Blogs Coffee House

The ugly, cynical EU immigration debate

28 December 2013

2:51 PM

28 December 2013

2:51 PM

Tristram Hunt, Shadow Education Secretary, is an intelligent and articulate individual but like everyone in politics, has the handicap of having to square his views with the record and policies of his own party. His interesting interview with the Fabian Review is a case in point. He attributes some of the education failures of white boys — the new educational underclass — in British schools to the influx of large numbers of East European immigrants in areas like Kent and East Anglia. His remedy for the problem is benign, namely, to educate indigenous youth to the standards needed by employers, so as to outflank the competition, and to focus on vocational skills in a way that Labour didn’t do in power. So far, so dandy.

He acknowledges too that in power Labour didn’t anticipate the scale of the influx from Poland after the EU expansion to the east. (Well quite so: at the time, I tried to put a bet about the likely scale of arrivals with the Home Office spokesman who told me that the numbers coming would be in the order of 10,000; he wouldn’t, alas.)

But what’s interesting is that in order to outline the potential disadvantages of immigration from Eastern Europe, he has to demonstrate his essential inclusivity by squaring the policy with Labour’s traditional immigrant constituency. Take this quote: ‘I’m influenced by my time as MP for Stoke on Trent. I remember talking to a young, second-generation Pakistani British lad who was concerned about the speed on change in the community as a result of the failure to introduce control-led immigration from the EU accession states last time.’


Yes, the speed of the influx was unsettling all round, including to a previous generation of immigrants. But it’s a curious device, to make his argument palatable by expressing it via a ‘second generation Pakistani British lad’ rather than, say, a white Brit. Because if it comes to the speed and scale of uncontrolled immigration, Labour has a case to answer, as Mr Hunt knows, about the influx from outside the EU during its watch.

There are two sets of figures to bear in mind. One is that in the decade between 2001- 2011, ie, during Labour’s time in government, around four million people came to Britain. Roughly 30 per cent of them were from the EU. So the notion that ungoverned immigration is a problem of Poles is not true, though it suits the party to say so. The other is that in the last two years to June, over a million people came to live in Britain. About half of them were from the EU. So it’s still the case that the problem of immigration is not just an EU problem, though you’d never think it to listen to the PM banging on about Bulgarians and benefits.

Both parties, in other words, are focussing on the unfortunate Bulgarians and Romanians who may come to Britain after tomorrow, as opposed to the larger and more problematic immigration from areas such as, say, Pakistan. But then it’s easier to have a go at Bulgarians than to annoy your own constituency. Consider former Home Secretary, David Blunkett, who recently expressed rather unpleasant views about Romanian immigrants on the basis that they were getting up the noses of his Pakistani constituents. But didn’t it similarly occur to him when he opined in office that there was no obvious upper limit to the extent of immigration that ever increasing numbers would have a disruptive effect on indigenous communities?

In other words, in order to divert attention from a real problem, the continuing scale of immigration from outside the EU, both parties are busy getting us worked up about a rather lesser one, the advent of the East Europeans. If we’re to talk about people in terms of their economic utility rather than their human and cultural worth — and that seems to be the tenor of the debate — I’d hazard a guess that the Romanians will have significantly less to contribute than the Poles, who transformed the British labour force. But I really don’t feel inclined to follow either of the main parties in attributing to these new arrivals the problems that go with immigration more generally. It’s ugly, cynical politics.

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
  • PG

    The only people who profit from labour mobility are companies ,and investors.

  • PG

    Many EU countries have no need of immigration . Yes they need highly qualified and educated people for certain creative and technical posts , but do not need manual workers , shopkeepers etc .
    The Eu idea of free movement was basically a good idea , but as usual , with third rate politicians , they forgot all the other parameters that make up a countries and their legislation . One classic example is companies employing people in one country
    and sending them to work in another , and taking financial advantage of the different legislation .
    The major problem with all EU immigration legislation is the fact that they ignore the most important parameter , and that is integration . Add to this that there is basically no punishment for immigrants who do not respect laws , who should be sent back to their country of origin , and this should also apply to naturalised citizens .
    The use of cheap labour has removed the need for companies to improve efficiency and be creative .

  • Paul Henry.

    How does this speculation contribute to a sensible debate, ‘I’d hazard a guess that the Romanians will have significantly less to contribute than the Poles’?

  • RobertC

    “… educate indigenous youth to the standards needed by employers, so as to outflank the competition …”

    Isn’t that ‘wacist?

  • freethinker14

    What this piece fails to explain is why non-EU immigration remains at such high levels. It also fails to address the issue of open border immigration which is the bigger problem because we cannot control this. The fact that non-EU migration was higher in the past is irrelevant.

    What happens if EU migration increases by 50% or 100% over the next few years as the UK economy grows and the rest of the EU falters under the Euro? At least with non-Eu migrants we can simply close the border and say no, assuming there is political will to do so. The same cannot be said for the EU border and this is why it’s so important that this changes.

    It’s also worth noting that while the poles have largely had a positive impact due to their work ethic and skill levels, the same cannot be said for Bulgaria and Romania.

    Crime rates amongst Romanians and Bulgarians that have already come to the UK are far higher than the national average.

    What’s the point in blocking skilled non-EU migrants from coming here but allowing unskilled EU migrants in? How does this help our country grow?

    Lastly, why are we harping on net migration? The majority of migrants leaving are those with skills as they can only migrate outside the EU with skills. These are the ones we want to keep. Again, how does it benefit us to have skilled locals migrating away and having unskilled EU migrants flooding in.

    What we need is a skilled based migration system for EU and non-EU migrants like most western countries outside the EU do. Command of the English language should be mandatory and a points based system favouring young people with the skills that we need and cannot fulfil locally. The current system is simply not fit for purpose.

  • George Smiley

    The nonsense of “it is all right as long as they are Whites”. Even the people of Bolivia have more in common with the people of England than the peoples of Romania and Bulgaria!

  • Treebrain

    Melanie, how were the Roma immigrants to Northern Ireland handled?

    Did the Irish Nationalist community not firebomb their homes until the Roma all decided to leave?

  • lmda

    nunc dimittis…

  • global city

    It is just unfortunate that a combine of the Liberal Left and the establishment toadies, in their desperation to undermine UKIP at every opportunity, have steered the debate away from the original UKIP point… that the UK can’t control it’s own borders because of it’s membership of the EU, into a strategy for trying to paint UKIP as the ‘anti immigrant’ party.

    How sad is that? How great is the missed opportunity to resolve a deep seated problem?

    Think about that all you pretend Tory journos the next time you prepare to write another little sneering piece about the fruit loops?

  • Donafugata

    The distinction between EU and non-EU migrants is not clear cut.

    As an ESOL teacher I discovered that routes to the UK are not always direct.
    For instance, many students of Bangladeshi origin had lived in Paris for years but had acquired a European passport and decided to move on when circumstances were more favourable.

    Lots of Somalis, the most aggressive and demanding of all immigrants, had been living in Holland. When benefits became less generous, they came to “the land of free money”.

    Britain, France, Spain and Portugal are now paying the price of past colonial rule by having to accommodate the native populations who can now access the entire continent, not just the former motherland.

    They are all Europeans now but without the allegiance that America gets from its huddled masses.

  • serguei_p

    The chances of a child of an Eastern European been fully integrated is much higher then the chances of a Muslim or person with some other strong religious views. They more likely to be married outside the religious and cultural environment. But mentioning this is a taboo.
    It is much safer from political correctness point of view to talk about immigration of Bulgarians then to talk about immigration of Pakistanis.

    • Agrippina

      Save that we have seen documentaries on corruption and light fingered Bulgs & Roms, using the kids to scam at ATM’s or asking for directions with a map out and their fingers in your pockets lifting stuff, that is the prob.

      We are the most densely populated and want no immigrants from anywhere. Our standard of living has been eroded by all the poor of the world turning up and offering their services for a pittance and we are fed up.

      • serguei_p

        It is also not politically correct to say this, but when one hears that Romanians did something illegal, in most cases it is about Romanian Gypsies, not ethnic Romanians. This is what is different if one compares Romania and Poland – high Gypsy population in Romania.
        Certainly the high immigration has negative impact on low paid UK workers and make property prices too high – it is impossible to argue with this.
        What I am trying to say is that while today its OK to talk about Poles and Romanians, it is still taboo to talk about “more multicultural” immigrants.

        • George Smiley

          The distinction is all academic as long as the Romanian Roma have Romanian citizenship as Romanian subjects.

  • Alb Einstein

    Tories , labour can talk to themselves until the cows come home, but in my humble opinion, much of the public is no longer listening to them. Both of these parties (if they really are 2 different parties anymore) are to blame. immigration under the current useless government is still totally out of control.

    Grant Shapps can shove his, “we’re listening message” – I’ll never vote for these traitors again.

  • Agrippina

    Dave & Co need to consider that we are the most densly populated in EU and it is an unsustainable position, it will lead to unrest. So instead of permitting more immigrants look at ways to halt them. A bond £5k per adult. Med Insurance for all travelling here incl holiday travellers. Schools all children of immigrants to pay towards their broods education. No access to social hsing, if you cannot support yourselves-deport. No speak Eng deport, will never be able to support themselves.

    Why does Brent Council hold 3 citizenship ceremonies per week for 50 weeks per yr, granting citizenship to 25/30 bods per ceremony. No more handing it out like confetti, children apply at 21 if unblemished record consider enroute to it after 5 further yrs.

    Any trouble with the law, deport whole family, can pursue ‘fam life’ in faraway land. We may end up with a more willing to integrate and highly qualified & skilled immigrant. Rather than the hostile to us freeloaders and religion of peace murderers we appear to attract at present.

  • Adanco

    About ten years ago all EU memberstates decided to postpone with five years
    opening borders for new members from eastern Europe.
    Except the UK. !!
    So all – mainly Poles – came to the UK because they had NOWHERE ELSE to go.
    The UK made a big mistake.
    They were sure only about ten or twenty thousand would come.
    In the end more then one million arrived in the five year periode.
    Otherwise UKIP would not exist today.

  • Two Bob

    Fact: Romania and Bulgaria are the poorest countries in the EU. Mass movement westwards is guaranteed.

    Our borders are open to them from next week.

    • ian channing

      A young Slovak working in Austria told me last month that nearly 2 million out of a total Slovak population of over 5 million had already gone abroad to work. When I asked him what were considered by Slovakians the ideal destinations for migration, he said, America and the UK. Why? “The English language. Everybody spends ten years learning it. Why not use it?” This factor, he said, makes the UK more attractive than Germany, which is much closer and has a stronger, larger economy. The same logic prevails for all of Eastern Europe and beyond.
      Population of Romania: 21 million. Bulgaria: 7 million. Ukraine: 45 million. Turkey: 74 million.

  • StandAgainstGenocide

    Flooding ALL White countries and ONLY White countries with non-White immigration combined with forced integration is a program of White genocide.

    Africa will still be full of Africans
    Asia will still be full of Asians.
    Only White children will suffer from this.

    Read the UN genocide conventions: It is genocide.

    They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-White.
    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

    • Wilhelm

      Peter Sutherland, head of UN Immigration and GOLDMAN SACHS banker wants mass immigration in all European nations, Sutherland is not Irish, just as Sarkozy is not French and Peter Mandelson and Jack Straw is not English, they’re non gentiles.

      • vieuxceps2

        Come on now- “non-gentiles”, ??? If they are Jews why not say so? Being prissy and mealy-mouthed about the truth can never be helpful.Have we reached the stage where we dare not utter reality? It’s surely nobetter to be anti-English than it is to be anti arab or anti -jew?Why the difference?

        • Wilhelm

          ”Have we reached the stage where we dare not utter reality?”


          • Daniel Maris

            You’re saying they suffer from goyophobia?

      • Daniel Maris

        Non-gentiles? Have you come over all religious Wilhelm?

  • Terence Hale

    “The ugly, cynical EU immigration debate”.Fr. Reding the EU commissioner
    may have made herself guilty of “injury to office”. Without questioning the
    free movement of people her policy of “human watering-can dumping” is sociologically dangerous. Adopting such a policy in preference to improving the standard of living in the immigrant’s countries she has initiated unrest and financial bankruptcy of many municipalities’. Britain a tolerant country will cope but France and Germany will face problems.

    • outraged

      ‘improve’ is the code for ‘take over’.

  • Lady Magdalene

    They focus on EU immigration because they can correctly parrot the line that there’s nothing they can do about it. The EU Treaties won’t let them.
    They hope it distracts people from the mass immigration by 3rd world peasants that they COULD do something to stop, but won’t.

  • Riz

    Melanie- can you cite evidence (quantitative or qualitative) that shows, say, British Pakistanis contributing less than poles? If not, why do you harbour such negative thoughts on this hard working and industrious section of our country?

    • roystonvasey

      Pakistanis in the UK have a higher unemployment rate,higher rate of ill health(partly due to so many first-cousin marriages) and are more likely to carry out Islamist terrorism.

    • Raw England

      When you say “our country”, who is “our”?

      Firstly, Pakistanis are not ethnically British, and most certainly not English.

      Finally, 75% of Muslim (AKA Pakistani) women in OUR country, don’t work; they just drain our benefit budget, along with their many kids. And Pakistanis/Muslims overall have caused huge, terrible damage to our nation. You’ll find that most actual English people are in full agreement.


      • Riz

        Hello-You cite a percentage- what is the source? Peace be with you.

    • Daniel Maris

      I wouldn’t normally agree with such sentiment but if it’s Riz Latif, I’ll make an exception.

    • outraged

      Any reason why you have written the word describing my nationality in lower case?

  • Smithersjones2013

    It doesn’t matter what verbal tap dancing a malevolent Labour Party offer, they have no solutions worthy of this country. They would be better off peddling their 3rd world despotism in South America and so would we!

  • outraged

    We are to blame for poor results of English boys? Unlikely ….

  • alabenn

    When two faced lying politicians are covered by the type of spurious rubbish this woman writes , ” is an intelligent and articulate individual ” when she should of wrote,

    , is a cunning slippery tongued individual who is also a deceitful lying piece of traitorous trash who will say and do anything to get himself and his equally treacherous party elected.

  • Wilhelm

    If Third World immigration was stopped today, we, the indigenous ethnic British will still become a minority in our OWN country, due to the ‘efnik’ immigrant high birth rates, popping out babies like biscuits in a biscuit factory.

    • David Webb

      Instead of giving the immigrants and their children Family Allowance, we ought to be taxing their high birth rate! (see the Islamic “poll tax” on Jews and Christians)

      • Wilhelm

        You may find this documentary enlightening on the New World Order and the trajectory where we’re headed, one world government. Rothschild ” I care not who makes the laws in your nation, so long as I control the money supply.” It’s all about the money.

  • David Webb

    What’s a Pakistani British lad? A contradiction in terms! These people are not British, and being British citizens doesn’t make them any more British.

  • Alexsandr

    when will tristram hunt be interviewed by James Naughtie? He is more of a hunt than Jeremy 🙂

  • Agrippina

    Since I keep posting the link to a Daily Telegraph article to accompany my comments I keep being deleted. The offending piece was written by Jane Kelly and titled I feel like a stranger where I live. Free speech I wish that were true.

    • Will Kettel

      Just read the article you recommended, one cannot fail to sympathise with anyone caught in her situation, “mass immigration will make reluctant racists of us all.”

      • Agrippina

        Culturally the immigrants are not interested in integrating or accepting our way of life. Thus immigration should be limited. If you cannot accept our way of life, stay where you are or leave to live where you will fit in. Ghettoising this country, is not the way forward.

        All folks coming here should be reqd to have med insurance(stop the pregnant fliers), pay for schooling for their large brood, no social hsing, large bond £5k shld the unforseen occur, no citizenship. Only pay child benefit 2 kids etc. That should slow things down and no speak Eng, no benefits, back to where you came from, that is what duplicitious dave said. Doing nothing as per usual.

        • Will Kettel

          For years we had idle talk which usually sounded something like this: “It’s time the British people were allowed an honest and frank discussion about immigration.” The truth is they lied and they will continue to lie, this policy will not be challenged, thousands of people will continue to come into Britain and this country will continue to be transformed beyond all recognition. They don’t want to have this discussion, in fact they’re terrified of having it, because that would mean admitting that for very many people, in communities across the country, mass immigration has been an unmitigated disaster and whatsmore (here’s the clincher) they are absolutely powerless to do anything about it.

        • Fergus Pickering

          That is a very sweeping statement. It is true of many muslims but not really true of Poles and certainly not true of Americans. You ought to be more specific.

          • Agrippina

            Read the article in the DT written by Jane Kelly. Then visit Luton, Birmingham, Leicester, Derby, London esp Tower Hamlets, Haringey, Brent, Ealing. Then go to Rochdale and any old mill town in the north. Blackburn etc.

            Poles around here in Cambs drink driving up, selling food stuffs all imported in their supermkt, the shopkeeper cannot speak Eng, she cannot tell you what is in the tins&bottles she is selling. The schools are bursting with them and the classroom assistants are polish or lith,lat speakers to support them in Eng. Leaving the Eng kids without support because school cannot employ lots of assistants. Lge catholic families who have not paid in enough to be taking out as much as they are.

            • serguei_p

              This is the first generation of Poles. Of course they don’t speak the language and they like eating different foods.

              But it does not mean that they don’t want their children to integrate like it happens in case immigrants with some particular religions

              The Poles are not going to send their children back to the country of their origin to get a bride who is “not spoilt by the West”. They would not try to prevent their daughters from marrying English lads. Their children won’t one day “find their religion” and refuse to handle alcohol while working in M&S.

  • Agrippina

    Sad truth is that the 3 parties cannot to be trusted to support and improve the lot of the working class and Brits in general.

    What is the point of having immigration policies if no-one carries out any of the procedures properly. It has been reported that many illegals are apprehended but UKBA never quite gets around to deporting the bods.

    The only patriotic thing to do is to vote for someone prepared to put Brits 1st. That means voting for anyone but the 3party troughers, who talk tough prior to election time and then do absolutely nothing.

    We don’t need anymore immigrants from the EU or from other faraway lands. I would like to think that cameron et al sometimes consider the lot of the working class and how ghastly it is for them to live in these ever changing times and not for the better for them. Culturally we are worlds apart and for the moment we need no further change. click and see

  • David B

    It’s interesting to see how Labour are dealing with this phase of a long term debate. Their traditional response has been a loud screen of “RACIST”. This stifled debate but burried the issue which resulted in the “bigoted woman” incident.

    This new approach is to try and frame the debate in a way that says if your skin is white your opinion is not welcome or needed. It the screen of “RACIST” in a different rapper.

    • Alexsandr

      if anyone yells wayciist at me I just tell them to shut the f*c k up and argue properly.

      • swatnan

        You can’t argue with a racist bigot, not that you are one.

    • LB

      Here are the things to watch out for.

      1. Migrants are better than the British. [Less likely to be on welfare]

      Pure racism.

      2. White’s can’t cook curry

      Pure racism.

      3. Migrants make a contribution

      Ho hum. Pay one quid (that’s the contribution) and get the welfare, the free health care, free defence.

      4. Generalisation. If one migrant is good, all must be good.

      The BNP argument. If one muslim is a paedophile they all must be. It’s the same logic. Some migrants are undoubtably good for the UK. Lots aren’t. We need the ones that are good and not the ones that are bad.

      5. Economic benefits. |

      Here the trick is that migrants pay nothing for the common goods but Brits carry the full cost. ie. If a migrant comes to the UK the cost of the roads doesn’t change, so if they pay a bit more than the per head costs we won’t count the common goods. ie. They get it for free and they don’t pay a fair share.

      6. Migrants are less likely to be on welfare.

      True statement. 29% are compared to 35% of Brits. Bit hard to say then that the 29% are making a net benefit.

      See point 3. There’s a difference between “make a contribution” and “make a net contribution”. Politicians want you to think they are the same.

      How to counter?

      Ask them how a worker at Starbucks on min wage (12K) a year makes a net contribution. Government spending is 11.5K a year per person per year. It’s an average, but what the heck. The left claim that on average they are better than Brits. Starbucks isn’t paying tax, so the employer doesn’t make it up. It’s pretty hard to pay 11.5K a year in tax on a salary of 12K, and live in the UK.

      • Daniel Maris

        Lots of good points.

        Regarding welfare, the figures are often skewed because:

        1. Most immigrants arrive as single with no children. They are more often than not keen to work.

        2. But they often acquire UK citizenship one way or another e.g. via marriage, within 5 years or so. By the time they have children, are in receipt of social housing and housing benefit etc. they are no longer immigrants but “UK Citizens” and don’t figure as immigrants in the statistics.

        • LB

          Easy solution.

          1 Longer period before you get citizenship.

          2. Citizen test, along with migration, means you have to be a net contributor.

          Almost all of the arguments about migration disappear if people know for certain that all migrants are paying in more than they are taking out. The exception are the racists.

          Currently that isn’t the case. People know that they are subsidising migrants, either with extra taxes or cuts to welfare.

          If the left want different, I would offer them a way out. They can pick a migrant and make up the difference out of their own pocket. Sponsor a migrant.

          I can’t see many taking up the offer.

          • Daniel Maris

            My preferred solution would be an infrastructure levy for all immigrants, whatever route they arrive by, reflecting the additional infrastructure costs they are bringing with them. That’s pretty similar to your approach but would be simpler and less open to abuse. If you are proposing an immigrant has to show they are earning say £20,000, you will soon find bogus companies springing up everywhere claiming to be paying peasants from Waziristan £20,000 per annum…when of course they won’t be. But if you have an actual levy of, say,
            £200,000 that will really dramatically reduce immigration. You could have exceptions to the levy in areas where you want to encourage entrants e.g. academics, medical staff and so on.

            • LB

              It’s even easier. Use the tax system.

              1. Migrants have to submit a tax for each year.
              2. Migrants have to pay 11.5K per person in tax.

              So at the end of the year, you check the tax paid, against 11.5K, and either they or their employer tops up, or the have to leave within 3 months.

              That leaves just one obvious problem. What to do for the first 5 years (or put in place your own period).

              1. Pay 11.5K up front, to come off your tax. The simple approach.
              2. Buy a bond (insurance policy), that pays the difference between tax paid and 11.5K.

              ie. Use the existing system, the tax system.

              The 11.5K is easy. It’s just total government spending divided by population. Worked out once a year by a junior clerk.

              If the left want a lower threshold, they can cut spending.

              • outraged

                Averages, averages ….
                the only immigrants you will have left under your tax system will be muslims with 4 wives and 26 children who consume 211.5K a year. Good luck with that!

                • LB

                  26K a year is the cap. They have already been capped. Not enough too. That’s 40K a year before tax. Yet another one of those lies told by politicians.

                  So those with 4 wives and 26 children, 31 people, would be welcome so long as 356.5K a year in tax was paid. If not, you have to leave.

              • Daniel Maris

                Maybe, but once someone is in the country, it’s easy for them to dodge the system with false documentation. A one off levy means that their only alternative is illegal immigration, which it is easier to control if you are serious about it.

        • LB

          29% of migrants on benefits?

        • outraged

          How people can put under the same label Muslim family with 4 wives and 26 children and decent, well educated, hard working immigrants from Poland . These averages do not make any sense.

          If Brits want to pay for the first despite of them being likely to hate everything about UK and plot to destroy UK, its their problem. Just do not implicate us in this madness.

        • Two Bob

          Arrive single. That makes them eager to procreate…..

      • David B

        Good points especially on the use of generalities.

        Does the net benefit allow for funds repatriated back to their home countries to support families there. Resulting in less sending here.

      • Two Bob

        More people = more strain on resources. FACT

        • LB

          Yep. But if those people are paying more tax than the cost of the resources, then there is less strain because there is more money available.

          If however, they are not paying enough tax to pay for the resources, then your conclusion is correct.

          You can’t make the statement about state spending, without going into the taxation side.

      • Agrippina

        Then of course we get the ‘beeg eesue’ sellers the majority now are immigrants claiming to be self employed and thus enabling them to access all the benefits, (housing &council tax, working&child tax credit, child benefit and top up for not earning enough to live on). (eastern euro fat/pregnant dropped off by car at my local supermkt, people are wising up and she doesn’t do aswell as she used too).

        Ditto the ‘carr vash’ workers (given space in supermarkets) all of whom are immigrants, desperate to pursue a career in car cleaning apparently!

        • LB


          Now there are lots of people on the other side who don’t consume much in the way of resources, pay lots of tax.

          The problem is that MPs look at this group and assume there are none in your categorisations.

          What we need is people in the categories of paying lots of tax. We don’t need big issue sellers from Romania.etc.

          However, its not going to happen. What’s going to happen is lots of low skilled low paid migrants. Romania will export their criminals like Castro. Then their skilled workers will leave. Then their economies will go down the toilet. Next thing we will be bailing them out, and their politicians will cream off their cuts.

          Long term, that leaves the big problem, pensions. The current pensions debt is 7,000 bn a year. Total debts rising at 850 bn a year. Taxes are only 600.

          What happens when all of these people want their pensions, whether or not they have paid in? Why do you think the lib dems want a 140 a week pension with no need to contribute. Ever wondered why?

          • Agrippina

            That is why at the top of this comments section I stated why we should attempt to attract the highly qualified & skilled immigrant. We have enough troughers of our own without adding to the numbers. But I really detest supporting all the immigrants, as the maj do not add to our culture and dislike us. I never listen to the libs, they lie, like the other 2 parties.

  • Ron Todd

    The liberals have been equating free movement of people with free trade. There is a limit to free trade. If we cannot freely move toxic waste without control or regulation why should we have free movement of toxic people into this country?

  • Hexhamgeezer

    So, Labour lied on immigration and continue to lie. The Tories lied on immigration and continue to lie. The Libs lied about immigration and continue to lie and want even more.

    So,vote but do not vote for LibLabCon.

    • Malfleur

      When is Fraser Nelson going to offer his thoughts on Neathergate? It must be two, perhaps three, years ago now that he promised to do so. Cat got your tongue, Mr. Nelson?

      • Pip

        Nelson is a disingenuous Pro Establishment Hack so I wouldn’t expect any honest debate from his quarter.

      • Hexhamgeezer

        I believe his tongue is employed elsewhere and although it be forked it can only be one place at a time.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      A little simplistic, but essentially on the money.

  • Wilhelm

    Samuel Dickson ” There’s thousands of meetings across the world in white countries on how to help non white people, but are there thousands of meetings in non white countries on how to help white people ? ” Think about it.

    • HookesLaw

      The only conclusion one can make after that remark mis that you are clinically insane. As ever its a disgusting slur on the name of journalism that you are allowed to spout your vile garbage.

      • Wilhelm

        Eh ?

      • TruthBeatsLies

        Do you honestly believe it makes sense to say someone who puts a perfectly valid question, is therefore spouting “vile garbage”…???

        This is what’s wrong with this whole debate – whites simply are not permitted to put their points, without being vilified unjustly solely in order to discredit them…! And they – the whites – just sit back and take this outrageous injustice with barely a murmur…!!!

      • Two Bob

        You are the vile one here mister. Your comments are beyond the pale.

  • HookesLaw

    Immigration from the EU can be broadly said to be temporary as many many will return as their own country’s economies will improve.

    The figures for the last year may surprise people. Non-muslim India dominates with lots of nicely white Irish French Italians Germans and Americans to cosy up to us. As well as the christian Poles of course.

    • LB

      Hasn’t worked so far has it.

      Where is the exodus back to India? The exodus back to Ireland, Germany and the USA?

      Their economies have improved its not happening. Your thesis is proved wrong by the evidence.

      • HookesLaw

        When did India join the EU? As I said many EU migrants will return home as their country’s economies improve. Some will stay. In the longer nterm there will be less immigration from India.

        • Alexsandr

          evidence for this. or have you just made it up?

          • LB

            He’s made it up.

            • HookesLaw

              Ha… the figures? You can argue with them if you want – I provded a link. maybe they are wrong! They point to a relatively low level of Muslim immigration.
              And there is past evidence of immigrants returning home. Migrationwatch speculate the same.

              • Daniel Maris

                No. You just don’t understand the difference between the terms “Indian” and “Muslim”. Unlike in Islamic Pakistan, which has mostly got rid of its Hindu population, the Muslim minority in India has prospered and expanded.

            • Daniel Maris

              Yep he made it up.

        • LB

          The figures for the last year may surprise people. Non-muslim India dominates with lots of nicely white Irish French Italians Germans and Americans to cosy up to us. As well as the christian Poles of course.
          (% country by birth: India 9.1, Poland 8.7, Pakistan 5.8, Ireland 5.1. Germany 3.8, USA 3.0)


          You brought up India.


          As I said many EU migrants will return home as their country’s economies improve.


          Not true. Your theory is false.

          The economies of Ireland, German, the USA which were on your list have improved, and yet there is no mass exodus of those nationals back.

          So you theorise, and its easy to show that the theory is wrong because its predicts that Irish, German and US nations would have returned (from your chosen examples)

          • HookesLaw

            You are incapable of basic English comprehension.

            My suggestion was not that Indian immigration would return. My suggetion alluded to the large non muslim and indeed non coloured strand to our immigration.
            (and the USA is not in the EU either)

            How do you know that the USA immigration is not temporary? As you say I thorise. if you are capable of remembering back, a large number of irish migrants returned when they were last in the middle mof their ‘celtic tiger’ boom.

            • Ron Todd

              There are a lot of Muslims in India.

              • TruthBeatsLies

                And a lot of them intend to get to America – though many will polish-up their English and do their early practice work in the UK.

          • Bonkim

            India is not ‘non-Muslim’ Muslim population ~180Million in a total of over 1.2 billion. The Muslim population of India is close to the total of Pakistan.

          • outraged

            Your percentages only show legal immigration. Do you believe that in 2011 there were only 100K of Chinese immigrants in UK? Unlikely …

    • Daniel Maris

      Where do you get the info that the Indians are “non Muslim”. There are 150 million Muslims in India and a lot of “Indian” immigration is actually Muslim.

      Likewise we are supposed to be bringing in huge numbers of “Germans” but I have never heard of a German quarter in London. Most of those “Germans” will be Pakistanis, Turks and Africans with German passports.

    • outraged

      Our economies will never improve, because we have been LBO’d. Free movement of Capital in the 90ties did it when our national wealth was valued at 5 pounds per adult citizen, LSE/Soros came up with the plan. Nice, huh?!

  • andagain

    He attributes some of the education failures of white boys — the new
    educational underclass — in British schools to the influx of large
    numbers of East European immigrants in areas like Kent and East Anglia.
    His remedy for the problem is benign, namely, to educate indigenous
    youth to the standards needed by employers, so as to outflank the

    Implying that the immigrants are better educated than the indigenous population? So how would their arrival cause the educational standards of the indigenous population to fall?

    • Fergus Pickering

      Qite easily.The immigrants need English lessons. So teachers have to spend time on teaching them English and therefore less time teaching the indigenous their tables and so forth.

      • HookesLaw

        So how is it then that allegedly white boys under achieve compared to the immigrants – if immigrants have such a bad head start? Where does this leave white girls?

        Methinks this is another case of socialists twisting the truth. Its more likely socialist sense of entitlement and lazyness that negates against boys.
        ‘Boys from white working-class families are growing up with no hope of a decent education or career because of an ‘anti-school culture’, the head of Ofsted warned last night.
        Sir Michael Wilshaw says generations of children in deprived areas are doomed to underachieve, thanks to an erosion of traditional community values and parents failing to set boundaries.’

        • Fergus Pickering

          I don’t doubt that what you say is true. My point was a smaller one. My daughter has to spend quite a lot of tim teaching Turkish children English. Later, the turks, more hard working and intelligent than idgenous white boys…. you see where this is going.

          • HookesLaw

            As you say – more hard working. This is a serious issue and its where we should be concentrating our efforts. The unwillingness of our own people to study and work is a serious issue. The left seem unwilling to want us discuss it. Meantime the nutjob right just rant on in their bigoted way about immigration. The reason for immigration needs to be adressed.

            • Fergus Pickering

              We are in total agreement here..

            • the viceroy’s gin

              So basically, what you’re saying is that the socialist paradise you Camerluvvies support, with your buddy the H2B, isn’t doing what it is you claim, and thus there is a “reason for immigration”, as a result of your failed ideology.

              In other words, you don’t want to fix what it is that you support, which is broken. And you support mass immigration.

              • LB

                And remember,migrants make a positive contribution. Even Abu Qautada is good for the UK. LibConLab policy.

              • LB

                And remember,migrants make a positive contribution. Even Abu Qautada is good for the UK. LibConLab policy.

            • TruthBeatsLies

              Having watched this situation for many years from close-up in a heavily Asian populated part of West London, it is now quite clear that immigrants – particularly those from the Indian Sub-Continent! – are not simply harder working than the whites, of their own volition… In addition they are also given relentless coaching, every conceivable encouragement and incentive to succeed by parents whose wish that they succeed often verges on the manic.

            • MikeF

              “The left seem unwilling to want us discuss it. Meantime the nutjob right just rant on in their bigoted way about immigration.”
              No the left suppress attempt to discuss it by deploying their usual language of formulaic invective . Your second sentence is actually an example of that.

          • crosscop

            More hard-working? The Turks? Not according to these figures from the BBC –

            British in employment – 73.49%.

            Turks in employment – 41.61%.


            • Fergus Pickering

              I was referring to the 7- year-old children my daughter is teaching and what she says about them.. I wouldn’t trust anything from the BBC if I were you. They are not trustworthy at all.

        • Two Bob

          methinks you need to suck Mr Boles’ white snake.

      • glurk

        Teachers who teach ESOL to children and adults tend not to have to bother teaching them tables….someone else does that!

    • outraged

      I am afraid that this Hunt bloke really hates so called Eastern Europe judging from his works as a historian. He is therefore likely to overlook the fact that Polish students fare better in Reading, Maths and Science according to PISA:

      • andagain

        Except that he implicitly admitted that when he blamed them for the lower standards of native-born white boys.

  • lgrundy

    He’s a member of the Labour Party. His contribution to any debate is going to be “ugly and cynical”.

  • Tom M

    Good God it gets worse by the day. Anybody looking like a puppet from Thunderbirds called Tristram and a spokesperson for Labour to boot has to be some sort of silly joke.

    • Nicholas K

      “looking like a puppet from Thunderbirds” Made my day!

  • Lorne Cartlidge

    Yep ,when the likes of moi said anything about immigration , i was usually called xenophobic but often racist by left leaning folk but like so many things such as this and inner city crime,if pointed out by a previous generation of immigrant, we no longer have to play emperors clothes and can acknowledge the whole nightmare labour brought up on us and still being helped along by the libcon

  • LB

    So much more twaddle from an MP.

    Lets talk about the economics he says.

    Does he talk about economics? Does he heck.

    The reason is that idiots like him are spending 11.5K per person per year. To break even on a migrant each and every one needs to pay 11.5K a year in tax. About 44K

    They aren’t.

    He won’t talk about the economics because if he does, he will be shown up as a person who has caused untold damage to the UK by admitting millions of low skilled low paid migrants.

    He won’t talk about it too because the obvious solution is to start removing migrants on welfare from the UK, and working up to a point where there is an economic benefit to them being in the UK.

  • Tron

    England is gone. It’s just a memory, a postcard or a TV series set in the past.
    No-one had to fight for it, we just gave it away.

    • Ricky Strong

      I do agree, but I can just envisage those in the countryside clinging onto the last vestages of our culture, bellowing “no surrender”!

    • HookesLaw

      Infantile twaddle.

      • LB

        So I take it you’re of the view that in order to eat curry we have to accept people to go with them?

        Explain the lack of Mayan temples with human sacrifices? After all lots of people like chocolate.

        • Alexsandr

          the big lie is that you need to have a dark skin to cook a curry. Plainly twaddle.

          • LB

            Of course it is. Just like Chocolate.

            What’s needed is trade, both in goods and ideas.

          • outraged

            Of course it is. Now you even need a dark skin to work in the bank. First computer arrived in India in 1987, now they took over all the credit for R&D.

            Your sons or grandsons have greater chance to cook curry as a career than to have decent paying professional jobs.

            • Fergus Pickering

              I went into my bank last week. Not a dark skin to be seen. Were they all hiding?

              • Tom Tom

                Where do you live Fergus ? In my bank in town I am the only one speaking English

                • Fergus Pickering

                  I live in Kent. Where do you live?

        • HookesLaw

          Curry? You seem to have joined the growing list of the clinically insane.

          ‘we have to accept the people…’ You are quite funny really – you don’t realise what you actually say.

          • Two Bob

            Why do you think insulting people will win the argument?

            • Pip

              He is a lefty, they cant win the debate because it is their inane beliefs that have caused the issues so they insult and cloud the issues, its all their weak fooled minds can comprehend.

      • vieuxceps2

        Said it before and say it again-Hookeslaw? Get more sense from Coleslaw.

        • Pip

          Surely its foolish to debate a fool.

      • Two Bob

        Instead of saying that, how about arguing how or why he is wrong?

        I know why you dont, because he is correct.

        Simply saying ‘infantile twaddle’ does not make you right

    • outraged

      Your bigger problem is export of all manufacturing jobs to China – and giveaway of all banking jobs to India. That what is destroying traditional way of living, any decent living. Not a few Polish immigrants.

  • Ben Cobley

    It’s a fair enough point that the whole debate on immigration gets skewed off into strange and bizarre corners and fails to really get to grips with the basic need to get numbers down and let existing immigrants settle in without lumping further great social change on to communities without their consent.

  • Pip

    Yet another LibLabCon MP debating the issues whilst intentionally ignoring the facts, in other words, lying.

    • @PhilKean1

      And she is not alone in either being very wrong –

      – or very determined to deflect attention away from the real problem.

      I mean, are there any people left who still think anti-unlimited-immigration campaigners only see the debate in terms of EU verses NON-EU immigration levels?

      It seems that there either are, or there are those who appear to be wanting to polarise the debate along those lines in order to disguise the real problem.

      And the real problem is that non-EU immigration is effectively a politically-benign syndrome that, unless in stratospheric numbers, has little effect on Britain’s political independence and ability to remain democratic and prosperous.

      EU immigration, on the other hand, is designed specifically to eat away at Britain’s ability to retain those vital areas of Sovereignty, making absorption into Federal-EU Governance and the adoption of the Euro an inevitability.

      • Pip

        NON EU Islamic Immigrants and their high birth rate compared to the that of the Indigenous British People will ultimately cause large scale civil unrest and probably far worse. EU Migrants will mostly leave the UK as soon as it is no longer in their interests to stay here. Non EU Immigrants will never leave unless we force them to.

        • @PhilKean1

          I am afraid you are completely missing the picture.

          EU immigration is designed to erode the British peoples’ ability to make a rational, dispassionate and logical choice if we ever get an in-or-out referendum.

          I won’t explain why. I am sure you can think of some examples yourself as to why this would be the case.

  • Chris

    Thank you. The parties are not dealing with mass third world immigration which THEY CAN STOP, and instead are concentrating on EU which they CAN’T STOP so guaranteeing nothing gets changed. This is all a vile ploy.

    • LB

      Oh but they can. They will tell you they can’t but they can. We know that 100% to be the case.

      The EU law is the freedom of movement of people, goods, capital and services. Except we know now that in the case of Cyprus, it doesn’t hold. Politicians lie about this.

      All that needs is for a limit on migration to be public policy and its legal. Ah, its already public policy.

      MPs lie.

      • Andy

        Exactly so. I didn’t see much ‘free movement’ of capital from Cyprus Banks when it suited the EU. Same can go for ‘free movement’ of people.

        • LB

          Exactly. They betray their real intent, which is to do nothing and let the migration escalate.

          My view, so long as you pay more in tax than it costs to have you here, you are welcome to come and stay.

          If you don’t you or your employer can top it up, if not you have to leave.

          Likewise, if you commit crimes, you have to leave.

          Migration is optional the UK can choose whom to accept on economic grounds.

          For asylum, its different. There we should apply the UN convention for refugees. If the UK is the first safe country they end up in, then they can stay. However over the last few years the number granted asylum is small

          Don’t confuse asylum with economic migration. That’s the left wing view that they are the same. They aren’t.

          There are other impacts of migration that aren’t talked about. For example, what if the UK deported all its criminals to Spain. Put them in buses, kicked them out. Would Spain welcome it? That’s what Bulgaria and Romania are hoping happens.

          However, they are equally likely to find that the productive tax payer leaves, and they are then up the swannee with large costs and a lack of tax to pay for it. No doubt we are then expected to bail them out.

          Or think about a GP from the third world. We accept them, they paid for the training and get nothing. More harm than good if you ask me.

          • outraged

            The bigger issue, when it comes to importing unskilled labor (under skilled label) and tax evasion are Inter Company Transfers from India, Look it up, get informed about real perils to your economy.

        • Tom Tom

          Huge free movement of capital from Cyprus to London – the rich Greeks moved their capital from banks in Greek Cyprus to London before the public were aware

          • Andy

            Very sharp of them, but the point still holds. Cyprus imposed capital controls, and not to mention the blatant theft of private property. So if that can be done because it suits the EU so can restrictions on free movement of people.

      • greggf

        And LB, then there’s all the administrative measures that continental members use widely to control, restrict and repatriate migrants.
        Health insurance, contributions records, return ticketing, housing, criminal records, local ordinances, permits to attend school, IDs/Passports……etc.

        • LB

          I’m surprised they haven’t tweaked to that yet.

          Remember the rhetoric. Migrants are paying their way. That means 11.5K a year in tax (each), which means on average they are pulling in at least 44K a year.

          There’s lots of money to be had there isn’t there? The civil service could be creaming it.

          Criminal record check? That will be 500 pounds.

          NI registration – another 500 quid.

          Annual checks – 500 quid.

          Lots of money to be had.

          • outraged

            If Brits want to pay for mansions to house Muslim immigrants with their 4 wives and 26 children, its their problem. Do not implicate decent, hard working and loyal Poles in this travesty. Averages do not make sense.

            • LB


              Now lets talk specifics. How does a Polish Barista working in Starbucks pay enough tax to cover the cost of them being here?

              [For Poland substitute any other country of your own choice]

              • outraged

                – That is pure racism (uber/unter mensh ideology). You are unfairly labelling all migrants from certain countries as low paid blue collar workers and that is low (and exactly what Hitler/Stalin wanted to achieve by targeting Polish elites for mass murders, among 5 million of total Poles killed – look up the Mein Kampf second volume).

                – The invalid tax system and indirect subsidies for corporations are a very serious issue in the UK but we can be hardly blamed for that.

                • LB

                  Re read – you will see there is no racism at all. I said take your pick of countries to deliberately avoid any particular issue of race religion or creed.

                  I don’t even go along with Labour racists outpourings that migrants are better than Brits. e.g More likely to be working.

                  It’s just another generalisation that’s wrong.

                  Bring it down to individual cases. Do they or do they not make a net contribution? Large numbers don’t and are therefore not good for the UK.

                  That’s why you won’t debate a Barista in Starbucks whose a migrant. The reason is they are not net contributors, they are net consumers. Couple that with a JSA claimant losing out in the job stakes and its even more of a bad idea.

                  At the top end, bring them here. It’s good for the UK, but it also damages the country they left. However, I can in most cases live with that.

                • outraged

                  – we can read between the lines, you should not assume that Polish people have reading impediment. look up recent PISA results if you don’t believe.

                  – instead of making the assumption that immigrants (cough, cough) must work in unskilled and low paid jobs you should first try to do something about those immigrants who come to your country to breed, plot against you and freeload tax money. time much better spent.

                  – fact that the people who are working in coffee chains do not pay their way is entirely due to faulty tax system in the UK. You should stop subsidising the corporates and better yet, allow the return of the small coffee shops. Life of everyone would be better for it – with the exception of Starbucks owners of course.

                  – its more complicated than that. the countries formerly behind iron curtain were ravaged and depopulated first by world wars then bolsheviks – grant you that. Our elites, upstanding Poles, were the main target (to create low skilled and obedient slave pool and provide lebens raum for german masters). After USSR era ended, all estate previously nationalised by Soviets has been completely and systematically taken over by foreign capital. The takeover plan was concocted in LSE nowhere else and executed with the help of Brits (but not only), some of whom I’ve met in London- they are still gloating about robbing us blind. Our companies were given away for fraction of pennies (if at all) and promptly closed down. There is no work here – we are importing everything from Germany, France or China or China labelled as Germany (and therefore de facto we are maintaining German jobs, and some Chinese jobs as well). Nellie Kruse (the one responsible for Lloyds Verde) even ordered closure of our previously buoyant and iconic shipyards. Our many steel mills were given away to A. Mittal. Once again since 1804 we were silently annexed as a colony of one of the foreign empires while preachers of invisible hand’s blessing were pulling wool over our eyes, my eyes anyway.

                  With so many resources, fertile land and talented, hard working people we should not have to immigrate and be unfairly subject to brain drain due to preconceptions which you have demonstrated.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            One fly in the ointment, reciprocity. Brits residents abroad may be on the sharp end of similar harassment.

            • kievjoy

              I’ve never been harrassed and I’ve live in Ukraine for over 10 years, but then again, I’m not claiming any benefits from the country and I’m not taking any jobs away from Ukrainians. I have also, as far as possible, tried to fit in with their culture and am not trying to make them change to mine. I sometimes make mistakes, but my neighbours know that if I do they can explain how it is done over here and I will try to fit in.

            • George Smiley

              What is it to you? You are still a Japanese, not British.

      • outraged

        The issue for us in the 90ties was the free movement of capital, which destroyed our economy and left us dispossessed. All the while politicians were lying that capital inflows are somehow blessing for us, Poles. Now all we, Polish people got, is cheap labor. Nice, huh!?

      • Tom Tom

        There was huge immigration from OUTSIDE the EU before 1972 and it has exploded since 1997 if you look at Bangladeshis, Indians, Pakistanis, Nigerians, Jamaicans…….and that is only the legal ones

    • roystonvasey

      Farage is one of the worst offenders here.I always hoped he was dog-whistling when banging on about EU migrants,and that Africans and Asians etc were also included.

      However,we now have him wanting to take Syrians.That is a disgraceful stab in the back of UKIP members and voters.Farage must go.

      • global city

        I think that you have rather missed the point about his stance. You have also missed the point of UKIP.

        You fell for the lies of the tory journalists. Go and find a party more suited to your priggish idiocy… UKIP clearly isn’t right for you.

    • Littlegrayman

      Immigration is a central plank of the cartel politics of Labour,Liberal and Conservative politicians. Time to Vote em all out as currently they rely on electoral apathy.

  • multi0312

    Anyone called Tristram chasing working class votes….irony indeed!

    • Pip

      He comes across as little more than an arrogant, misguided, bombastic, opinionated fool.

  • RavenRandom

    Tristram Hunt will say anything to further his career. Fortunately he becomes so convoluted and twisted in his arguments, that as a result he is showing himself up for the lightweight he is.

    He’s nothing but a chancer feeding off the tradition the working class have of voting for Labour. Even for upper class champagne socialists like him, who are parachuted into working class constituencies.