You are reading a single comment by @NickCJ and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • I'm still not convinced by the argument that links investment in skills to migration.

    I don't know if there is evidence on this or not - it doesn't seem to me to be the same point as whether immigration can affect wages (where from my reading of the studies I'd summarise the effects as being mixed, overall probably neutral or very slightly positive, with some winners and losers within that but all quite small effects).

    But isn't part of the point that, rhetorically, govt makes the link between migration and skills / UK workforce. Starmer therefore needs to address both parts if he's talking about one - if he disagrees with anything on migration, he needs to be clear to say "but that doesn't mean I don't want workers to be trained + more invested in them". As otherwise he just gets attacked for not supporting training of UK workers

  • the government makes the link between migration and skills / UK workforce

    It does, and Starmer doesn't refute the point. He could have said something like "the gov't is wrong to blame immigrants for the failure of UK companies to invest in their staff and of government to provide opportunities for people to develop skills" but he quite deliberately didn't.

  • Migration is part of our national story - always has been, always will be. And the Labour Party will never diminish the contribution it makes to the economy, to public services, to your businesses and our communities

    This bit?

  • Yeah that's a fair point - he definitely could go further. But loads of people are making out as if it is him linking the two, rather than them already being linked (rightly or wrongly) and it then being a case of his views on each.

About

Avatar for NickCJ @NickCJ started