Britain's population to be 73 million by 2035

Batsy

Due mostly to immigration, the UK's population is growing rapidly.


At the moment, the UK population is almost 63 million but, in 30 years' time, it will have overtaken Germany as the most populous nation in Europe.


Britain's population will soar by the equivalent of a city the size of Leeds every year for the next decade, according to official figures.


Over the next ten years, the population is expected to rise annually by 491,000, about the same as a city the size of Leeds.

Numbers will reach 70million in 2027 and 73.2million in 2035. In the same year, Britain will overtake France for numbers, and Germany, where low birthrates have resulted in a falling population, will be matched by 2043. The land area of Germany is 137,000 square miles – almost 50 per cent larger than the United Kingdom at 94,000 square miles.

England will experience the biggest population growth within the UK, with Scotland growing more slowly. Wales and NI willa ctually experience a fall in population.


**************

From The Daily Mail:

Revised statistics show numbers rising at a sustained pace not matched for 100 years. And the main factor behind the increase is immigration. The projections suggest that, in just over 30 years, Britain will overtake Germany as the most populous country in Europe.


All estimates produced two years ago have been revised heavily upwards in a report published yesterday by the Office for National Statistics. Over the next ten years, the population is expected to rise annually by 491,000. Leeds’s current total is 486,000.


Most will live in the already-crowded South of England.


It is predicted that the landmark total of 70million – a figure the immigration minister in the last Labour government said would never be allowed – will be reached in the middle of 2027. This is two years earlier than previous reckoning. Two thirds of the overall growth in numbers, says the ONS, will be brought about either directly or indirectly by migration.


In the long term, net migration – the number added to the population every year through arrivals from abroad – will continue to run at 200,000 a year, the ONS said. This level, some 20,000 a year more than was predicted two years ago, is more than double the net migration that David Cameron has promised will be achieved by Coalition curbs.


The revised estimates come at a time of deepening concern over the effects of fast- rising population on housing, transport, water, power and state services such as education, health and welfare benefits.





Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2053652/UK-population-hit-70m-2027.html#ixzz1bzDzdyD8

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/8850656/UK-population-to-reach-70-million.html

Nodin

Given the opportunity to come ahead of the Germans, I'd imagine you and the mail are delighted.

Jimoslimos

Simples, have less children and balance out the supposed immigration increase. Either that or ship the undesirables off to Aus/NZ or is that not an option anymore?

Batsy

Nodin wrote: »

Given the opportunity to come ahead of the Germans, I'd imagine you and the mail are delighted.

I quite like the idea that Britain is on course to becoming the largest nation in the EU and, I assume, its largest economy, too (assuming we will still be in it by then). That way maybe Britain could then take command of the EU and shape it the way it wants it to be.

The problem Britain will experience, though, is that, despite being already too overcrowded, that will be nothing compared to the overcrowding we will be soon experiencing.

LondonIrish90

Time to stop non-european immigration for good. If you aren't an EU citizen, you should not be allowed to come and live in Britain. We are already overcrowded. I was staggered to find out that each day our foreign office are letting hundreds of people from nations such as Nigeria, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh into the country, in addition to the thousands coming en-masse from eastern europe. Why not just a blanket ban? We are already out of hospital and school spaces, we lack houses, our transport infrastructure cannot cope.

What the **** is going on in downing street? why is the problem continuing and why are they just sitting back to let it continue? I shall not be in Britain by the time the population is 70 million anyhow. It will be a disaster. I will take my qualifications and work ethic elsewhere.

LondonIrish90

Nodin wrote: »

Given the opportunity to come ahead of the Germans, I'd imagine you and the mail are delighted.

Another dig at Britain from Nodin? How surprising. Why don't you just remove the mask and admit you are a xenophobe when it comes to Britain?

Einhard

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

Another dig at Britain from Nodin? How surprising. Why don't you just remove the mask and admit you are a xenophobe when it comes to Britain?

Or a person of refined tastes when it comes to newspapers...

woodoo

Sharia Law too... something to look forward too.

Manach

Well, if the UK needs extra space perhaps we can rent out the area around Leinster house - as its not used for much productive work anyway.

Victor

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

we lack houses

No, the problem in the UK is that many family-sized homes are occupied by 1-2 people. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/19/should-older-people-downsize

http://www.if.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/IF_Housing_Defin_Report_19oct.pdf

* The current housing crisis is not principally about Britain having enough housing but about the way it is shared between older and younger generations.

* Under-occupation of houses is encouraged by the tax system and there are now 25 million surplus bedrooms in under-occupied houses in England. ‘Hoarding of living space’ (under-occupation) is increasing very rapidly.

* Under-occupied housing has increased from 20% of all households to about 33%, according to the English Housing Survey.

Under-occupation is defined as having two or more spare bedrooms.

In the context of this thread, is you user name a little ironic?

jc84

well it's to be expected with the amount of people they let in, all this free roaming between europe is crap, why not reintroduce visas for all non uk nationals

djpbarry

Batsy wrote: »

Due mostly to immigration, the UK's population is growing rapidly.

Not for the first time Batsy, you’re wrong. According to the Office of National Statistics, net migration only accounts for 47% of the projected increase.

Batsy wrote: »

I quite like the idea that Britain is on course to becoming the largest nation in the EU and, I assume, its largest economy, too (assuming we will still be in it by then). That way maybe Britain could then take command of the EU and shape it the way it wants it to be.

That’s not how the EU works Batsy. Small changes in populations will only result in a marginal shift in influence.

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

Time to stop non-european immigration for good. If you aren't an EU citizen, you should not be allowed to come and live in Britain. We are already overcrowded.

No we’re not.

jonsnow

Batsy wrote: »

I quite like the idea that Britain is on course to becoming the largest nation in the EU and, I assume, its largest economy, too (assuming we will still be in it by then). That way maybe Britain could then take command of the EU and shape it the way it wants it to be.

So you don,t really have a problem with the EU as long as Britain "is in command".You just resent the germans/french calling the shots.

donaghs

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Simples, have less children and balance out the supposed immigration increase. Either that or ship the undesirables off to Aus/NZ or is that not an option anymore?

Not really possible, birth rate of British-born has been falling for ages. Only a Chinese style one-child policy or sterilisation program would be possible for a "have less children" plan to work. And surely no-one can support that?

sensibleken

So?

Batsy

Victor wrote: »

No, the problem in the UK is that many family-sized homes are occupied by 1-2 people. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/19/should-older-people-downsize

http://www.if.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/IF_Housing_Defin_Report_19oct.pdfUnder-occupation is defined as having two or more spare bedrooms.

In the context of this thread, is you user name a little ironic?

There aren't many houses in Britain with two or more spare bedrooms. British houses are the smallest in Europe.

djpbarry

Batsy wrote: »

Victor wrote: »

No, the problem in the UK is that many family-sized homes are occupied by 1-2 people. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/19/should-older-people-downsize

http://www.if.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/IF_Housing_Defin_Report_19oct.pdfUnder-occupation is defined as having two or more spare bedrooms.

In the context of this thread, is you user name a little ironic?

There aren't many houses in Britain with two or more spare bedrooms. British houses are the smallest in Europe.

Facts are no match for Batsy’s dogmatic beliefs.

I think therefore I am right.

jonsnow

Batsy wrote: »

There aren't many houses in Britain with two or more spare bedrooms. British houses are the smallest in Europe.

Wrong again right wing media

New British houses are the smallest of the EU15 countries.They are not the smallest new houses among all eu countries.They are not the smallest new houses among European countries and they are certainly not the smallest houses in Europe.

KeithAFC

With so many illegal immigrants all over Britain, this is no surprise. Its a complete disgrace and the legacy of Tony Blair. The traitor to the British people. A real crack down is needed to get these illegal immigrants out of the country.

pragmatic1

KeithAFC wrote: »

With so many illegal immigrants all over Britain, this is no surprise. Its a complete disgrace and the legacy of Tony Blair. The traitor to the British people. A real crack down is needed to get these illegal immigrants out of the country.

Are you not from immigrant stock yourself keith? Maybe the chickens are coming home to roost for the British.

irishh_bob

KeithAFC wrote: »

With so many illegal immigrants all over Britain, this is no surprise. Its a complete disgrace and the legacy of Tony Blair. The traitor to the British people. A real crack down is needed to get these illegal immigrants out of the country.

blair is indeed a slimeball

JustinDee

pragmatic1 wrote: »

Are you not from immigrant stock yourself keith? Maybe the chickens are coming home to roost for the British.

There is a difference between illegal immigration and legal/formal immigration.

pragmatic1

JustinDee wrote: »

There is a difference between illegal immigration and legal/formal immigration.

Obviously. Your point?

A Primal Nut

JustinDee wrote: »

There is a difference between illegal immigration and legal/formal immigration.

I'm pretty sure the Unionist plantations could have been considered illegal in Ireland at the time.

JustinDee

A Primal Nut wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the Unionist plantations could have been considered illegal in Ireland at the time.

Unless you are privy to an anonymous poster's family tree and heritage lines, I don't think anyone here can really call on what they 'are'.

The timelines that people use in yet another immigration dirge tend to be conveniently subjective. How many generations does one need to revert back to in order to be considered not of "immigrant stock"??
As for the legality of the plantation of Ulster in the 17th century (?), it would be a seperate subject really regarding the morality of what happened. Its highly debatable that was any "immigration" however as Ireland was part of the United Kingdom at the time. It would be, in my own view, as skewed a charge as a Daily Mail or Telegraph sensationalist article on immigration.

Victor

JustinDee wrote: »

As for the legality of the plantation of Ulster in the 17th century (?), it would be a seperate subject really regarding the morality of what happened. Its highly debatable that was any "immigration" however as Ireland was part of the United Kingdom at the time.

Act of Union 1800? Actual union 1801?

passarellaie

So the population of the United?Kingdom is to increase to 73 million in 2035 and overtake Germany.So says the Daily Mail/Telegraph.
Tell us have the Brits a secret plan to nuke Berlin?The population of Germany today is 81 million are they telling us Their population is going to rise by 11 million while Germanys will fall by 9 million mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
someone should tell those Brits sometime soon
GERMANY WAS REUNITED 20 YEARS AGO AND BELEIVE IT OR NOT WHAT WAS THEN EAST GERMANY IS NOW PART OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC AND ALL PART OF THE EU.
Maybe they would be better concentrateing on keeping the Scots happy or the United?Kingdom might actually lose population and be passed out by Spain

Victor

Germany's population is aging, with as many old people dying as young people are being born.

Germany https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gm.html

Population growth rate: -0.208% (2011 est.)
Birth rate: 8.3 births/1,000 population (2011 est.)
Death rate: 10.92 deaths/1,000 population (July 2011 est.)
Net migration rate: 0.54 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2011 est.)

UK https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/uk.html

Population growth rate: 0.557% (2011 est.)
Birth rate: 12.29 births/1,000 population (2011 est.)
Death rate: 9.33 deaths/1,000 population (July 2011 est.)
Net migration rate: 2.6 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2011 est.)

Ireland https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ei.html

Population growth rate: 1.061% (2011 est.)
Birth rate: 16.1 births/1,000 population (2011 est.)
Death rate: 6.34 deaths/1,000 population (July 2011 est.)
Net migration rate: 0.86 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2011 est.)

FruitLover

sensibleken wrote: »

So?

The most sensible point so far. Shouldn't this thread be on the UK forum?

LondonIrish90

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

Time to stop non-european immigration for good. If you aren't an EU citizen, you should not be allowed to come and live in Britain. We are already overcrowded. I was staggered to find out that each day our foreign office are letting hundreds of people from nations such as Nigeria, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh into the country, in addition to the thousands coming en-masse from eastern europe. Why not just a blanket ban? We are already out of hospital and school spaces, we lack houses, our transport infrastructure cannot cope.

What the **** is going on in downing street? why is the problem continuing and why are they just sitting back to let it continue? I shall not be in Britain by the time the population is 70 million anyhow. It will be a disaster. I will take my qualifications and work ethic elsewhere.

So you won't welcome immigrants into your country, but be willing to be an immigrant in someone else's country? :pac:

djpbarry

Deleted User wrote: »

So you won't welcome immigrants into your country, but be willing to be an immigrant in someone else's country? :pac:

Migration is fine so long as the migrants aren't darkies.

passarellaie

Victor wrote: »

Germany's population is aging, with as many old people dying as young people are being born.

Germany https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gm.html

UK https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/uk.html

Ireland https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ei.html

You can say Germanys population is ageing etc but please spare me the notion the population will decline from 81,5 million to 72 million in 20 years.Utter rubbish as is the notion the UK will increase to 73 as it has been growing very slowly in recent years

Victor

passarellaie wrote: »

You can say Germanys population is ageing etc but please spare me the notion the population will decline from 81,5 million to 72 million in 20 years.Utter rubbish as is the notion the UK will increase to 73 as it has been growing very slowly in recent years

And what is your basis for this?

passarellaie

Victor wrote: »

And what is your basis for this?

History not some once in a moment in time rubbish
Facts, hard facts not speculation

Population of Germany 1950 68,37 million
population of Germany 2011 82,16 million increase of 20%

Population of UK 1950 50,62 million
population of UK 2011 62,42 million increase of 21%

So explain to me how someone sees this change comeing unless someone is going to nuke Berlin

Victor

If more people will die than will be born and those numbers aren't being made up by immigration, what do you expect?

passarellaie

Victor wrote: »

If more people will die than will be born and those numbers aren't being made up by immigration, what do you expect?

Ohh so they didnt have death in Germany in the last sixty years its only happening now
Listen look at the history over sixty years not one moment in time.I am sure before the famine some statistician was predicting by 1880 ireland wouild have a population of 30 million
The UK population is not going to pass out Germany by 2035 or indeed 2055 lets get real

Victor

passarellaie wrote: »

Ohh so they didnt have death in Germany in the last sixty years its only happening now

Can I take it that you are being deliberately obstreperous / ignorant?

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1991216,00.html

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=h650d9ipptcp4_&ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=births#ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=population&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&idim=country:GM:EI:UK&ifdim=region&hl=en&dl=en

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=h650d9ipptcp4_&ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=births#ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=population_changes&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&idim=country:GM&ifdim=region&tstart=688780800000&tend=2266704000000&hl=en&dl=en

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=h650d9ipptcp4_&ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=births#ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=births&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&idim=country:GM:EI:UK&ifdim=region&tstart=688780800000&tend=2266704000000&hl=en&dl=en

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=h650d9ipptcp4_&ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=births#ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=crude_death_rate&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&idim=country:GM:EI:UK&ifdim=region&tstart=688780800000&tend=2266704000000&hl=en&dl=en

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=h650d9ipptcp4_&ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=births#ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=population_density&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&idim=country:UK:EI:GM&ifdim=region&hl=en&dl=en

gurramok

Where will all those extra people fit within England? I just hope England in the future will not end up with a fascist leader annexing Scotland and Wales for the sole purpose of settlement for the overflow.
Hitler once had an excuse for invasion, Germany was overcrowded. :eek:

djpbarry

gurramok wrote: »

Where will all those extra people fit within England? I just hope England in the future will not end up with a fascist leader annexing Scotland and Wales for the sole purpose of settlement for the overflow.

Considering people can move freely throughout the UK, I fail to see the problem.

gurramok

djpbarry wrote: »

Considering people can move freely throughout the UK, I fail to see the problem.

Would an independent Scotland allow it?

djpbarry

gurramok wrote: »

Would an independent Scotland allow it?

Why wouldn't they? It seems extremely unlikely that Scotland would try to isolate itself from the rest of Britani and/or Europe. But since Scotland is not independent (and is not likely to be any time soon), it's a moot point.

gurramok

djpbarry wrote: »

Why wouldn't they? It seems extremely unlikely that Scotland would try to isolate itself from the rest of Britani and/or Europe. But since Scotland is not independent (and is not likely to be any time soon), it's a moot point.

Scotland accepting a few million English immigrants will not go down well with maintaining Scotlands identity.

Yahew

passarellaie wrote: »

Ohh so they didnt have death in Germany in the last sixty years its only happening now
Listen look at the history over sixty years not one moment in time.I am sure before the famine some statistician was predicting by 1880 ireland wouild have a population of 30 million
The UK population is not going to pass out Germany by 2035 or indeed 2055 lets get real

They had death but they had higher birth rates.

Seriously. Thats pretty weak stuff.

djpbarry

gurramok wrote: »

Scotland accepting a few million English immigrants will not go down well with maintaining Scotlands identity.

I'm really not interested in discussing alternate realities.

Yahew

There are a few issues with immigration to the UK.

1) England is over-populated, particularly in the South. Most of the increases will be in England, and most of that in the South. The M4 Corridor and environs is amongst the most congested in the world for a large State. ( I find it funny that the kind of people who think the world over-populated think England not).
2) England is not building any housing relative to demand. It built 650K houses in its most productive year of the 20th century, 1968, and is now building circa. 100K. The reasons are often to do with the very kind of environmentalist who thinks the world over-populated but England under-populated. Housing is sacrificed to nimbyism and environmentalism. There are other head-winds too. Older populations holding onto property etc.

A recent report says that the average person , or couple ( i.e. median and below) would take 31 years to get a deposit big enough for a house in the South. By which time they are 50+, and wouldn't get a mortgage. So ownership will plummet to < 40% ( or worse). But it won't be a renters paradise either, with so little house building the day of your own rental place, and probably your own room will be over. Or housing will be all bedsits, with no communal spaces as that wastes sleeping spaces.

Not an appealing vista.

How bad is this? Its not good.

Boskowski

Batsy wrote: »

I quite like the idea that Britain is on course to becoming the largest nation in the EU and, I assume, its largest economy, too (assuming we will still be in it by then). That way maybe Britain could then take command of the EU and shape it the way it wants it to be.

Why does Britain have 'to take command'? Why does anyone? What's wrong with a multilateral partnership? Why could they not engage in it a little more already? Why is everything with Britain about being top dog or not?

Or maybe I misunderstood?

Victor

gurramok wrote: »

Where will all those extra people fit within England? I just hope England in the future will not end up with a fascist leader annexing Scotland and Wales for the sole purpose of settlement for the overflow.

I think you might be a bit late for that.

The UK has a population density of about 261/km2, not much higher that Germany's 233/km2 - in fact they have tracked each other for a long time. Luxembourg, Switzerland and Liechtenstein all have similar densities.

Belgium 345/km2
Netherlands 494/km2
San Marino 527/km2
Jersey 818/km2
Guernsey 838/km2
Malta 1297/km2
Gibraltar 4468/km2
Monaco 15255/km2

Hitler once had an excuse for invasion, Germany was overcrowded. :eek:

Eh, no Hitler was a greedy expansaionist. Germany has a much higher population now (81 million) than in the 1933 (66 million, on substantially more land).

http://www.tacitus.nu/historical-atlas/population/germany.htm

djpbarry

Yahew wrote: »

A recent report says that the average person , or couple ( i.e. median and below) would take 31 years to get a deposit big enough for a house in the South. By which time they are 50+, and wouldn't get a mortgage. So ownership will plummet to < 40% ( or worse). But it won't be a renters paradise either, with so little house building the day of your own rental place, and probably your own room will be over. Or housing will be all bedsits, with no communal spaces as that wastes sleeping spaces.

You’re assuming in all this that people will be prepared to endure a considerably diminished quality of life just so they can live in the South of England? That’s ever so slightly naive.

Yahew

djpbarry wrote: »

You’re assuming in all this that people will be prepared to endure a considerably diminished quality of life just so they can live in the South of England? That’s ever so slightly naive.

Labour follows capital. People go to where the work is, not where the quality of life is, unless they have capital themselves. This has been true since the industrial revolution when going to london guaranteed an early death, and a horrible life. Yet still, it grew.

( Of course the Government could try and spread work and at least public capital across the country, but I don't see that happening).

Yahew

Victor wrote: »

I think you might be a bit late for that.

The UK has a population density of about 261/km2, not much higher that Germany's 233/km2 - in fact they have tracked each other for a long time. Luxembourg, Switzerland and Liechtenstein all have similar densities.

Belgium 345/km2
Netherlands 494/km2
San Marino 527/km2
Jersey 818/km2
Guernsey 838/km2
Malta 1297/km2
Gibraltar 4468/km2
Monaco 15255/km2

Eh, no Hitler was a greedy expansaionist. Germany has a much higher population now (81 million) than in the 1933 (66 million, on substantially more land).

http://www.tacitus.nu/historical-atlas/population/germany.htm

Every time the population density is brought up, someone throws in the UK. But it is not the UK which is crowded, it is England, and specifically Southern England. The UK includes Scotland and Northern Ireland. Scotland has 5 million people with about 45% the area of Britain ( or 30% of the UK), and is largely empty. And Nothern Ireland, though more dense than the South has 1.5 million. A similar area in the South of England has most of the population of the UK.

Northern England isn't that highly populated either.

A rule of thumb for that is to multiply your 261/km2 by approximately 4 for Southern England, or 2.5 for England, which is where most of the immigrants are going and where the housing crisis is acute ( and this is no Irish housing bubble, its a real manifestation of supply and demand imbalance).

So is England overcrowded. Yes it is. Is Britain. Less so. But it has unliveable mountainous areas.

Your list includes tiny Islands ( two off England) with high population densities, and - absurdly - city States. It also includes the two well known population hot-spots in Europe - Holland, smaller than Munster with 16M people, and Belgium.

Taking an area of Southern England about the size of Holland you probably are seeing about 30M there.

Yahew

Englands population density is mentioned here (from http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/questions/population.html)

In 2003, it had a population density of 383 people per sq km compared with Wales (142), Northern Ireland (125) and Scotland (65). London had a far higher population density than any of the English regions, with 4,700 people living in each square kilometre on average.

England's population density is more than treble the European average of 117 people per sq km.