP on defence.

Under this government we’ve seen a quiet diminishing of Britain’s role in the world, which we did too little to challenge because we’ve been paralysed by the past.

Under my leadership, Labour will no longer stand by while the Prime Minister weakens our country and allows the world to become less secure.

That means insisting that the UK maintains our basic NATO commitment to continue spending two percent on defence.

As leader of the Opposition I will hold David Cameron to account for Britain’s promise to our allies and I’ll oppose him if he breaks it.

  • She said she was a strong believer in public sector reform.

When it comes to the public services I am firmly on the side of the public. The clue is in the name. Services should revolve around the people who use them - not the other way round – and be fit for the future, not stuck in the past.

There’s no point in saying you believe in economic credibility, and being careful with taxpayers money, if the public services that money pays for are a reform free zone.

  • She said she supported free schools.

As leader, I’m not going to waste time obsessing about school structures. If a school is providing a great education – whether it’s a local authority, academy or free school – we will back it. Full stop.

What’s more, if someone wants to help run their school, they deserve credit not criticism.

(To me that sounded like a dig at Tristram Hunt’s “yummy mummies” comment from five years ago, but, given that he endorsed her yesterday, that was probably unintentional.)

  • She said that, for her, early years education would be a priority, not cutting tuition fees. That was because so many poor children start school well behind their peers in developmental terms.
  • She said she favoured radical devolution in England.

In the face of our wipeout in Scotland, and the growing sense of grievance in England, any simple or quick answers would be glib.

However, a radical devolution of powers within England must be a crucial part of our response. We need a new settlement for four countries in ONE union. That’s a huge task, which I’ve asked Tristram Hunt to lead on

But let me make one thing clear.

I don’t believe that becoming ever more nationalist is the solution to the challenges we face.

  • She said it was “simple” to explain why Labour lost.

The reasons why we lost aren’t complicated. They’re simple.

We decided that the British public had shifted to the left because we wished it to be so.

We rarely said what was good about our last government, and never dealt with the central economic case of our opponents about where we really fell short.

And we didn’t have answers to the big questions people were really asking about THEIR future and that of our country – on jobs, immigration or the public finances.

Lots of people told me during the election they couldn’t see Ed as Prime Minister. But we didn’t lose because of Ed’s personality. We lost because of our politics.

  • She said Labour won when it inspired the whole electorate, “not when we try and cobble together 5 or 10 percent of votes from this or that party in an attempt to haul ourselves over the line.”
  • She said the Labour leadership contest should not be decided by union leaders.

I’m proud to be a member of a trade union. I passionately want a strong, modern trade union movement that can advance the interests of working people across the country.

But this election can’t be about who the general secretaries say impresses them most. Or who makes the Labour party feel comfortable. Or who’s the best known candidate in 2015.

Q: People will be sceptical about your call for defence spending to stay at 2% of GDP when you won’t say what cuts you would make.

Kendall says Labour has to hold the government to account, to ensure it keeps the promises it has given to its allies.

And that’s it.

I’ll post a summary soon.

Q: Would you share a platform with David Cameron to campaign for membership of the EU?

Kendall says she wants Labour to make a strong, committed, early case for EU membership.

She ducks the bit about sharing a platform with Cameron.

Q: What would be your ideal balance between tax rises and spending cuts for cutting the deficit?

Kendall says she made it clear early on that clearing the deficit is a priority. There is nothing progressive about wracking up debts for the next generation, she says.

Q: When did you start to think about running for leadership?

Kendall says she started to worry as the election got close about how the party was doing.

Updated

Q: Will you definitely offer you rivals a shadow cabinet post?

Kendall says she is not going to get into the business of offering people jobs.

But she is a “team player”, she says.

Q: Should the union leaders keep out of the leadership election?

Kendall says they are entitled to their views. But Labour needs to win over people who did not vote Labour and who voted Conservative.

Q: Would you back changes to the party rules to allow a leader to undergo re-election after three years or so?

Kendall says the Labour party should have confidence in its new leader.

Q: What do you think of the idea of having Alan Johnson as interim leader in place for more than four months?

Kendall says we have an interim leader, Harriet Harman. She will do a good job attacking the Tories. She says she backs the timetable for the leadership election.

Q: You are going to be labelled. What label would you choose?

Kendall says she is a modernising candidate who is true to Labour’s values.

Q: You said in your opening speech that we should stick to the 2% of GDP defence target. How would you pay for that?

Kendall says we are meeting this at the moment. The government has not said how it would stick to that target.

Q: Do you think the new leader should have to be confirmed again after three years or so?

Kendall says that is an interesting idea. MPs have to be reconfirmed by the Labour party. Leaders should have to show they are up to the job.

Q: What should Labour do about Ukip?

Kendall says Ukip got almost one in five votes in her constituency.

Labour has suffered a catastrophic defeat. But it could get worse. There are boundary changes to come, Ukip are in second place in many seats, and the Lib Dems can only go up.

Labour has no God-given right to exist, she says.

It has to persuade people it would make life better.

Q: So what should it do about Ukip?

Kendall says Labour has to give people hope for the future.

Q: Is it helpful being described as the Blairite candidate? Would you want Tony Blair to back you publicly?

Kendall says these labels belong to the past. She sidesteps the question about a Blair endorsement, but says he has a role to play.

Kendall says the problem the Labour’s proposed energy price freeze was that people did not believe it.

Q: Why did you not say this before the election?

Kendall says she has always argued for public sector reform. But she was loyal to Ed Miliband as leader.

Q: Did you expect Labour to lose?

She says she thought the Tories would be the biggest party.

Q: My mum is being cared for by low-paid women who all voted Conservative. They did not know much about politics. And they supported rightwing ideas. How would you address this?

Kendall says too many people who do work do not think Labour believes in hard work.

When she became an MP, she did a shift with a care worker, she says. She was amazed how the woman held it together. No wonder people like that are fed up with people who do not make a contribution.

Politicians should talk about things that relate to people’s lives.

What people want to somewhere to live, something to do, something to look forward to, and someone to love.

(That’s a line from a Jon Cruddas speech.)

But politicians can’t do something about the someone to love.

And she is not the person to advise on this, she says, referring to her relationship break-up.

UPDATE: I was thinking of this Cruddas speech, on love and work, although I can’t find the precise quote, and so perhaps it was said by someone else, or by Cruddas on another occasion.

Updated

Q: Do you agree with Frank Field about breaking the link with the unions?

Kendall says she is strongly in favour of the link with the unions. Labour emerged from its links with working people. The party should use the leadership contest to reach out to union members who did not vote Labour.

Q: What would you be saying about immigration today?

Kendall says she believes in rules. People coming her illegally and breaking the rules is wrong.

Too many people are being left behind, she says.

Q: In 2020 you might be up against Boris Johnson or George Osborne? How would you respond to people who say that, against experienced people like that, you are too inexperienced. You have not even had a big shadow cabinet job?

Kendall says the important thing is who understands how the world is changing. People want hope. They do not believe politicians. And they don’t want the opposition just to criticise the government or to moan.

Kendall's Q&A

Kendall is now taking questions.

Q: Do you agree with Andy Burnham that Labour should make the Scottish party independent?

Kendall says an internal reorganisation is not necessarily the solution.

Kendall says Labour has done too little to challenge the diminution of Britain’s role in the world. It was paralysed by its past, she says.

Britain should take its international responsibilities seriously, she says.

Kendall says Labour also has to address the challenge of nationalism. She says she has asked Tristram Hunt to lead on his for her campaign.

But she says she is certain that Britain is better off united.

Liz Kendall's opening speech

Liz Kendall opens with a joke. Labour lost many figures on 7 May. But many people think it lost its Balls long before then, she says.

She makes a joke about a spoof website being set up in her name, and jokes about the Labour leadership contest being “sabotaged” by Len McCluskey.

She says says Labour must appeal to everyone. It cannot just win by adopting a 35% strategy.

She says she wants to change the party’s approach to business completely. Paying for services requires a dynamic economy. Saying that should not be news. The fact that this counts as news says something about the state of the party.

Achieving this starts with ensuring that every child has a great education.

She says, as leader, she would not obsesses about schools structures. If a school is successful, Labour should back it.

And she will not criticise parents who want to get involved in running schools.

Early years education would be her priority, she says. It is a scandal that poor children start school so far behind many of their peers.

Rob Hutton, the Bloomberg political editor, is introducing Liz Kendall. He says after the election many journalists were impressed by her interview with Andrew Neil on the Sunday Politics.

Updated

Liz Kendall at the press gallery hustings

Liz Kendall, the Labour leadership contender, is about to hold a Q&A session with journalists over a snack lunch at the press gallery in the Commons. I’ve described it as a hustings because other candidates are also being invited to appear at a later date.

Kendall, the shadow care minister, is one of three candidates likely to make it to the final ballot. The others are Andy Burnham, the current favourite, and Yvette Cooper.

My colleagues Patrick Wintour and Nicholas Watt interviewed her last week and their article is well worth a read.

Lunchtime summary

  • Wolfgang Schauble, the German finance minister, has said Germany has a “huge interest” in Britain remaining part of the EU. As the Press Association reports, Schauble has invited chancellor George Osborne to Berlin to discuss the UK government’s plans for changes ahead of an in/out referendum on membership of the EU promised by the end of 2017. Schauble suggested British demands for reform could be considered along with changes to the way the eurozone single currency area is governed, and although he acknowledged the prospect of treaty change by Cameron’s deadline was unlikely, he indicated there could be agreements to take that step at a later date. Schauble told the Wall Street Journal:

We have talked about [Osborne] coming to Berlin so that we can think together about how we can combine the British position with the urgent need for a strengthened governance of the eurozone. Since 2010, we’ve been more successful at stabilising the eurozone than many critics expected. But the structure of this currency union will stay fragile as long as its governance isn’t substantially reinforced. Maybe there is a chance to combine both goals ...

There is a big margin of manoeuvre. We have a huge interest in the UK remaining a strong and engaged member of the European Union.

Migration Watch UK has described today’s migration figures as “appalling”. This is from its chairman, Lord Green.

The latest figures are appalling. We need to stop and think where this mass immigration is leading. It points to a probable increase of three million in the UK population over the next five years in the face of very strong public opinion. Any further cuts in resources for immigration control would be absurd.

You can read all today’s Guardian politics stories here.

As for the rest of the papers, here is the PoliticsHome list of top 10 must-reads, and here is the ConservativeHome round-up of today’s political stories.

And here are three articles I found particularly interesting.

The prime minister wants to force the EU to acknowledge that the euro is not Europe’s “single currency” — and to write the change into the bloc’s treaties.

A confidential British negotiating document seen by The Times spells out one of the prime minister’s pivotal demands as he tries to reshape the UK’s relationship with the EU.

The change would on one level be symbolic, in that Britain has no intention of joining the euro in the foreseeable future. It would also allow Mr Cameron to show that Britain was not bound by the EU’s treaty pledges of “ever closer union”, one of the Tories’ manifesto pledges.

Without such a change to put before voters in the in/out referendum promised by Mr Cameron as early as next year, “the UK will end up outside the EU”, according to diplomatic sources.

Few of the tax cuts pledged by Mr Cameron will do much to broaden the Conservative coalition. The promised inheritance tax cut will “disproportionately [benefit] those towards the top of the income distribution”, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies ...

There’s also a big difference between certain benefit- cutting options. Limiting child benefit to families with two children or taxing disability benefit is at least morally defensible. Further cuts to the in-work credits paid to poor workers while giving inflation-beating increases to wealthy pensioners stinks.

I don’t for a moment agree with [Tim] Farron that this government deserves to be described as “wicked” ...

But, but, but . . . I’ll put this simply: the middle classes shouldn’t be getting tax cuts while those in tough, poorly paid jobs, who are already running out of money at the start of the month, are getting their benefits cut. That’s not one-nation conservatism; it’s two-nations conservatism.

Here’s a Guardian video with an extract from David Cameron’s speech.

And here is some more reaction to the migration figures, and David Cameron’s plans, from thinktanks and pressure groups

From Sunder Katwala, director of the British Future thinktank

The measures announced today may offer some reassurance to those who are worried about people working here illegally. But they are basically a distraction. Most of the people counted in today’s figures are working here legally or paying to study at our universities.

If the PM has a realistic plan to reduce net migration he should make that clear. Until then, a more sensible approach would admit that immigration is high because more people are here to work, and use the gains in tax revenue to help deal with the impact.

From Marley Morris, a research fellow at the IPPR thinktank

The mirage of chasing a net migration target will not work in this parliament, just as it did not work in the last. The UK is now in a steady state of net migration, which can be expected to continue for the foreseeable future. Cracking down on illegal immigration will have no impact on EU migration.

The way forward for the government is to move away from a fixation on overall numbers and instead place real emphasis on supporting communities affected by high levels of inward migration.

From Ryan Shorthouse, director of Bright Blue, a liberal conservative thinktank

The Conservative government needs to move the debate on beyond their net migration ambition - which is proving arbitrary, unreliable and undeliverable. Instead, it needs to develop a strong record of competence on managing our immigration system. An important part of this is the creation of deliverable targets - such as an alternative target on non-EU gross migration - as well as asking new migrants to contribute a new class of national insurance to help fund public services and the establishment of the controlling migration fund, where local areas experiencing high levels of migration are given extra resources.


Lib Dems says Cameron's immigration target is 'a stupid idea'

The Lib Dems have also criticised the government’s plans. This is from the Lib Dem peer Lord Paddick.

The Tories promised to cut net migration to tens of thousands but failed spectacularly. Instead of admitting their target was a stupid idea, they have pushed the ‘let’s sound tough on immigration’ button yet again.

Theresa May needs to get it into her head – not all immigration is bad. If she was serious about cracking down on illegal immigration she should concentrate on what works and not tar all immigrants with the same brush.

Natalie Bennett, the Green party leader, has condemned the government’s immigration policies as “morally reprehensible and politically inept”. She went on:

This government has spectacularly missed its migration targets not because of the minority of migrants who stay beyond their visas, but because those targets are arbitrary and illogical; this new legislation is a transparent attempt to shift the focus away from this failure. A promised ‘crackdown’ on illegal migrants risks forcing them into destitution but does nothing to address the real economic issues facing Britain.

IoD says Cameron's immigration target is 'neither achievable nor desirable'

The Institute for Directors has strongly criticised David Cameron for reaffirming his commitment to get net migration down below 100,000. This is from Simon Walker, its director general.

The government must address public concerns over immigration with real solutions, but they must be equally clear about what the issues actually are. IoD members do not employ immigrants because they are cheaper, with fewer than 4 per cent saying cost has anything to do with it. Indeed, our members overwhelmingly pay even their most junior staff above the Living Wage. When they do employ people from outside the UK it is because they need the skills or value the different experience.

The IoD will never support the small number of rogue companies who employ illegal workers, or set out to exploit migrants by paying less than the minimum wage. This is criminal behaviour which is shunned by all responsible businesses.

But the government’s approach of wedding themselves to a net migration target is very hard to understand. Policy makers have no control over how many UK citizens leave each year, and if the economy were faring worse and more people were emigrating, the net figure would be lower. By setting a target that is neither achievable not desirable, they have only undermined faith in the whole system.

Walker’s line about the migration target “undermining faith in the whole system” is almost word-for-word the same as Yvette Cooper’s. (See 9.53am.)

Here’s Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, responding to David Cameron’s speech and the net migration figures. It’s a beefed-up version of what she said earlier on Twitter. (See 9.53am.)

David Cameron is taking people for fools. On the day he has promised yet again to cut net migration to the tens of thousands, these figures show it is over three times that target. Both EU and non-EU net migration are considerably higher than in June 2010, after five years of David Cameron and Theresa May’s broken promises. This massive gap between rhetoric and reality, between promise and delivery, just destroys trust in anything Ministers say on immigration.

While the Government have attempted to copy some of Labour’s plans on tackling exploitation or illegal immigration, no one will believe their plans for enforcement. They are still ignoring the problem of employers exploiting legal migration to undercut local wages and jobs - we need a new offence of exploitation to make the system fair for all.

Promises consistently broken by the prime minister and the Conservative Party simply erode public trust, and make it easier for UKIP and others to exploit people’s concerns. Immigration is important for Britain, that’s why it needs to be controlled and managed so the system is fair. Rather than empty promises, David Cameron should be taking sensible, practical steps to make sure the system is controlled, managed and fair.

Yvette Cooper
Yvette Cooper Photograph: Ken McKay/ITV/REX Shutterstock/Ken McKay/ITV/REX Shutterstock

Cameron concludes by thanking Home Office staff in the audience for their work, but telling them that the cuts due to take place will be “difficult”.

Cameron claims Lib Dems stopped the last government controlling immigration

Cameron says in the last government he and Theresa May were keen on controlling immigration. But when they got to the department of business (headed by Vince Cable, a Liberal Democrat), they got a different response.

  • Cameron claims Lib Dems stopped the last government controlling immigration.

Q: What proof do you have that cutting migrants’ access to benefits will stop people coming? People are coming here to work, not to claim. You are operating on a wing and prayer.

Cameron says he does not accept that. Some 86,000 people are coming to the UK from the EU to look for a job, he says.

He says he decided to make cutting access to benefits for EU migrants a priority for his EU renegotiation because this is such an important issue for people in the UK.

He says the combined effect of the tax and benefit system can be worth up to £10,000 to an EU migrant in work. If you don’t think that makes a different, “I don’t know what planet you are on.”

Cameron says today’s net migration figures are 'disappointing'

Q: Won’t net migration continue to rise while the economy grows?

Cameron says you could just give up and forget about it, but that is not his approach.

He is taking action, right across the board. If you take all the steps he is proposing, you will get immigration under control.

We need a plan right across government to tackle this, he says. It is not just about border controls.

He says it is “disappointing” that the government has not made more progress. But he says he takes today’s figures as a clear instruction to deliver.

  • Cameron says today’s net migration figures are “disappointing”.

Updated

Cameron is now taking questions.

Q: Shouldn’t you abandon your target of getting net migration below 100,000 because you have missed it so badly?

No, says Cameron. The right thing to do is to get migration down.

People want a country open to talent, but with controls on numbers.

Cameron calls for cut in number of skilled workers from outside EU coming to UK

Cameron says, as the training of British workers improves, Britain should be able to reduce the number of skilled workers from outside the EU.

He says the government will ask the migration advisory committee to advise on substantially lowering the target for skilled workers from outside the EU.

People should only be allowed in if there are genuine skill shortages in an area, or if they work in a particularly unusual field, he says.

Some workers are admitted because the same fields come up as having skills shortages year after year. That should stop, he says. British workers should be trained to fill the gap.

  • Cameron says government plans to cut number of skilled workers from outside the EU allowed into the UK.

Cameron says he will chair an immigration task force

Cameron says he will chair an immigration task force.

Updated

David Cameron's speech

David Cameron is giving his speech now.

He says that he witnessed an immigration raid this morning.

How Cameron's plans fit with his manifesto promises - analysis

Theresa May and David Cameron.
Theresa May and David Cameron.

Politics can be confusing.

Parties are supposed to present their ideas in a manifesto, and then implement them if they form a government.

But today David Cameron is giving a speech, only two weeks after the election, with a headline pledge - to create a new offence of illegal working - that was not even mentioned in the manifesto. You can argue that it was half-mentioned (see below), but it was never explicitly promised.

What is even more odd is that, of the seven new ideas unveiled overnight by Number 10 (see 9.32am) two were included in a manifesto - but the Labour one, not the Conservative one.

Here is a short analysis. By my count, of the seven proposals, two were in the Conservative manifesto and two were semi-included. Another two proposals were in Labour’s manifesto. And one has come out nowhere

Cameron’s policies from the Conservative manifesto

  • Extending the successful deport, first appeal later measures to all immigration appeals and judicial reviews to stop people frustrating the system

This was in the Conservative manifesto.

  • Satellite tracking tags for foreign criminals awaiting deportation so we always know exactly where they are

This was in the Conservative manifesto.

  • Creating a new offence of illegal working to close the loophole which means people who are here illegally can’t benefit from working and police can seize wages as proceeds of crime

This was not explicitly in the Conservative manifesto, but it did talk about introducing “tougher labour market regulation to tackle illegal working and exploitation”.

  • New powers for councils to crackdown on unscrupulous landlords and evict illegal workers/migrants more quickly

The Conservative manifesto did not explicitly say this, but it did refer to imposing tougher requirements on landlords to check the immigration status of their tenants.

Cameron’s policies from the Labour manifesto

  • Making it an offence for businesses and recruitment agencies to recruit abroad without advertising in the UK

This was not in the Conservative manifesto, but it was in the Labour manifesto.

  • Creating a new labour market enforcement agency to crack down on the worst cases of labour market exploitation

This was not in the Conservative manifesto. The Labour manifesto did not promise a new agency, but it did say the party would “introduce a new law to stop employers undercutting wages by exploiting workers”.

Cameron’s policy in neither manifesto

  • Making all banks check bank accounts against databases of people here illegally

Updated

David Cameron is about to deliver his speech, at the Home Office.

Here is a live feed.

Ukip says government has 'failed catastrophically' to control migration

Here’s Steven Woolfe, Ukip’s immigration spokesman, on today’s immigration figures.

Today’s government announcement on illegal migration is a smoke screen to mask today’s appalling immigration statistics. In almost every area, net migration, overall UK immigration, EU immigration, non-EU immigration, sham marriages, bogus students, overstayers; the government has failed catastrophically.

It has never been clearer that the UK borders are open to all whenever, wherever and however they want to come. The government has lost all control. The ONS report that 285,000 people came to work in the UK work last year. That is a city the size of Nottingham, which has nearly a 100 schools, 60 GP surgeries and several hospitals. Britain needs to provide the equivalent just to keep up with the workers arriving and this illustrates clearly the strain mass migration is putting on our public services.

Government must act now in three areas. It must stop the free movement of people onto the UK from the EU. Second, it must improve the control systems and review the conditions for visa issuance for immigrants from non-EU countries. Third, it must increase the numbers of border control staff to ensure that we crack down on illegal immigrants entering the UK and can deport those who are caught once here.

This morning’s rushed, uncosted, ill-thought through government proposals for tackling illegal immigrants and ‘overstayers’ are to be welcomed for recognising a problem that UKIP has highlighted for several years. The government has failed in managing our borders. The impracticalities of trying to resolve an illegal immigration problem that they cannot measure will lead to failure here too.

Steven Woolfe
Steven Woolfe Photograph: Chris Radburn/PA

Here’s Madeleine Sumption, director of the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford, on today’s migration figures.

Today’s figures show how difficult it would be to reduce net migration to the ‘tens of thousands’.

Net migration has risen even despite new restrictions on family, work and student visas that were introduced during the last parliament.

Here is some Twitter comment on the migration figures.

From the New Statesman’s George Eaton

From the Financial Times’s John McDermott

From Jonathan Portes, head of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research

From Rob Ford, the academic and immigration specialist

From the economics blogger Flip Chart Rick

Updated

The Telegraph’s Ben Riley-Smith has thrown some other city comparators into the mix.

Journalists are competing to find cities with a population roughly as high as 318,000 - the net migration figure for 2014.

Yvette Cooper says government promises are undermining public trust in migration system

Here is some political reaction.

From the Ukip MP Douglas Carswell

From the Ukip MEP Patrick O’Flynn

From Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary

Cooper posted this before the figures came out at 9.30am, but the point still applies.

Here is some snap comment on the figures.

From the Guardian’s Alan Travis

From the BBC’s Dominic Casciani

ONS migration figures - Details

  • Here are more of the figures from the Office for National Statistics summary. They are from the ONS summary.

  • And here is the statistical bulletin with the full details (pdf).

  • * Net long-term migration to the UK (immigration less emigration) was estimated to be 318,000 in the calendar year 2014. This was just below the previous peak (320,000 in the year ending (YE) June 2005) and a statistically significant increase from 209,000 in 2013.

  • * 641,000 people immigrated to the UK in 2014, a statistically significant increase from 526,000 in 2013. There were statistically significant increases for immigration of EU (non-British) citizens (up 67,000 to 268,000) and non-EU citizens (up 42,000 to 290,000). Immigration of British citizens increased by 7,000 to 83,000, but this was not statistically significant.

  • * An estimated 323,000 people emigrated from the UK in 2014. Overall emigration levels have been relatively stable since 2010.

  • * 284,000 people immigrated for work in 2014, a statistically significant increase of 70,000 compared with 2013, continuing the rise since the middle of 2012. There were statistically significant increases compared with the previous year for both EU (non-British) non-EU citizens, whereas the increase for British citizens was not statistically significant.

  • * Latest employment statistics show estimated employment of EU nationals (excluding British) living in the UK was 283,000 higher in January to March 2015 compared with a year earlier and non-EU nationals in employment increased by 11,000. Over the same period, British nationals in employment also increased (by 279,000).

  • * 46,000 Romanian and Bulgarian (EU2) citizens immigrated to the UK in 2014, a statistically significant increase from 23,000 in the previous 12 months. Of these, 35,000 were coming for work, a statistically significant increase of 19,000 compared with 2013. The latest estimates reflect the first full year since EU2 working restrictions ended on 1 January 2014.

    • Net migration rose to 318,000 in 2014

    The migration figures are out.

    You’ll remember, of course, that David Cameron promised before the 2010 election to get it below 100,000.

    Cameron's immigration plans - Details

    Here are more details of David Cameron’s plans. According to the briefing note from Number 10, the immigration bill will include these seven proposals.

    • New powers for councils to crackdown on unscrupulous landlords and evict illegal workers/migrants more quickly;
    • Making all banks check bank accounts against databases of people here illegally;
    • Extending the successful deport, first appeal later measures to all immigration appeals and judicial reviews to stop people frustrating the system;
    • Satellite tracking tags for foreign criminals awaiting deportation so we always know exactly where they are;
    • Creating a new offence of illegal working to close the loophole which means people who are here illegally can’t benefit from working and police can seize wages as proceeds of crime;
    • Making it an offence for businesses and recruitment agencies to recruit abroad without advertising in the UK;
    • Creating a new labour market enforcement agency to crack down on the worst cases of labour market exploitation.

    And here is more from Number 10 about the plan to make illegal working an offence.

    The new criminal offence of illegal working will apply to migrants who have entered the country illegally and also those who came to the country legally but are in breach of their conditions or have overstayed. It will deprive illegal migrants of their wages which will make it harder for them to stay in the UK.

    At the moment, migrants with current leave to remain who are working illegally in breach of their conditions may be prosecuted under section 24 of the Immigration Act 1971 and be liable on summary conviction to a 6 months’ custodial sentence and/or an unlimited fine.

    This leaves a gap in relation to migrants who entered illegally or have overstayed their leave, and are not therefore subject to current conditions of stay. This new offence will address this gap and will also close a loophole whereby the wages of some illegal migrants fall outside of the scope of the confiscation provisions in the Proceeds of Crime Act, unlike those individuals who are working in breach of leave conditions. It will also mean that people who are here illegally can’t benefit from working and police can seize wages as proceeds of crime.

    Here’s a statement from David Hanson, the shadow immigration minister, on the Cameron plans.

    A lot of this will look very familiar to anyone who read Labour’s manifesto.

    After five years of opposing action to tackle exploitation, which can affect wages and act as a driver for low-skilled labour, the prime minister is now offering policies he said were unnecessary, such as banning agencies from only recruiting from abroad.

    We will of course examine the detail of the bill, but it’s clear the measures outlined here will not be sufficient to tackle exploitation. There needs to be a clear offence of exploitation that undercuts local jobs and wages, which the police and other experts have called for.

    And while action to tackle illegal working is welcome, the Conservatives are still not offering a plan that strengthens border enforcement and boosts staffing.

    Next week’s Queen’s Speech will include what Downing Street is describing as a “far-reaching” immigration bill. David Cameron is giving a speech about it this morning, but much of what he is going to say has been briefed overnight. Here is Patrick Wintour’s preview story, and here is how it starts.

    David Cameron will try to brush off embarrassing net migration figures on Thursday by announcing details of a new immigration bill to be included in the Queen’s speech, which will propose a new criminal offence of illegal working that will allow police to seize the wages of anyone employed unlawfully.

    It has been estimated that the backlog of people in Britain who have overstayed their visas and whose whereabouts are unknown is around 300,000, but it is not known how many are working. Cameron managed to survive the general election even though he once urged voters to kick him out if he failed to bring net migration down to the tens of thousands.

    The last official quarterly net migration figures showed net migration was 298,000 last year, 54,000 higher than when he made the pledge in 2010.

    Cameron promised in the Tory manifesto to keep the pledge, although he has also said he would be adding new metrics to test whether migration was being reduced.

    On the Today programme this morning Saira Grant, legal and policy director of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI), said that one proposal, extending the cases in which people are deported before appeal, would be “extremely detrimental”.

    Access to justice is virtually impossible. How do you communicate with your lawyer? How do you gather evidence for your appeal? How do you represent yourself at your appeal?

    Other measures would “make very little difference”, because they reinforced powers that already existed. But Theresa May, the home secretary, said the plan to criminalise illegal working would make a real difference.

    It makes a very real practical difference, if I may say so, in terms of acting as a deterrent for people who are trying to be here illegally. This isn’t about revenue raising. It is about making it harder for people to be here illegally and it is about setting a very clear deterrent for people who want to stay here illegally.

    I will be covering the speech in detail when Cameron delivers it, as well as the net migration figures coming out earlier, which the speech seems intended to overshadow.

    Here is the agenda for the day.

    9.30am: Net migration figures are released.

    11am: David Cameron delivers his immigration speech.

    Around 1.30pm: Liz Kendall, the Labour leadership contender, speaks at a press gallery hustings.

    As usual I will be covering the breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I will post a summary at lunchtime and another in the afternoon.

    If you want to follow me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow

    Sign up to read this article
    Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
    Already a member? Sign in here
    Related Stories
    Top stories on inkl right now
    One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
    Already a member? Sign in here
    Our Picks
    How Selena Gomez Showed Love To Hubby Benny Blanco After Fans Called Out His Dirty Feet Pic
    What an odd viral moment...
    Cinemablend
    Cinemablend
    Is Pedro Pascal Gay? The Last of Us Actor Allegedly In Relationship with Rafael Ollara
    Pedro Pascal and Rafael Olarra were seen in affectionate moments in Los Angeles, sparking speculation about their relationship status.
    International Business Times UK
    International Business Times UK
    If That Spider-Man Tombstone Rumor Is True, Then I Know Where He Should Appear After Brand New Day
    This would be a logical fit.
    Cinemablend
    Cinemablend
    Did Hilary Duff Really Crash The Freaky Friday Premiere Amid Feud With Lindsay Lohan? She Explains
    Here's what happened...
    Cinemablend
    Cinemablend
    Cardi B Accused Of Throwing Phone And Punching A Screen During SNL Rehearsals Over Nicki Minaj Joke
    Things reportedly got tense...
    Cinemablend
    Cinemablend
    How social media draws vulnerable users back to eating disorder content – new research
    People recovering from eating disorders often use social media for support, seeking out recovery content, body-positive creators and others with similar experiences.
    The Conversation
    The Conversation
    Fourteen days free
    Download the app
    One app. One membership.
    100+ trusted global sources.
    Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play