EU - Immigration
England to be most crowded in Europe By Christopher Hope, Home Affairs Editor Last Updated: 1:42AM BST 06/05/2008 The population of England will increase by a third over the next 50 years as it becomes the most crowded major nation in Europe, official forecasts suggest. The population density in England is almost double the level in Germany England's population is now 50 million, but by 2056 it will be 68 million – or 1,349 for every square mile. At present there are 1,010 per square mile. In London, the population density will jump from 12,377 people per square mile to 13,910 over 20 years. The Conservatives, who obtained the figures from the Office for National Statistics, called for tariffs on migration. Damian Green, the shadow immigration minister, said: "This demonstrates the real pressure public services are being put under as a result of Labour's immigration policy." The population density in England is already almost double the level in Germany and quadruple that in France. About 1.3 million immigrants have arrived in the past decade. Yet the benefits to indigenous Britons have been questioned, most recently by a cross-party group of peers. London aside, the biggest rises will be in the East and South West of England, up 16 per cent by 2029, while the population of the North East is expected to remain static. Scotland's population will remain the same at 171 per square mile; Wales will have 15 per cent more residents by 2056 and Northern Ireland will have 19 per cent more. Related Content Is England over-crowded? Eco-towns will ruin our heritage, warns actor England to be most overcrowded EU nation A nation of newcomers Seeking an asylum policy Looking for information on immigration The Weekly Telegraph letters http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1930010/England-to-be-most-crowded-in-Europe.html

I haven't tracked down the "official forcasts" the piece refers to, but I simply do not believe that this is correct. Firstly, of course, the only reason that that will happen is if it continues to be worth coming. If the sort of widespread collapse of infrastructure that anti-immigration campaigners go on about occurs then there's no chance of getting this sort of increase. Therefore, this forecast is inconsistent with the anti-immigration doomslayers' prophecies so they should be cautious of using it. I am curious to know exactly why the article refers constantly to "England". Perhaps it is because the population density in Scotland makes for much less dramatic reading? It seems extremely unlikely to me that the sort of numbers suggested are realistic. One factor to consider is that a report out recently suggested that a huge proportion of the "massive wave" from Eastern Europe have now actually left. Migration within the EU is not likely to be permanent (especially as the poorer countries within the EU develop their economies). Public services are in desperate need of reform. They need to be decentralised massively. If that happens then they will be much more responsive than at present and better able to cope with population dynamics. The massive "1.3 million immigrants" is actually not such a huge number. It works out at about 2.5% of the population (being generous, 3% of the population quoted for England, though I'm fairly sure that the 1.3m is for the UK as a whole). The point about "indigenous Britons" is a complete red herring as far as I am concerned. All in all, I'm extremely suspicious of figures like these. We also shouldn't lose sight of the fact that these figures are 40 year predictions. Break them down to year-on-year figures, which are more useful for assessing pressure on public services, and they aren't nearly as impressive. One example is that 1.3m in a decade suddenly turns into a relatively-unimpressive 130,000 per year. Events could be extremely significant as well. We have no idea what will happen in the next 40 years. If even half of the climate change predictions come true then the population density is likely to be the least of our worries.

The Daily Telegraph is probably the most respected national newspaper. So, until you do accept the information, or prove it to be incorrect - you will understand if I do not respond to this post.