Coffee House

Immigration caps don’t hamper the economic recovery. Why pretend otherwise?

28 October 2012

3:55 PM

28 October 2012

3:55 PM

The immigration lobby are getting desperately short of arguments to set against the huge costs of mass immigration. The first body blow was a House of Lords report which ‘found no evidence…… that net migration generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population’ (see abstract here). This was followed by a report from the government’s own Migration Advisory Committee which pointed out that much of any benefit goes to the immigrants themselves. (see Paragraphs 3.6-3.13 here). Then a study by the NIESR found that the contribution of the much vaunted East European migrants to GDP per head was expected to be ‘negligible’ (see Exec Summary here), indeed negative in the long run.

So their latest ploy is to claim that immigration control is a barrier to the vital task of economic recovery. You only have to glance at the facts to see that this also collapses. There is no limit on senior staff transfers between international companies nor, of course, on any form of recruitment from the EEA — a pool of over 500 million people. Tier 1, the route for self-starters, was effectively closed after evidence that a significant proportion ended up in unskilled roles such as shop assistants, security guards, and supermarket cashiers. (see here) Tier 2, for skilled workers sponsored by employers, was capped at 20,700 a year but in its first year, only about half that quota has been taken up. (see here) How is that for a killer blow? Meanwhile, improved routes have been introduced for entrepreneurs and investors. (see here) Given all this, it is hard to believe that some are questioning whether Britain is ‘open for business’ — especially when we receive one and a half million business visitors a year. Someone must be doing some business!

[Alt-Text]


Nor should employers be our only concern. Since 2000, the British labour market has expanded by just over 2 million, virtually all of whom were foreign born. (see here) Whatever the technical arguments, it is clear that, over the boom period up to 2008, British workers were not drawn into the active labour market as would have been desirable. Obviously, immigration is not the only factor. There are issues of motivation, welfare provision, education and training but it does seem clear that, if employers are entirely free to bring in cheap, flexible and non-unionised labour, they are likely to do so — especially if they are tied to them by the work permit system. For wider social reasons it is important that there should be some countervailing pressure on employers to train and employ British workers. Two and a half million people unemployed is more than enough.

Those who are protesting the loudest should be clear about the kind of immigration policy that they advocate. If they want a virtually open door they should say so and say how they would address the consequences. Immigration at current levels will add five million to the UK population in the next fifteen years. To accommodate the extra numbers we would have to build the equivalent of eight major cities — Birmingham, Leeds, Glasgow, Sheffield, Bradford, Manchester, Liverpool and Bristol. We already have a major housing crisis to say nothing of an empty exchequer. Need I say more?

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • Sarah

    People move to where the wealth and opportunities are. There’s not a damn thing any government can do about it in this day and age of easy transport and global trade. Face it, the world is changing, nationality is no longer the unifying factor.

    The only time the population of the UK is going to fall is when it’s in economic recession and somewhere else is in the ascendant. If you are anti-immigration, the best thing you can do is not to buy British.

    • Daniel Maris

      How do you explain the fact that Japan, one of the world’s economic powerhouses, has so few immigrants? That completely contradicts what you say.

      And before you say it, I am not proposing we adopt Japanese attitudes to immigration.

      I am saying we listen very carefully to what Andrew Green says and bring in effective control measures, after an emergency moratorium.

      • StephanieJCW

        Because comparatively speaking, fewer people try to move there as compared to, for example Canada and Britain.

    • retundario

      Yes but that does not excuse giving millions of third-world no-hopers British passports, for them to add absolutely nothing to the whole, other than be a divisive growing element of our population that will surely cause problems in the future. For example, there are millions of Indians and Europeans working in China, but the Han will never give these people the right to become Chinese citizens unless they marry into that race of people.

      • StephanieJCW

        I don’t think we should be copying such bizarrely racist ideas. So you can be born and raised in a country, live there all your life, but have no right to citizenship? Ever? Hmm…

  • Danish dog mess

    First pass the post and a restriction on free speech and appeassment made this mess.

  • Roy

    What are the Royal Family thinking of, letting this all happen without a murmur? One would think with the dreadful consequences of the Church of England being swamped and the law of the land being changed to suit the influx. It would be worth while their highnesses showing some concern. Or are they unconcerned enough to have their kingdom over run by strangers of a remote caliphate. All the churches changed over time to calling towers and the grave stones bulldozed out of the way. When it comes down to it, is silence the answer? Or are they really just figure heads?

  • Roy

    Unlike the immigrants to the US who were on fire to become citizens, dedicated from the word go, to become a part of their new country. This new crowd entering the UK have decided before leaving their distant heat scorched scrub-lands they will keep every aspect of their old culture. In fact they have to implant the whole caboodle on to the area they have decided to kip down on to. In no way do they envisage living as British or developing a new cultural habit. They obviously would not have arrived on these bleak foggy shores had they not knew full well they were guaranteed a splashy income from these silly people who are throwing around such benevolence. With also added benefits for children, two or more wives, and parents to boot. Not only do we have to accept the personages themselves but the laws of their old tribal affiliates. In other words they are not subject to abide by the laws of their new found country which is funding them such a noble living. They really must think the people giving them so much – complete idiots. Especially when they also know the immigrants are sworn enemies and this embedded in the book of prayers they carry and live by. The host country know all this yet still seem to think the new sons of Mohammed have something to offer and must be made welcome. Strange indeed. One is inclined to think the British have disappeared into some childhood fantasy or an equally morbid nightmare and wish to bring it to life.

  • Pakistani dog mess

    First pass the post voting system created this mess.

  • TomTom

    There are those who aim is that noone should have any historic claim to live in England, that there should be no concept of England, simply an atomised society of individuals with no common allegiance based on culture or history. It is clear whose these people are and they will bring Europe back into the era of Hyper Nationalism as they expose themselves as mindless and chaotic

  • Wilhelm

    By 2060 the Worlds White population will plummet to 9 % from a high of 30% in 1950. The Black population on the other hand will explode to 30 % by 2060. That’s quite disturbing.150 million Nigerians at present to 400 million by 2050.

    What would a country look like when a white nation like England for example, becomes majority black. Look no further than to Zimbabwe and South Africa. Are whites treated well there ? 50 murders a day. 3000 white farmers killed. It’s more dangerous than Iraq and Afghanistan. And you can forget about classical music, opera, theatre, art museums, that’s Western European and will be consigned to the dustbin, it will be replaced by a rap, hip hop, basketball, nike shoe ”culture.”

    White women have abortions, and that’s all well and good, but this has had unattended consequences to White Demographics, since David Steels Abortion Act came in 1967, 200,000 Abortions ( killings ) have taken place each year. Whites seem to be going the way of the dodo.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6pzPp1Q2ew&feature=plcp

    • StephanieJCW

      Tosh. Good God what utter, utter tosh! So hip-hop is ‘black’? (I think you mean ‘American’) and theatre is white? Good Lord! Why is it that when sensible people, such as Andrew Green, come out to speak on immigration, you always have the Stormfront goons who come out to play.

  • Wilhelm

    People always talk about the economic benefit but never the cultural aspect. Fill the country up with African bantus, Arab muslims and Romanian gypsies . The true essence of what makes England English will be lost for ever.

  • Radford_NG

    29 Oct.c.410GMT:…Can’t do with wadding through all this,but:mass immigration into an advanced settled society is a bad thing.Top quality immigration is a good thing .The Germans are not stupid,having learnt a lesson;if you have top quality computer skills they need they will give you a ‘work card’ if you speak English and passable German,if you come from East Anglia or East Bengal…..in the EU ,or out of it.

  • Realist

    Telemachus is tolerant of all views expressed that are in direct opposition to his own. Yeah, and there goes that flying pig again.

  • retundario

    Why can’t we have an immigration policy that favours us, as in people that are our own? Why is a British-origined person from the USA or New Zealand or Australia subject to the same rules as a Russian, or a East African? If someone can speak English and is of the same ethnicity as us, then why should we ever turn them away if they have good education etc? At the moment, we turn away British ethnicity Aussie and USA graduates who can’t get a job upon leaving University, EVEN WHEN THEY have the means to stay here independently while they are job-searching! This recently happened to a friend of mine. It’s nuts, really. It is all very well to stem the Labour Party’s attempts at suicide or selecting for others unlike us… but to do that effectively we have to be able to discriminate for ourselves/in our own favour.

    • StephanieJCW

      “Why is a British-origined person from the USA or New Zealand or Australia subject to the same rules as a Russian, or a East African? ”

      Why shouldn’t they be? I am a Briton, who moved to Australia this year and was subject to the same rules as my Malaysian, South African, Canadian, Zimbawean, Kazakh colleagues. As is right. And what is ‘British ethnicity’? Britons have a variety of ethnic backgrounds. And many, many Australians do have have a British heritage? Why should those who state ‘English ancestry’ have privilege over those who state “Italian”, “Chinese” or “Aboriginal”?

  • HooksLaw

    ‘ it is clear that, over the boom period up to 2008, British workers were
    not drawn into the active labour market as would have been desirable.’ — its a savage indictment of the Blair Brown years.
    As I understand Andrew Green’s views though he regards EU immigration as temporary economic migration. The end results are the same in the short term.

  • Redneck

    I am delighted but surprised to see this article on the Spectator site, thank you Mr Nelson.

    A strictly controlled level of immigration, restricted to those who’d be of benefit to the UK, would be acceptable to most Brits. I don’t regard that as being unreasonable.

    The abuse of the visa system is a travesty and I think any Party that stopped it plus returned those “overstaying” would be warmly welcomed.

    I detest the usage of the term “racist” whenever there is a discussion of the most appropriate rate of immigration tolerable. Unfortunately, it is a very potent silencer of dissent to the “party line”.

    If the best arguments for mass immigration include the Notting Hill Carnival, ethnic food and “blossoming” then I’m certainly won over: what fantastic contributions these represent!

    Just as an afterthought, if someone could get that “blossoming” concept over to the White House then I’m sure the POTUS and his team would be on it in a flash! Might well swing Ohio?

  • Peter Crawford

    Which country thinks having millions of impoverished illiterates around is a boost to the economy ? Quite clearly Pakistan, Bangladesh or Somalia don’t…

  • stee

    The worst problem is that the government’s statistics on which they base their immigration targets are so totally inaccurate – not that any academic could conceptualise this fact or research the discrepancy.
    For example, the Home Office says net migration from Romania in the last five years was 23,000 whereas they also admit that 112,000 national insurance were issued to (adult) Romanians in the same period (see House of Lords answer to Lord Laird – http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldhansrd/text/121022w0001.htm#12102222000757)
    So the government figures are out by a factor of at least four – not that the immigration target will be reached in a million years.

  • David Cockerham

    It’s ironic, is it not, that when the ONLY argument in favour of a liberal immigration policy is that it helps keep labour costs down, the only parties supporting it are those of the left, who look to the workers for their support. The Tories should be able to use this data to make mincemeat of both Labour and the LibDems at the next election.

  • djpv

    Peter Sutherland UN Special representative on immigration explained in detail that amongst other things the EU should “do its best to undermine” the “homogeneity” of member states.

    In a one hour address to the HOL EU Sub-committee f (Home affairs) Sutherland clearly laid out the road map for immigration policy in the UK (See the full interview on YouTube 20th June 2012). As he explained to the sub committee the government stands behind him on this.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXBgyeNoeSc

  • Daniel Maris

    I think what convinced me that the mass immigration scam had been exposed was when I read we need an extra 75,000 school places in one year in the primary sector in London alone. That’s the equivalent of perhaps 150 EXTRA primary schools required in just one year. The costs of that sort of infrastructure provision are huge.

    And the worst of it is there is no end in sight.

    We certainly need a moratorium on mass immigration while a Royal Commission looks into all aspects of the problem. I would back Andrew Green to chair that.

    • Daniel Maris

      There are several strands to this problem:

      1. Environmental – population pressure is degrading our environment, starving flora and fauna of natural habitat and making our land less green and pleasant.

      2. Economic – the evidence is mounting that mass immigration is impacting negatively on per capita GDP and actually turning us into a post-affluent society. Mass immigration appears to be depriving millions of young people of job opportunities.

      3. Cultural – there are serious issues about what sort of culture we are importing into this country when we have at the last count 14 specialist FGM birthing clinics, when we have brought in an internal terrorist threat and when millions of new immigrants seem determined to have nothing to do with the culture of the majoirty population.

      4. Constitutional – there is evidence that parts of our country are developing their own legal system and institutions, separate from the rule of parliament.

      I know some people are concerned about race. Personally I feel that is not a major issue. Where people of different races share our culture there are actually pretty high levels of integration.

      • StephanieJCW

        Genuine question – do you have a link to the specialist birthing FGM clinics? I am unaware of this and it sounds pretty horrific. I do however agree with the essence of your comment. I just hate when these sensible concerns are hijacked by those focused on ‘race’, when what really matters is culture.

  • http://twitter.com/EU_Dictatorship Sue

    Mass uncontrolled immigration is something that was DONE to us. Nobody asked us if we were prepared to support so many extra people. NuLabour did it on purpose to spite the right and now the Conservatives are advocating it because IT’S PART OF THE SINGLE MARKET HE SO LOVES!

    • james102

      Most immigration is still from outside the EU.The Single Market is only a part of the problem.

    • StephanieJCW

      We live in a democracy. We are ‘asked’ at election time when we are free to vote for anti-immigration political parties.

      • Colonel Mustard

        So where was uncontrolled immigration to rub the right’s nose in diversity mentioned in New Labour’s pre-election manifesto? Please remind me.

        • StephanieJCW

          It wasn’t mentioned because it wasn’t part of their manifesto, nor was it part of policy. Now remind me how many times Labour was re-elected even as immigration figures grew while they were in power?

  • Troika21

    At the risk of having my head bitten off – I’m all for immigration; for someone to get-up-and-go requires ‘get-up-and-go’, if you see what you mean, and we should welcome those migrants.

    That said, there are genuine concerns that are caused by increased immigration – extra stress on government services (especially local ones), sudden changes in character to places and the failed idea of multiculturalism, are all ignored by those on the left.

    • james102

      We used to say:”it’s a free country” when someone tried to stop us saying or doing something they disagreed with but was legal. You don’t hear the expression anymore because it isn’t.

      Your point of view is perfectly reasonable and you have every right to express it without anyone biting your head off.

    • Rhoda Klapp

      Maybe you are right. The economic case is arguable, at least. The problem is not that, it is that nobody ever bothered with the argument, we the electorate were just presented with the policy. Neither party had it in a manifesto, such mentions of immigration as there were were promises to limit it which never happened. The problem is that nobody asked us. They gave away that which was not theirs to give without a mandate. They are never going to ask us either.

      However, good for Fraser for letting this post through.

    • Daniel Maris

      BS. Lots of immigrants are young men ordered to marry cousin X in the UK. No “get up and go” about it. Simply an order from the head of the household.

      Secondly you can have plenty of “get up and go” and no real concern for the inhabitants of this country.

  • Daniel Maris

    At last! – an article from someone who actually has some grasp of reality.

    I would add that we also have to take into account the population effects of mass immigration. By bringing in hundreds of thousands of people of child bearing age (and often people from cultural backgrounds that encourage large families) we are pushing up our birth rate as well.

    I think we actually have hit the buffers now.

  • Austin Barry

    How melancholic and depressing it is to see the tapestry of English culture ripped apart by our leaders without any cogent kind of consent. The greatest tragedy and treachery ever to be inflicted upon this country.

    • ArchiePonsonby

      Absolutely in agreement, as per, A B., so why have we been re-electing the ghastly pricks for the last 50 years? That, surely, is the great mystery of our age?

    • Wilhelm

      Jared Taylor on ” The Weakness of Diversity, White Flight and the Demographic Decline of the Indigenous Inhabitants.”

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxCKH7f_ywU

    • British Plonkers

      You have had the piss taken out of you big time for years. The British are the biggest plonkers in the world. You lost your country, fools! Its revenge for Empire!

    • Big Harry

      Why did the British Establishment shit on the English? Is this the real reason why Scotland wants to be free from Britain…..cultural and social genocide?

    • Big Harry

      Is this why Jack Straw and his son always walk round with a big smile on their face?

  • Heartless etc.,

    “Why pretend otherwise?” . . . . because the H2B and his
    acolytes live in a fantasy PR world where all their wishes become fact, – and
    everything accords with their puerile notions.

  • Jules

    Immigration has gone UP under the coalition. In the last year of Labour it was 166,000 net and now it’s 250,000 net.

    • james102

      Did you expect anything else?

      This is not a right/left issue: both believe in open borders.

      • http://twitter.com/PhilKean1 @PhilKean1

        On that we can agree.

      • Daniel Maris

        Quite right. This is an elite v. the people issue.

        The elite – whether left-liberal or rich – feel they do well out of mass immigration.

        Most people – and that includes a lot of descendants of previous immigrants – feel it doesn’t.

  • Trevor Kavanagh

    Well said, Andrew….
    Your case is, and always has been, inarguable…..

    • james102

      Unfortunately our political class interpreted this as not being permitted to argue.

    • telemachus

      Tosh and balderdash

      *

      There are truly major economic benefits.

      Recall the barriers that immigrants have to climb before they ever get to Britain. This means that those who get here are the more motivated and enterprising people, the ones with greater initiative, self-confidence, and persistence. These are the sorts of people who tend to make a success of economic endeavours.

      Further, since they are here in search of a better life, they are going
      to try to make a success of it.

      If someone is sufficiently motivated to travel thousands of miles in
      search of a better life, they are sufficiently motivated to get out of the damp
      bedsit and look for work in search of one that is better yet.

      The ultimate limit on the size of an economy is the average productivity
      of an individual, multiplied by the number of individuals. More individuals,
      each with above average productivity, mean a larger economy. Some natives will lose out, due to being unable to compete with the immigrants. But overall, the country will benefit, and most Brits will be in a better position economically

      • james102

        The only economic beneficiaries are the employers of cheap tax payer subsidised labour.

      • terence patrick hewett

        The problem is not with immigrants from European countries who predominantly share a common heritage and ethnicity with the host nation, but with those from the third world whose cultures, customs, and in the case of Muslims, their religious background and attitude, are totally foreign to, and often actively antagonistic towards those of the United Kingdom.

        Apart from the early movement of European tribes and peoples which affected the whole continent early in the first millennium, then the arrival of some 300,000 Huguenots from France at the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries and a similar number of Jews, mainly from Russia, at the start of the 19th century the demographic record of Great Britain attests that since the Norman invasion the population of this country remained settled and ethnically unchanged for almost a 1,000 years until the 1950’s.

        Since then third world immigration, mainly from the Caribbean, Africa, and the Indian sub-continent, supported by a liberal-left obsession with multiculturalism, has wrought greater and more fundamental changes to the traditional way of life of the previous settled population than at any previous period in its history.

        They have experienced a peace-time foreign invasion and contrary to the flawed myth of multiculturalism many migrant groups have been encouraged to develop separate ghetto societies outside of and often antagonistic to the mainstream culture. In fact those on the liberal-left in their efforts to produce a cultural revolution in the UK similar to that pursued by the Red Guards in China, have deliberately sidelined and denigrated the host culture in order to accommodate those of new immigrants.

        And contrary to the myth of the benefits immigration brings to the host nation , Government social surveys on everything from use of the NHS to prison populations show that third world migrants have in fact contributed to a net increase in crime, unemployment, disease, ignorance (in educational terms) and poverty. Statistics also show that a quarter of all new births in the UK are now to women who were themselves born outside the country demonstrating how immigrant birth rates already outstrip those of the previously settled population.

        People such as Telemachus wish for an irreversible change in the future cultural and population mix of the UK without any consensus from the majority population and it must rate as the biggest peacetime betrayal any indigenous population of any country in modern history.

        The only threat European migrants pose to the British is in the area of employment, whereas again quoting official government figures non-EU migrants are actually more likely to be unemployed than long-term UK residents. We have had no race riots involving Poles. Latvians don’t plant bombs on the London underground and unlike black youths who make up just 12% of the population of the capital; Portuguese, Italians or Spaniards aren’t responsible for 46% of street crime, 54% of knife crime and over 50% of gun
        crime. Black gangs are also responsible for one in seven of all rapes committed in the capital.

        Of course there are immigrants from other cultures in the developing world, particularly India and China who have come here to integrate and benefit the country and themselves and they should be encouraged and welcomed with open arms. But it is easy to identify those who have not from the crime and unemployment figures, their refusal to integrate and the social disturbances they cause. And overwhelmingly they are not fellow Europeans.

        • telemachus

          Instead of wringing your hands of the groups you decry why not set about asking why there is no integration of those of whom you feel it true. Could it be the antagonism expressed bu a majority of posters here could be responsible

          • Dicky14

            You haven’t realised, either because you’re willfully ignorant or just ignorant, that the least able are the ones who will get shafted. This doesn’t really affect Tory voters, we’re richer and better educated, but the poor, deprived, weak, young and less intelligent who will get crowded out by the cheaper labour from abroad. You’re hurting those who you espouse to support. That’s Labour’s legacy and the coalitions too but I don’t care, really. I don’t have kids and i’m quite minted so i’ll just watch as the tediously inevitable occurs every year. Way to go Telemachus, you don’t even know or care who you hurt as long as the ideology continues – there’s a word for that you know.

            • telemachus

              There is certainly a word for the tosh you have just written-bigotted autocratic self serving balderdash

              • Colonel Mustard

                Well you should know, since every comment you make here contains bigoted, autocratic, self-serving balderdash. You equally sicken and depress me in a way no other troll does. I despair that the country of my birth contains people like you who vote for and support the most self-destructive political entity known to man.

        • FRANKP1

          There you have it, Mr Hewett. Great analysis! But I would just qualify your assertion about the Caribbean immigrants, particularly those of the early 1950s. Most of those were steeped in British culture before they came – and a Christian way of life; they came to look for work and found it; it was swathes of their British born children who were nobbled by Leftist, Black Power activists, in schools, youth clubs and on the streets and shebeens of Notting Hill and Brixton. Through the pop music industry and the drug culture they were inculcated into a sub culture with its own patois argot and music that quickly permeated the indigenous white youth culture and produced the hybrid melange we have to day. I found that this dismayed the God fearing and hard working West Indian parents, who have suffered the results as badly the white parents.

        • StephanieJCW

          And we come back to race. You do realise that most Caribbean countries, as a result of history, are culturally closer to the UK than many European countries? Sharing a history, language, religion, political establishment etc.

          Also you are making the classic mistake of confounding immigration and race. Those ‘black youths’ you refer to are not, in the main, immigrants. They are Britons, born in Britain, to Britons and are a product of Britain. If you wish to criticise immigration from the Caribbean then you need to use figures from the 40s, 50s, 60s when it was mainly occurring. What you refer to now has absolutely nothing to do with immigration.

      • Sarah

        It’s not like the developing world needs its motivated and enterprising people is it. They have trained, skilled people going spare to help us out.

      • Trofim

        You hadn’t noticed that there’s more to life than economic “prosperity” then? Prosperity addicts are akin to heroin addicts – they always need a bigger fix They’re never satisfied with enough. More, more, more, more. The future is one of diminishing resources, and ever-growing population. Our grandchildren will pay for this. Oh, and I forgot – there is a thing called the environment, upon which humans depend for their existence and happiness. More humans means less environment. Still, who cares. As long as we’re prosperous, prosperous, more prosperous, more prosperous, and yet more prosperous and . . .

  • Colonel Mustard

    It is ideological, as Neather revealed, dressed up as everything but. And when any concern about it or opposition to it is articulated there are cheap cracks of “racist” and “bigot” from the usual suspects, connived at to shame dissidents into silence. That approach is not going to resolve the underlying issues in the long term but instead make them worse as resentment is stoked up and a tipping point reached.

    The true inequality is that whilst the English are being ethnically cleansed and denied a right to own their national identity the Welsh, Scots and Irish have been encouraged to celebrate their nationalism through New Labour’s devolution policies. We now face the break-up of the United Kingdom as a result. Labour, whatever they call themselves this time, deserve Hardy’s “another nice mess” for all of this nonsense.

    • Augustus

      Who said “we will rub the Right’s noses in diversity”? Can’t remember. Was it Jack Straw? Anyway, Neather certainly said that there was a “”driving political purpose” behind immigration policy. And so they came, wearing headscarves and beards, in their masses, becoming more and more a dominant self-assertive factor in society,
      while their leftist friends love to bow and scrape before them, not particularly for who they are, but to spite all those who won’t vote for them. Millions of adherents of a discriminatory, violent, hateful and oppressive ideology admitted ” for cynical political reasons concealed by dodgy economic camouflage.”

    • Malfleur

      When is Fraser Nelson going to publish his thoughts on Neathergate? How many years ago is it now that he promised to do so? “Pusillanimous” is the word that comes to mind.

  • james102

    I must say I am surprised and pleased to see an article on this subject which is both factual and contrary to the consensus views of our self defined “elite”.

    Immigration policy in the UK has for a generation not been about economics but political dogma.

    Our political class does not believe in the concept of nationality which is why they use Net immigration as a performance indicator. As long as half a million Britons leave then a half a million Bangladeshis can arrive and Net immigration is zero: no problems.

    To the left, as Andrew Neather confirmed, it was about changing the political culture of Britain forever; for the libertarian right it was about freedom of movement of labour, we are merely bipedal work units after all.

  • anyfool

    Everyone must ask themselves why a large proportion of the left wants to subsume Great Britain in a flood of aliens who have not one redeeming feature between them that would add to the quality of life in this country, in fact to the contrary they have set about destroying the good things in the life of this country that ironically they aspired to.
    We now have ghettos and no go areas that make a mockery of the argument that integration will follow, they do not wish to integrate and most of the British population does not want to integrate with them, neither groups will ever live in harmony but just push along till the next set of suicide bombers or even worse decides they have had enough of the native populations unwillingness to bow to their demands.

    • james102

      It is not just the left, the libertarian right also agree with open borders. It is the fact they agree on this issue that has allowed it to occur.

      • Boudicca_Icenii

        If by the libetarian right, you are referring to UKIP then you are wrong.
        UKIP believes there should be a complete halt to immigration for a 5 yr period whilst we sort out the mess LibLabCON has created.
        We should then introduce a Visa/Work Permit system to allow people to enter the country who will make a valuable contribution – but the visa/wp route should not automatically lead to British citizenship.

        • james102

          No, I know Ukip does not believe in open borders but then I don’t think of them as libertarians as I doubt they would legalise all recreational drugs and end the age of consent which are policies I associate with the libertarian fringe.

        • http://twitter.com/PhilKean1 @PhilKean1

          Hi. Boudicca.

          I doubt that he is. Not that you and I would see them as being anywhere near the “right” – but I imagine he’s referring to Liberal and Tory liberals.
          .

          • james102

            They are at the fringes of both parties, less so now with the LibDems than they were in the 1980s as the party is now more socialist.

            Think about some of the present cabinet, what would you consider their views on the free movement of labour and the use of recreational drugs?

      • telemachus

        So you agree on balance that it is a good thing

        • LB

          Why does it have to be balanced?

          Migrants are optional. The state has the right to say no. [We don’t get to make that decision]

          So we don’t have to accept migrants that don’t contribute on balance to the UK. eg. Those paying less than 11K a year in tax [the sum the government spends per head]

          So the question for you.

          Why do we have to accept the detrimental when migration is optional?

        • telekuka

          Maoism

        • telekuka

          sick

      • MichtyMe

        Well there ain’t no immigration in or out of N Korea. The Poles wouldn’t be here if the Socialists still ruled Eastern Europe. It’s the devotees of the market, where labour is just a commodity, to be sourced, transported, exploited and profited from, it’s business.

        • james102

          Yes but it is easier to sell if it is marketed with the Red Flag playing in the background. How else would you get the unions on side?

      • TomTom

        Many on the “Libertarian Right” are former Marxists or Trotskyists

      • LB

        But its condiitional isn’t it.

        The ultra libertarians might agree with it. However, they would also make sure that there is no welfare system for those migrants. So they can’t be parasitic.

        That’s the way of dealing with migration.

        No migrant can be in the UK unless they pay more tax than the average government spend per person. Assessed by the tax form.

        That’s a neat solution.

        1. Non racist.
        2. Economic test.
        3. Easy to assess.

        So if you haven’t paid more than 11K in tax at the end of the tax year, thanks, but you have 3 months to leave. [You or your employer could always top up]

        For the first year, you either pay in advance, or get a bond to pay the tax if you can’t.

      • Trofim

        For a look at the libertarian right take a look at Samizdata blog – not only open borders, but the mere hint that anyone might like to use contraception and there are cries of “So you want to exterminate the human race”.

    • telemachus

      You are wrong wrong wrong

      *

      The biggest gift that immigrants offer is the enrichment of British
      culture.

      A culture is a living thing, and it is always growing and changing. Cultures which feed on nothing but themselves tend to become stale and derivative, while those that are open to outside influences are constantly renewed and remain exciting.

      British culture is no exception. It has always grown by taking in
      outside influences, including those of distant lands. The Notting Hill Carnival
      is one of the most vibrant aspects of contemporary British culture, and it has
      fed on the cultural riches brought in by immigrants.

      Look at some examples. Chinese, Indian, and Pakistani immigrants have
      transformed British food, overwhelmingly for the better.

      Or visit the Chinatown in a major city, and enjoy the different feeling.

      Or even just walk through a city with a substantial immigrant population (where, for these purposes, ‘immigrant’ can include people whose parents were born in Britain).

      Revanchists here want Chinese or Pakistani immigrants to be just like
      us. Surely it is better if they create and preserve a distinctive part of
      British culture?

      The multicultural experiment enhances the life of us all.

      Of course, this requires the immigrant communities to be open to
      influence from the rest of British culture, but they can hardly avoid that.
      There are some things which are legally mandated, such as education for all
      their children, and others which are simply ubiquitous, such as British
      television. But the rest of British culture should be open to influence from
      them, as well. There is nothing remotely ‘unBritish’ about becoming a Muslim,
      for example, or dressing in a manner inspired by the Chinese, or learning to
      cook curry. Similarly, someone of Chinese origin does not betray her heritage
      by learning to play cricket.

      The predominant outflowering of the cultural benefits is that it is
      impossible to predict exactly what they will be. Many historical cultures have
      flowered spectacularly when brought into contact with foreign cultures, but
      every flowering has been different. Greater immigration increases the chance
      that British culture will blossom into something truly new and wonderful.

      • http://twitter.com/PhilKean1 @PhilKean1

        .
        Really? – Have you recently been to the beautiful, historic town of Stamford?

        Starting at one end of the town, admiring the local stone buildings, trying to avoid the pushy East European street sellers as they try to sell you their wares. Past one, then another, just 20 yards away.

        Then there are the headscarf-wearing women of Romanian appearance sitting in shop doorways. Big smiles, holding up copies of the big issue, or some other publication.

        I did this 6 weeks ago. I was left feeling deeply saddened that Britain’s pro-EU, Liberal conspiracy had inflicted this alien culture on the British people against their will, and that enjoying ancient English towns, from a uniquely British perspective, is likely to become impossible over the next ten years as EU immigration swells to unsustainable levels.

        All this, and I mentioned nothing about the pickpocket gangs and ATM fraudsters.
        .

        • telemachus

          Are you talking of the dying villages of the home counties accessible to none other than the septugenarians that live there?

          • http://twitter.com/PhilKean1 @PhilKean1

            .
            I am talking about the historic town of Stamford. Where Britons, young and old, live and work.

            But hey, 20 pubs and up to 100 shops closing each week. However, there is at least one growth industry: “Polish shops” – of which hundreds are opening each year in towns all over the UK.

            This should be an indicator as to the emergency situation facing the British people.
            .

            • james102

              Or East London with its Burka clad women and social housing estates filled with welfare dependant unemployables or the cultural enrichment we read about every day as yet another young boy dies in a stabbing involving Afro-Caribbean “youths”.

              • telemachus

                No James
                See my reply to Kavanagh for your first point
                On the second this is the kind of racialist remark the met of the time of Stephen Lawrence might be proud

                • Dicky14

                  Do you know what a line-up is Telemeshit? Have you heard of operation Trident? Have you ever been to Rochdale? It ain’t racist if it’s fact now is it son?

                • james102

                  Have you ever read:”Racist Murder and Pressure Group Politics: The Macpherson report and the police” by Norman Dennis, George Erdos and Ahmed Al-Shahi?

                • telekuka

                  i reach for my revolver

                • Trofim

                  Please – Saint Stephen Lawrence. Let’s have some respect here. It’s curious to here the rather 1950’s term “racialist” nowadays.

                • telekuka

                  good show

            • telemachus

              You make my point about the industry of the Poles and others

              • http://twitter.com/PhilKean1 @PhilKean1

                Industry that is keeping recently redundant, hard-working British job-seekers unemployed due to having to compete with unlimited numbers of EU job applicants.
                .

                • telemachus

                  No no no
                  Industry that is reviving our economy and thereby providing opportunities for the shaven headed tattooed edl dimwits to whom you refer

                • http://twitter.com/PhilKean1 @PhilKean1

                  Why do you twist and fabricate?

                  I know of hard-working British people who have lost their jobs due to the recession who, through NO fault of their own, are finding it impossible to find another job because, even if employers are NOT going straight to specialist EU recruiters, are having to compete with unlimited numbers of EU applicants, in lists sometimes hundreds long.

                  The fact of the matter is that British Governments have sacrificed the British people’s best interests in order to advance their pro-Federal EU dream.
                  .

                • telemachus

                  In the end the economic benefits stoke the economy such that there will be more jobs for the hard working Brits you mention

                • http://twitter.com/PhilKean1 @PhilKean1

                  Which is counter to the conclusions drawn and printed on this blog.
                  .

                • telekuka

                  ed miliband is the son of a dog

                • telekuka

                  the poles are scum and so are the british – vive le mosques

                • Daniel Maris

                  I know there are many firms supplying labour in various industrial processes who specialise in Polish workers. They have safety signs in Polish. There is no chance of a UK worker getting a job with them. Do the CRE care? Do they f***!

                • telekuka

                  they put out………..

                • james102

                  And making some people very rich.

                  Never mind ,domestic help has not been this cheap for a couple of generations, adjusted for inflation that is.

                • telekuka

                  telemachus is a poofta

                • james102

                  I’m sure you did not wish that to sound as Anglophobic as it does. A bit of stereotyping surely?

                • telemachus

                  I am English and love England, so much so that I do not wish to see it wither and die

                • The_Missing_Think

                  .

                  – telemachus,

                  “I am English and love England”

                  Do you accept that without the English, there is no England?

                  Or does your version of England exist,even with zero % English, because you’re not a racist?

                  If it’s not zero %, could you please state the number within two decimal places please?

                  That’s not a huge problem for you is it… just one decimal place then?

                • telemachus

                  The English have been mongrels since the rape of Boudicca’s daughters

                • The_Missing_Think

                  .

                  – telemachus,

                  So why didn’t you write, ‘I am an English mongrel, and love mongrel England’?

                  Do you accept that the mongrel English, that you love… exist on an equal racial basis, as all other races?

                  Or are you holding their diverse – mongrel – DNA code against them? Please clarify this point.

                  Or perhaps, your answer is an indirect (sinister) zero? I really hope not, there’s a 1940s word for it.

                  Thought not. So then, as it’s not zero, (yes?) What percent of English peope does it require, to keep England Englsh?

                  Do whole numbers make it easier for you to compute?

                • telemachus

                  What I am saying is what are the English if not a dynamic interbreeding population who benefit from invigoration of the influx of new ideas and nes new DNA

                • Wilhelm

                  Garbage

                • The_Missing_Think

                  – telemachus,

                  By using either term,”a dynamic interbreeding population”, or “mongrel”, you’re still deliberately pushing some sort of racial purity factor into your decison making. Unless you’ve been advocating a 100% borderless planet, then you are clearly discriminating against white English / British people. Have you?

                  Are you shielding your own family from these true opinions?

                  If you are, you should stop shielding them, and tell them face to face, they are mere English “mongrels”, with no rights to an English England. End of. Alternatively, recognise the fact that you can’t do it, because you know it’s pure tosh, and it would damage relationships.

                  Thus, your comments are statements of self-delusion, because you daren’t repeat them to the people you care about, in the real world. Or have you looked into your grandchildrens’ eyes, and told them… You are English “mongrels”, and so not worthy of your own country, unlike the the splendid pure breeds.

                  Tell them your views outloud, or concede your politics cannot withstand the cold light of day, as they are essentially, just well dressed up anti-white racism.

                • Angela

                  Wow! That is one of the most hateful and offensive things I have seen here. I find it hard to believe that you love England having written that because it reeks of hatred. “Mongrel”:-

                  1. An animal or a plant resulting from various interbreedings, especially a dog of mixed or undetermined breed.
                  2. A cross between different breeds, groups, or varieties, especially a mixture that is or appears to be incongruous.

                  “Mongrels” is hardly applicable to human beings anyway but you are also confusing race and nationality. Is “mongrels” an acceptable word to describe a sovereign people with over 1,000 years of shared history of being “English”, with their own language and flag and recognised as such throughout the world ? That is a real problem and I think I need to report it. It seems that every country but England is entitled to pride in and respect for its national identity.

                • telemachus

                  All successful peoples from the Romans on were mongrels
                  I know of an empire due to last for 1000 years that had a different view
                  And look what happened
                  (Its successor, interbreeding with Turks, poles etc is not doing too bad)

                • Trofim

                  The Japanese have never been successful, nor the Han Chines, come to that.

                • telekuka

                  die you bastard DIE

                • telekuka

                  commies?

              • telekuka

                polish ponces

            • telekuka

              bring on the burkas

          • TomTom

            Dimwit. You clearly have never been to Stamford. You know zilch about Keighley or Stamford…..you are clearly bed-bound but not gagged

          • telekuka

            bring in the hoodies

      • Ron Todd

        Some restriction on future immigration will do little to reduce my choice of restaurants. I do not expect immigrants all to take up cricket, but I would like them to have some understanding of what is or is not acceptable to the natives.

        We already have a large number of people from most parts of the world more flooding in is more likely to dilute British culture than cause it to bloom. Some of the cultural practices of some immigrant do not belong in any civilized country. Would forcing British women to wear a burka that covers one eye because showing two eyes is too enticing for some Muslim men be a welcome addition to our culture

      • anyfool

        telemachus, I have asked you numerous times without answer, i will try again, Would you like your children to be under the control of Muslims. Because you have refused to answer several times i must assume you would not, therefore you think the same as the majority in this country, but like all of you lefties you have not the stomach to say so, moral cowardice is the main characteristic trait of most politicians and so called socialists,

        • telemachus

          I wish my children to participate in the democracy that we have exported round the world and then live by the consensual rule of the majority

          • anyfool

            I wish my children to participate in the democracy.
            So your answer is no you don’t want your children under the control of Muslims, democracy is a tool to them not a requirement of their society.
            You could have said yes or no instead of that meaningless verbiage you have just spouted.

            • telemachus

              Did you read the recent speech of Turkey;s democratically elected Islamist leader?

              • anyfool

                No i did not.Democracy is only a democracy when everyone has freedom to participate, in Turkey they are not, they were until recently secular by law because of Attaturk but now it is being chipped away, as i said democracy is a tool to Muslims to be used against so called kuffars or whatever perjorative name they want to use for non Muslims, useful fools like you will eventually realise how silly you are. still no response to the yes or no question.

              • telekuka

                goble, gobble, gobble

          • TomTom

            Most places where Britain – actually England – has “exported” democracy on the Westminster Model have turned into dictatorships especially in non-white countries

          • telekuka

            so you have children? Obviously you and your woman rented rooms to lodgers. Excellent!

      • RKing

        Bollocks!!

      • Malfleur

        “…someone of Chinese origin does not betray her [sic] heritage by learning to play cricket.”

        Wrong again, telemachus:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdgBZDj8Bdk

      • telekuka

        telemachus, we will slowly slowly destroy the British heritage

    • Austin Barry

      The 7/7 bombings and the London Riots were the precursor of the violence to come. Our elites could have avoided this madness, but they chose, and choose, not to. Why?

      • anyfool

        They are now so frightened of the race industry that they created, it has turned into a self perpetuating monster that has insinuated its way into all facets of public life
        That they dare not confront the monstrous untruths and vicious character assassination that anyone who dares speak up shows what spineless people they have become.
        I am afraid the only way out of this cancerous situation is becoming more fraught with difficulty that none of the current crop of politicians are up to the task.
        We have turned this country into a swamp in which our children will have to face up to the task of draining it.
        I say our children because this generation does not appear to have will or heart to repair the damage done.

        • ArchiePonsonby

          Our sacrifices in numerous wars have robbed us of our backbone, I fear.

          • TomTom

            From 1914 onwards those wars have been a useful diversion from tensions at home especially after Curragh……

      • LB

        I’m not sure its a precursor. The reason is the cause.

        However, we will get violence. The state against the citizen.

        Think what happens when the average bloke on 26K a year, finds out the state has taken 420,000 pounds from him. That’s the difference between what he would have received with his NI going into the FTSE, compared to the cost of a state pension.

    • 2trueblue

      We were governed for 13yrs by the ‘Scottish Raj’ who had no respect for the British people. They decided to change the demographics of the country by allowing open immigration and gave independence to Scotland and Wales. They then proceeded to break England into regions, despite the electorate voting against it.

      They decided that Englishness should be wiped out and did a very good job of that. They politicised the civil service and the media, made the BBC the Blair B C, downgraded most things, and in the end destroyed the economy. There was no thought given to improving any of the infrastructure to cope with the changes and influx they brought about.

      They tied us into more EU legislation, having promised us a referendum on the EU and did not deliver. They created a client state to ensure their re-election for 3 terms. They left us with a terrible legacy that will not be improved for at least a generation. Our grandchildren will pay for it. They ensured that MPs lived a lifestyle that none of us could afford, because we pay for that lifestyle that they live. They unashamedly carry on doing this and we are powerless to do anything about it. Democracy was stolen from us, we now have to work out how to get it back. It is our country……… or is it?

    • Malfleur

      One would except Malala, whose first request of her father made from her hospital bed in Birmingham was for her school books so that she might resume her studies. Unfortunately, when she is fully recovered, she will return to Pakistan where she will find herself on the firing line again.

  • ToryOAP

    Notwithstanding the evidence, the issue is not about economics, it is about the deliberate destruction of the English/British identity for cheap political reasons by the scum in the labour party. I welcome immigrants who integrate into our society. I reject the idea that those from the horn of Africa, Pakistan and Aghanistan who retain their islamic beliefs and customs add anything to our culture; quite the opposite in fact.

    • telemachus

      The typical thought clunk of the revanchist right faced by legitimate immigration

      The whisper that immigrants ‘take’ ‘our’ jobs.
      Then they trumpet immigrants ‘dilute’ British culture; they have a negative cultural impact.
      How pray?

      • Kevin

        Why do you keep writing “revanchist”?

        • ToryOAP

          Because he is mentally ill and a troll fuckwit.

        • james102

          He remembers it from his politics lectures. Obviously a believer in the Brussels style ratchet.

        • telemachus

          Ii might say irredentist but the war like rhetoric spouted by many here cries out revanchism

      • james102

        The libertarian right are all for immigration. The more bipedal work units the cheaper the cost of labour.

        • Curnonsky

          Assuming they will be labouring and not collecting benefits.

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here