Good, because I wasn't talking about those, slight misunderstanding. "Immigrant who have been accepted" = visa holder who is now a citizen = for example a ultra-highly-skilled newly-UK-national born in India.
> but that's nothing to do with the EU?
Absolutely nothing, and that's the problem: The English haven't been asked whether they wanted to increase visas, but their intelligencia did it anyway. So next time they had an opportunity to vote, be sure they voted against whatever the intelligencia wants, whatever it cost. Brexit was a vote against both their governing class and against their upper economic class (London). Yes, the cost is huge, but what other choice were they given?
That's why I said putting all "immigration" into a single category is that it conflates so many different things. The Brexit vote can only affect EU free movement immigration.
> So next time they had an opportunity to vote
Next time? What time period do you think this covers? People have been complaining about immigration since the Empire Windrush in 1948. The 'rivers of blood' speech was in 1968. This conversation about immigration has been happening my entire lifetime.
There's a handy graph widget here: http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/HTMLDocs/dvc123/i... which any reasonable eyeballing suggests that immigration has been in the hundred-thousands for about two decades across three Labour governments and two Conservative ones.
I was exxxxtremely specific in my last post about one very detailed type of immigration, and you are conflating "all types of immigration" AGAIN. You did systematically misunderstand and conflate everything that was misunderstandable in my speech, I don't know whether that's on purpose or not. That English people have been accepting or refusing immigration in the past is no question. The question is whether they want to add 1 million people in London in the next 10 years (it was the London plan before Brexit), and the English people didn't get to vote on that.
But you, and all the Remain camp together with you, make a full, complete denial that it is possible to discuss immigration quantities, although the visa bureaus exist in every country. And it's to break stubborn people like you that the People of England was required to break your toys, England, and Europe at the same time. Thank you for your stubbornness, here is the bill, please don't do the same in France and accept to discuss immigration quantities.
No, being an intra-EU migrant under EU free movement does not automatically make you a UK national. You retain your original nationality unless and until you go through the naturalisation process, which few have bothered with because it costs >£1500 and until now does not convey much benefit.
This is why people are worried about the Conservative party leadership candidates refusing to rule out expelling EU nationals - millions of people, some of whom have been here for years, are potentially affected.
> Now have we asked the country side UK people whether they want to distribute more visas in 2017 to non-EU highly skilled foreign workers, followed by a passport 10 years later?
No we haven't, but that's nothing to do with the EU? Generally the pressure has been to reduce "immigration", so the non-EU visa rules have been made more onerous, especially spousal visas.