Managing migration

 

After the Coalition government was formed, but before he joined it as a Minister, Mr Boles wrote an interesting book entitled  “Which Way’s up?” At the time the press sensationalised one conclusion, that a second Conservativc-Lib Dem Coalition would be a good idea after 2010. This was a conclusion which the rest of the Conservative party did not share and was never going to be adopted as an aim.

There were, however, other surprising and more influential thoughts in the book . None more so than on the topic of migration. Here, arch moderniser Mr Boles said he had changed his mind on the subject when he became a Westminster Councillor. “I began to discover the downside of mass immigration” he wrote. “I had to help the council wrestle with the pressure on social housing from asylum seekers and other migrants” “It made it impossible for young adult children to find accommodation in the communities in which they had grown up…”  “It was  (also) plain that,for decades,  we had failed to integrate recent immigrants into our society or pass on our values to them and their children…”

He went on to say we could not afford to allow many more to join the NSH queue or require school places. He wanted more of the jobs available to go to people already settled here. He concluded “Britain needs a new immigration settlement, involving tighter controls on the number of people who can move into the UK every year (from both inside and outside the EU)….and more intensive efforts to ensure all who do settle in Britain adopt British values…”

Step by step this government is cutting the ways the system can be used or abused as Mr Boles wished. Yesterday the government announced further restrictions on access to out of work benefits for EU migrants, limiting it to three months of benefits after the first three months of receiving nothing. This follows reductions in eligibility for housing benefit. 750 bogus Colleges have been closed down. New arrivals cannot join housing lists when they arrive. Health tourism is being discouraged.

Some reading this want to go further faster with these changes. There are two main constraints. The first is EU law, which does intrude on our welfare and benefits policy and will continue to do so until we have a successful renegotiation or a vote to leave. The second is coalition with the Lib Dems who have been more reluctant to accept this is a major issue that needs tackling. Yesterday was another  step 0n a journey that many voters have said they wish to government to tread.

arrive

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

99 Comments

  1. ian wragg
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 5:46 am | Permalink

    Another day another vacuous initiative. You obviously haven’t read todays Mail. No one is fooled by CMD’s posturing trying to recover UKIP voters. Here is a joke which has more than a grain of truth.

    Subject: The Queen’s Riddle

    The Queen’s Riddle

    David Cameron asked the Queen,

    “Your Majesty, how do you run such an efficient commonwealth and government?
    Are there any tips you can give me?”

    “Well,” said the Queen,

    “The most important thing is to surround yourself with intelligent people.”

    David Cameron then asked ,”But how do I know if the people around me are really intelligent?”

    The Queen took a sip of champagne.
    “Oh, that’s easy; you just ask them to answer an intelligent riddle, Watch me and listen”

    The Queen pushed a button on her intercom.

    “Please send Prince Charles in here, would you?”

    Prince Charles walked into the room and said,

    “Yes, Mum?”

    The Queen smiled and said to Charles,

    “Answer me this please Charlie.

    Your mother and father have a child. It is not your brother and it is not your sister. Who is it?”

    Without pausing for a moment, Prince Charles answered

    “That would be me.”

    “Yes! Very good.” said the Queen.

    Ah Ha I get it said David, thank you Mam ! And in a great rush he left.

    David Cameron went back to Parliament

    He decided to ask Nick Clegg the same question.
    “Nick, answer this for me.”

    “Your mother and your father have a child. It’s not your brother and it’s not your sister.

    Who is it?”

    “I’m not sure,” said Nick Clegg.

    And then in True Nick Clegg Style he went on to say.

    “Let me get back to you on that one.”

    He went to his advisors and asked everyone, but none could give him an answer.

    Frustrated, Nick went to the toilet, and found Nigel Farage in there.

    Nick Clegg went up to Nigel Farage and asked,

    “Hey Nigel, see if you can answer this question.”

    “Shoot Nick” replied Nigel.

    Your mother and father have a child and it’s not your brother or your sister

    Who is it?”

    Nigel Farage answered, without stalling said;

    “That’s easy, it’s me!”

    Nick Clegg grinned, and said,

    “Good answer Nigel, I see it all now!”

    Nick Clegg then, went back to find David Cameron and said to him;
    “David, I did some research, and I have the answer to that riddle.”

    ” If your mother and father have a child who is not your brother or Your sister >the Child is Nigel Farage !”

    David Cameron went red in the face, got up, stomped over to Nick Clegg, and angrily yelled into his face,

    “No! You bloody idiot! It’s Prince Charles!”

    . AND THAT MY FRIENDS IS PRECISELY WHY *UKIP* IS DOING SO WELL

    • Mark B
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:23 am | Permalink

      Them POSH boys’ sure do make for some comedy gold.

      ;o))

      Thanks.

      • Hope
        Posted July 31, 2014 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

        And Cameron is asking in a survey if you prefer him to Miliband! He could of course have included Junker who is the real boss.

        • Mark B
          Posted July 31, 2014 at 6:51 pm | Permalink

          You’re joking ?!?!?!

          • Hope
            Posted August 1, 2014 at 8:16 am | Permalink

            The survey is true.

            Good articles about the consequences of mass immigration if it continues ie water shortages, hospitals and schools not being able to cope with numbers etc. who would have thought! Civitas and a prof in economics from Cambridge. Meanwhile Cameron still wants to encourage free movement of people across the EU. May 2015 cannot come quick enough.

    • alan jutson,
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:29 am | Permalink

      Ian

      Summed up perfectly.

  2. Mark B
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 5:52 am | Permalink

    From the Article:
    . . . . Mr Boles said he had changed his mind on the subject when he became a Westminster Councillor. “I began to discover the downside of mass immigration” he wrote. “I had to help the council wrestle with the pressure on social housing from asylum seekers and other migrants” “It made it impossible for young adult children to find accommodation in the communities in which they had grown up…” “It was (also) plain that,for decades, we had failed to integrate recent immigrants into our society or pass on our values to them and their children…”

    First of all, he did not need to become a Westminster Councillor to know all that. He just had to look outside his window (or bubble) and apply a little common sense.

    Immigrant communities have been ‘brought’ too this country for all the wrong reasons. That is not to say that it their fault, because it is not. When they arrived, be it from the West Indies, Africa or the Asian Sub-Continent, they were given the worst jobs, the worst housing and treated like a sub-class. Not by the indigenous working-class people of this country, but by those that brought them here. There was a need for cheap labour and, the government, simply rolled over and let it happen. No though as to the consequences, they knew that none of the people coming here would be living next door to them or going to the schools and universities of their progeny.

    And

    “. . . .and more intensive efforts to ensure all who do settle in Britain adopt British values…”

    It is this kind of delusional think that both created and, will perpetuate the problem. YOU let these people in. And yet, YOU seem to think that YOU have might have the answer. YOU do NOT !!!!!

    As for the rest. It has taken you 4 years to do that which should, and could, have been done in the first 4 months. Why now, pray tell ?

    Hiding behind the Lib Dems will not work. YOU invited them in to form a government after YOUR leader screwed up against the most loathed PM and Government in recent history, and on the back f failing economy.

    When you say the EU, you mean the other 27 members, who, if they are to agree to some changes in the freedom of movement, which they will not, they will want something in return, won’t they ?

    Too little, too late mate ! The dye has been cast. Just be thankful you are in a constituency with a healthy majority.

    • Timaction
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

      I’m afraid the legacy parties can’t be trusted on the EU or mass migration. They created the treaties and the rules that allow free movement and the same rights for EU citizens as the English and British. All the bureaucracy, directives, 70% of our laws, costs and competencies given up for what? Free trade? We all know we don’t have to be in the EU to trade with it. Its just the politicos who seem to believe their own propaganda. We know it is a political construct for the creation of a Federal dictatorship known as Europa.
      If we can’t control our own borders we don’t have an effective Government that we can remove. Therefore our sovereignty and democracy has been lost to the unaccountable EU.

  3. Old Albion
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 6:01 am | Permalink

    We cannot control immigration while we remain members of the EU. (ask Juncker)
    We cannot stop people arriving who utter the phrase ‘ I seek asylum’ because we have signed up to the UN convention
    We cannot stop people sneaking into the country and disappearing because there is no governmental will to spend whatever it costs to prevent clandestine entry. Even those discovered are rarely returned, they employ ‘human rights’ legislation at enormous cost to (dis)UK taxpayers, to stay or string out their case for years.
    There are also the the bride/husband import scams and bogus marriage scam which have never been dealt with effectively.

    • sm
      Posted August 1, 2014 at 10:28 pm | Permalink

      or purchase or obtain the a.n.other EU passport.

  4. alan jutson,
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 6:24 am | Permalink

    Better late than never I suppose, but why so many wasted years?

    Why is it with the election only some 9 months away, some action is being taken at last.

    I seem to recall tens of thousands being a promise last time around !

    Aware that under EU Law so many things cannot be done as a National Government would wish (a good reason to get out) but very highly paid staff exist in the civil service, and should be able to find away around such rules, if pressed to do so.

    Using the LibDems is no argument, you knew what their views were before a coalition was agreed, it was up to Camerons team to negotiate a better arrangement with them with regards to ground rules at the outset.

    Know nothing about Mr Boles, but clearly he had a grasp on what the problem was after he was involved at the sharp end.
    Shame more Ministers and MP’s do not get involved at grass roots levels occasionally, and thus are able to see the light/smell the coffee rather more often, instead of using focus groups who are likewise often insulated from reality.

    • Hope
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 8:57 am | Permalink

      Actually Farage in the DT and the Daily Mail showed what utter rubbish Cameron wrote in the DT. £5 billion of in- work benefits for migrants and there is nothing Cameron can do to EU citizens that he is not prepared to do to the citizens of the UK. That is EU law. Hardly putting British people first, no wonder our taxes so high and he cannot afford tax cuts.

  5. Roy Grainger
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 6:25 am | Permalink

    Just a question: do you think the restrictions just announced will prove to be legal under EU law ?

  6. Posted July 30, 2014 at 6:32 am | Permalink

    One wonders whether it is too little too late or better late than never. It just makes sense to ensure that ,by overcrowding, we don’t spoil what we have.I remember as a child in school there were families, before the availability of contraception, who had nine or ten children.Women couldn’t get work and child care was a task which the family shared.The children of these families , although many happy , went hungry , wore hand me downs and were supported by other school children class members.In a world which is far more competitive and children expect Mac Donald’s meals and mobile telephones and have to do their homework on a computer overcrowding will not work.

  7. Bazman
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 6:53 am | Permalink

    Why should the British worker not compete with other EU workers lowering wage inflation and helping themselves and businesses by lowering their living costs and not claiming benefits for not working. Many of these EU workers have travelled very far and the British are not even expected to travel within their own country to speak their own language. Stop the benefits for those not working in Britain first to provide incentive to work this would also stop migrants coming here by default. Abolishing the minimum wage would also increase this competition between these groups lower business costs and prices, with higher tax take.

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 6:45 am | Permalink

      Can we not aspire to both Baz? Once we have full employment we can invite others in.

      • Bazman
        Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:23 pm | Permalink

        Full employment will only ever be reached without a benefits system. Quid Pro Quo.

    • Anonymous
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 8:07 am | Permalink

      Bazman – The skilled, the financially backed, those willing to graft and contribute to our society ought to be welcomed. There is a lot of damaging immigration going on too, though.

      I’m with you on cutting benefit, but I also say that we should close borders to the unskilled to give the newly deprived the chance of unskilled work. We cannot expect to starve people and deprive them – as a reforming measure – of the chance to work at the same time.

      • Bazman
        Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:21 pm | Permalink

        The unskilled are obviously coming here to absorb the slack in the system this is to be applauded. You are saying we should support the slack by the slacking?!

        • Anonymous
          Posted August 1, 2014 at 10:34 am | Permalink

          Are you willfully obtuse ?

          Sadly people such as yourself are running the country and in charge of the broadcast media.

          • Bazman
            Posted August 1, 2014 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

            I thought the BBC was left wing in supporting slackers?

  8. Anonymous
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:01 am | Permalink

    We see that the NHS crisis is being blamed on the aged – always by the BBC but even in the ‘grown up’ Tory newspapers.

    What we are told does not seem to tally with what we see (and hear). Massive demographic change in our region in the last two years. Tough talk from central government indeed (in the run up to an election), but a program of dispersal is clearly going on and “You have a housing crisis in your area so your town is going to have to be expanded by 25% in the next two years” and then they fill it up not with renter-serf locals but London/Birmingham overspill.

    That just about anyone can come to this country and claim benefit (in ANY form) or NHS treatment (whilst blaming shortages on those who paid for it) beggars belief. This administration has been notable for the LibDem wagging of the Tory dog.

    We’ve worked out that the Cameron/Hesseltine Tory party IS LibDem so coalition suited fine.

    If we don’t have borders then we don’t need government.

  9. Lifelogic
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:08 am | Permalink

    But Cameron has already said he does not even want to negotiate on changes to free movement within the EU. So it is once again it is all a pathetic con trick.

    What about the suggestion from the Labour camp of a 15% death tax on top of the 40% that Osborne ratted on. I assume we will get a new promise from Osborne on this before the election. Something like, I know I conned you last time but this time I mean it!

    Labour are certainly trying to help the useless Tories as much as they can.

    • Hope
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

      It will eventually turn into an IOU tax upon death, they will want all you have worked for plus more. Cameron still does not understand that he promised 80 percent spending cuts and 20 tax rises. Still that is an Oxbridge PPE graduate for you!

  10. Antisthenes
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:19 am | Permalink

    In theory unfettered immigration economically is a sound practice it is the social and cultural problems that such a policy incurs that negates the benefits of it. The only answer to having the economic benefits and at the same time minimising the downside effects of immigrants arriving on UK shores is to create an environment that only attracts those migrants who will benefit the UK economy and will put into society at least as much as they take out. However to achieve the right environment entails changing the way that the welfare and social engineering part of the state works in terms of provision and funding and changing perceptions on equality. The public at large encouraged by the left and other dim-wits are not going to accept the radical changes that are necessary so the problems will continue and will store up. The outcome will either be considerable civil strife or a nation that will have far different standards, values and a culture that will no longer be recognisable as a traditional British one.

    • Anonymous
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 8:11 am | Permalink

      Antisthenes – How is unfettered immigration economically sound if it is based on a welfare state ?

      Either the unemployed migrant is receiving benefits or the displaced local is receiving them.

      It makes no economic sense whatsoever.

  11. Anonymous
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:30 am | Permalink
    • Timaction
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

      The fact is that most migrants are low skilled, low paid people who earn more via tax credits and child allowances, subsidised by the British taxpayer, whilst we pay 5 million Brits and others to be on non work related benefits including almost a million young people. Over 600,000 EU citizens on unemployment benefits! That is hardly standing up for the British.

  12. Bryan
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:42 am | Permalink

    It is the immigrants in the coalition which are doing the most damage – namely the Libdems.

    With less than 12 months to the election it is time for Mr McCameron to ditch them and govern as a minority. He has zilch to lose and much to gain.

    Why is this the only ‘promise’ that he is keeping?

  13. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:43 am | Permalink

    Yet we still hear from the left and other defenders of the EU that uncontrolled immigration is a net contributor to the economy. Selective reasoning is used to determine that the economy has grown without accounting for the additional bodies. Per capita GDP is down between 4 and 7 percent depending who is giving the figures.

    Business chooses immigrant labour in preference to training and acclimatising youth and the unemployed to work practices and are subsided by in work benefits in order to do so. Hospitals and other health outlets are under strain due to numbers (there are many immigrant workers in the NHS but this comes back to the point about lack of indigenous training and subsidy), our schools are expanding to account for the extra immigrant birth rates and arrivals; each additional pupil’s revenue expenditure is at least £4, 000 per annum (the tax and ni on a median wage before in work benefits) plus £1, 200 pupil premium, plus an allowance for English as an additional language such that in Tower Hamets each pupil gets £10K. This is without the capital spend required to build extra places.

    My tax bill is up 60%. But at least supermarkets are offering a good variety of food and we have plenty of minority stores selling goodies without it registering through the tills.

  14. A different Simon
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:45 am | Permalink

    “I began to discover the downside of mass immigration”

    This is a fascinating insight because it suggests that some politicians believe there are no downsides to MASS immigration .

    This is like saying a pint of Guinness is good for you so 10 pints must be 10 times as beneficial .

    One may avoid many of the unpleasant results of excessive drinking by moderating consumption or stopping .

    However , in the case of immigration (and so many other things) the damage once done is irreversible .

    Generations long into the future are going to have to pay for this social engineering experiment .

    Perhaps as punishment the MP’s who are responsible for this should have their BTL portfolios and any capital gains confiscated as they were clearly following their own vested interests and maybe prosecute them to the full extent of the law for insider trading .

  15. Ex-expat Colin
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:46 am | Permalink

    Cannot see that negotiation will achieve anything.

    Nigel Farage today:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage/10998115/Nigel-Farage-David-Camerons-EU-benefits-diatribe-fools-no-one.html

    Cameron is on about re-building UK in a similar article…how many more times does this place need rebuilding?

  16. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 8:06 am | Permalink

    JR: “Some reading this want to go further faster with these changes.There are two main constraints. The first is EU law, which does intrude on our welfare and benefits policy and will continue to do so until we have a successful renegotiation or a vote to leave.”
    In other words what your leader was talking about this week was merely more dog whistle politics, which is Crosby’s modus operandi. Give the impression that you are dealing with something even though you know that it is not possible but hope that most people won’t realise that. Anyway, what he is proposing is merely tinkering around the edges of the problems of mass immigration as set out by your own Nick Boles. As Farage puts it in today’s Telegraph: “No amount of warm words or glib promises will provide any confidence that the Government has either the will or the desire to act effectively on migration. Nor will they change the fact that such action is impossible while Britain remains a member of the European Union.”
    As we know, your party is led by someone determined to make our membership of that EU permanent, regardless of any unspecified “renegotiations”.

  17. Martyn G
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 8:08 am | Permalink

    John, is it not the case that the commendable steps you suggest are being taken cannot be applied to EU immigrants unless, in accordance with EU Law, they are applied equally to all UK citizens? There has been no mention of that, so far as I know?
    clearly, if applied in isolation to EU immigrants there seems little doubt that the EU will step in and declare such actions as illegal. Sadly, no matter how well intended are the proposals, it seems to me to be that as it stands the PM is doing little more than ’tilting at windmills’ in the hopes of gathering more votes….

  18. alan jutson,
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 8:18 am | Permalink

    I see todays National Press do not think much of Mr Camerons speech and its contents.

    Would seem that it is not only the actual hand outs given to those who arrive on these shores, but the massive amounts of money going abroad to support their families who are still at home will continue.
    Likewise it is suggested that Official figures show that the working tax credit bill is now amounting to close to £100 million a week for 415,000 migrant workers.

    We need to get back control and fast.

    4 wasted years on top of Labours disastrous 13.

    We now have the result of an over complex, social engineered policy, which is attached to a Benefits and Tax system which is not fit for purpose, which seems to be overridden by EU regulation and Law.

    When will OUR PARLIAMENT wake up !!!

    • Boudicca
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 9:07 pm | Permalink

      When it’s forced to, by the presence of Nigel Farage and a few other UKIP MPs.

  19. oldtimer
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 8:22 am | Permalink

    If a community is swamped by a large influx of people, be they immigrants, refugees or simply existing inhabitants moving from one place to another then there is bound to be pressure on housing, schools, hospitals, GPs and social services. It is surprising that Mr Boles needed to become a councillor before he realised it. Unfortunately blinkers and closed minds are all to common among those who presume to tell the rest of us what we must or must not accept and/or do. Is he another PPE graduate?

  20. JoeSoap
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 9:06 am | Permalink

    ….many (UKIP)voters have said they wish to government to tread.
    You missed a word out there.

    Do you ever ask yourself why, in 2014, over 4 years into this government, this and other issues which were clear to most posters on this site in 2008-9 are only now being tackled, when this could have been announced in June 2010? If your answer to this includes Libdems, why form a Coalition government in the first place if you can’t do the things you really want to as a Tory party?

    Anything being undertaken in the 5th year of a 5 year government is being done for electoral purposes only, and not because these feelings are in the heart and soul of the leadership. You can’t really stand up and count these as great victories for the Eurosceptic wing of the party, I’m afraid, as you might have been able to in 2010 or 2011.

    • JoeSoap
      Posted July 30, 2014 at 9:11 am | Permalink

      Infact I would go so far as to say the fact that these things are being said and done now is as cynical as Labour putting the income tax rate up to 50p in the last year, so that for evermore they could accuse the Tories of cutting taxes. It is Libcondem games time and some of the electorate see through it.

  21. Max dunbar
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 9:52 am | Permalink

    There appears to be a problem with this site. Comments are being ‘posted too quickly’.

    • Mark B
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:19 am | Permalink

      Yes, I noticed that, and more !!

  22. Roger Farmer
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 9:52 am | Permalink

    The UK is overpopulated at 65 million. We have become the dumping ground in terms of people for many of the Worlds problems. Membership of the EU exacerbates the problem making it almost impossible to solve.

    Exit from the EU is key to the resolution of the problem. Removal of all illegals is the first required step in conjunction with the closing down of our borders.

    Those permitted to enter should be those coming on a work visa for a fixed but renewable period to take up a job which cannot be filled by UK citizens. Only after a period of three years should we consider letting in dependants and only then if they are financially independent. People of independent means are also welcome.

    Tourists are always welcome as are political refugees in limited numbers having made their case and been positively vetted at one of our numerous overseas embassies.

    To discourage population explosion, child allowance should be limited to the first two
    children. There is an argument for taxation to apply to children in excess of two.

    All criminals who are not UK citizens should be deported after completion of sentence along with their dependants.

    Such steps may make our liberal elite howl, but I can see no alternative if we wish to reverse the UK population explosion and revert to a manageable 40 million.

  23. stred
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 9:53 am | Permalink

    You may wish to raise the question of the eficiency of another government agency- HMRC. A month ago I received a letter telling me that they had altered my self assessment for my old age pension to ‘what they thought I was entitled to receive’ rather than what I added up on my bank statements and actually received in the financial year.I was given a month to dispute this and I have tried 3 times to phone but after pressing various buttons to speak to a humanbean had to give up after a long wait.

    In the end I tried to email on their ‘contactus’ link but here they only allow certain restricted emails on forms such as for PAYE codes. As a last try, I phoned again but this time they said that, owing to industrial action, the waiting times would be longer. I suppose, now they can just take what they think fit out of our bank accounts, we may as well give up and see what is left.

  24. stred
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 10:01 am | Permalink

    Mr Cameron and Mrs May were seen on the news yesterday helping the police raid a building containing allegedly illegal Albanian immigrants. Perhaps he and his new all ex-PR cabinet recruits had thought this was a good move to please Ukippers. Presumably it had to be Albanians, as there is nothing that the EU could do to overrule, as Albania is not yet a member. Racist fruitcakes , however, may not be impressed.

    • Anonymous
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 8:26 am | Permalink

      Stred – I hope ‘racist fruitcakes’ was said ironically. Otherwise you have offended me.

      Racists already have their party and we can calculate their numbers by counting the BNP vote in recent years. Let’s assume the worst and consider that everyone of them had turned to UKIP at the EU elections. OK. Subtract that number from the total of UKIP votes and there you have the amount of non racists voting UKIP.

      Yet again a journalist (the London Evening Standard this time) calling the immigration debate ‘inflammatory’.

      We have no debate. And those calling for it have not lost our tempers. We have been most patient in fact. So who are the hotheads who will be inflamed by having a debate ? Not us who quietly vote for UKIP, we’ve already demonstrated that.

      Reply I do not think UKIP voters are either fruitcakes or racists and allowed this as a wry quote. Nor is it true to say BNP voters are racist, though I reject and dislike BNP views. There have been occasions when BNP people have been challenged over alleged racist remarks. Remember racism is an offence and needs to be proven in a court of law.

      • stred
        Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

        Ukippers have a memory of our PM calling them racist fruitcakes and it is amusing to recall the insult when we see his attempts to win back votes.

  25. Duyfken
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    You refer to “bogus colleges” and I would refer you to our “bogus PM”. Leave aside the distraction of Boles “the arch moderniser”, it is Cameron to whom you should be drawing our attention. I suggest the article by Farage in today’s DT should be required reading.

  26. JA
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 10:35 am | Permalink

    Immigration is the #1 issue with the public.

    It should, therefore, be the #1 issue in Mr Cameron’s election campaign. So why won’t it be ?

  27. Max Dunbar
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    Is there really any point in discussing this issue here? You are a member of a party that has been complicit in the immigration disaster and has made little, if any, attempt to role back the oppressive legislation introduced by the Labour Party, zealously enforced by the political police. We need a revolution, not tinkering around the edges in a feeble attempt to appease the electorate in the run-up to an election.
    The best that can be said is that your article allows those of us who oppose mass immigration to vent our spleen, provided that our comments are printable of course!

  28. Lifelogic
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 10:42 am | Permalink

    Frederick Forsythe in the Telegraph today suggest that the 7% bias against the Tories, in the constituency boundaries, is more likely to cost the Tories the election than UKIP. He lays the blame firmly on Nick Clegg and rightly so. It is clearly an affront to such democracy as pertains to have this large labour bias. But then surely Cameron is equally culpable, first in throwing the last election and secondly in doing such a duff & hugely incompetent deal with the LibDems. This when Cameron still held most of the cards. He has basically presided over a LibDem government, there is no real Tory element present at all. Is there really any Tory in Cameron one wonders?

    • Mark B
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:36 am | Permalink

      LL

      Have you ever thought, that the government that DC presided over, was in fact the government he felt most comfortable with.

      I am firm believer of; “You can judge a person, by the company they keep”, mentality. If you care to look at DC’s circle of friends, relations and colleagues, I think you will come to see what I mean.

    • Anonymous
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 8:32 am | Permalink

      Lifelogic – Mr Cameron didn’t throw the last election far enough !

      By now we would have had a real Tory party and an utterly discredited Labour party most clearly to blame for the last bust.

      The recovery ? Ask others on this site what they think of it.

  29. The PrangWizard
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 11:06 am | Permalink

    I’m not convinced that your party has the will or determination to do much. I see window dressing, prior to the General Election. Does anyone think it’s just too much of a coincidence that we get some minor action around now which has a very limited effect. What about the hundreds of thousands who are here illegally? How many have you deported? Four years during which ordinary people like me were ridiculed, insulted and accused of racist attitudes when we said something should be done. And of course we were censored by you.

    PS This is another second attempt – got your going too fast message again. It seems to make no sense, it needs re-wording at least.

  30. Eddie Hill
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 11:19 am | Permalink

    Didn’t I read today that the EU is launching an investigation as to whether Mr Cameron’s latest proposal is legal under EU law?

    Didn’t I also read today that Mr Cameron is wasting his time launching all these new initiatives because none of them are legal under European law?

    Isn’t Mr Cameron’s basic problem with immigration that he doesn’t control our borders, the EU does?

    Isn’t it therefore just political spin when Mr Cameron announces some new crack-down?

    PS: I was amused to be advised last week that I am making comments on this site “too fast” and that I must “Slow down.”

    I don’t know whether that means I am making too many comments or that I’m typing too fast, but the fact that very few of my comments get past moderation leads me to suspect the real problem is that my opinions are unacceptable, notwithstanding that they are always cogently and respectfully expressed, and are never accompanied by profanity in any form.

    “Thoughtcrime” is with us, it seems.

    • stred
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 9:13 am | Permalink

      It was some achievement for me to be too fast on the click. However,the message was still on the screen and a second click was accepted.

  31. Alte Fritz
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 11:27 am | Permalink

    Shame it has taken so long, but who can conceivably argue against the measure?

  32. Iain Gill
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 11:41 am | Permalink

    There are a few problems with this John.
    First and foremost I am one of your biggest supporters, I know I know it doesn’t always sound like that on here but I do go out of my way to sing your praises, but if this is the best you can do I could not vote for you.
    Secondly the liberals are not an excuse for everything, because the coalition (i.e. both parties) made some immigration promises when it was first formed that you have all failed to deliver on, and indeed reading between the lines it seems many senior ministers had no intention of delivering on either.
    Thirdly it’s not all Europe’s fault either, there is plenty that could be done about none EC immigration with the flick of a British ministers pen. If you are stuck for ideas give me a ring.
    Best of luck, but I think your party is in trouble.

  33. BobE
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

    European law means that any legislation that a UK government brings in to change benefits entitlement must apply equally to UK citizens, or face the fiercest opposition in the European courts. Put simply, the European Union in its current form will not allow the British Government to do the things that the Prime Minister says he wants to do to European migrants’ claims, without also applying those changes to his own people.
    The Telegraph, today.

  34. outsider
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 4:23 pm | Permalink

    Dear Mr Redwood, The idea that this Government wishes to slash net immigration but is unable to do so will have no credibility so long as the public sector, particularly the National Health Service, continues to conduct active recruitment drives abroad*. Do EU rules stipulate that the NHS must do this? I think not. Have the Liberal Democrats insisted that NHS hospitals must conduct recruiting drives abroad? I doubt it.

    To my knowledge, two of our distinguished teaching hospitals, one in London, one in the provinces, have simply switched their foreign recruitment from Asia and Africa to the poorer EU countries. This helps the Government to say it has cut non-EU immigration while the corresponding rise in immigration from the rest of the EU is “entirely beyond its control”.

    I have nothing against immigrant doctors or nurses. In my thankfully limited experience, overseas-born foreign nurses with a full command of English are often more caring than those trained in Great Britain. As with most immigration issues, it is purely a matter of numbers.

    * The Welsh First Minister complained in the Assembly that further restrictions would hinder its recruitment drives for the Welsh NHS, though this does not appear to have happened.

  35. waramess
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

    Fascinating it has taken so long.

    Could it be that UKIP had anything to do with the response or was it just a coincidence?

  36. Mark
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

    Yesterday Ian Duncan Smith was lamenting the lack of data on immigrants claiming benefits – purposefully ignored by Labour. We still have very little handle on the true levels and nature of migration, with large omissions in the data on illegal migrants (many of whom are visa overstayers rather than being illegal stowaways) and those who came here legally while the International Passenger Survey wasn’t even looking at their routes of travel. If we had a more reliable view of the size of the problem caused by the large population influx we might be on stronger ground in being able to manage it.

    For a start, we could make a proper effort to deport those here illegally. Next, we would have a base to establish whether we really wish to continue to admit people in the same numbers in various categories where we do have control. Finally, we would have the case to discuss how best to tackle EU migration by changing the rules, or by leaving the EU altogether.

  37. lifelogic
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 6:15 pm | Permalink

    Health tourism is being discouraged how, just by the poor service and delays most users receive I assume!

  38. ian
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:08 pm | Permalink

    When a politician like john says managing migration, he means immigration for ever and he”s a moderate. That”s all they got for growth full stop.

  39. Bazman
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

    Tesco as the nations biggest employers are losing a lot of money. If the minimum wage was abolished this would allow them to compete with the discount supermarkets who unfairly compete with a smaller product lines and use similar looking brand products that companies have spent millions creating.

    • Ted Monbiot
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:49 am | Permalink

      Wages are just one element of a supermarkets total costs, other elements like cost of land, rents, council tax, energy costs, costs of purchases and transport costs are important.
      If the min wage was reduced or abolished it would apply to every business so it would not favour just one company.
      I’m puzzled why you consider competition in the market is unfair.
      I see it only as a good thing as it is at last reducing prices I am paying for my weekly food shop, leaving me with more money to spend elsewhere.

    • Anonymous
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 8:44 am | Permalink

      Bazman,

      The discount supermarkets would benefit from minimum wages too. Race to the bottom on wages – then no-one can afford to buy anything !

      It was all so unnecessary – but you wanted a third world shanty town and bazaar and that’s what we’re going to get by the look of it.

      (Tesco is suffering because of online shopping and the fact that in is a lower middle class outlet. Ever heard of ‘the squeezed middle’ ?)

      • Anonymous
        Posted July 31, 2014 at 8:46 am | Permalink

        Should read: The discount supermarkets would benefit from the *scrapage* of minimum wages too.

      • Bazman
        Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:30 pm | Permalink

        I could afford to spend more and wealthy people could spend much more. Flat taxes for all! It’s called the trickle down effect. The competition is unfair as how can an upmarket upmarket compete with a cheap one with their cheap nasty products? To spend elsewhere on other cheap nasty products in peasant style markets? This is what will create shanty towns and down town shops.

        • Edward2
          Posted July 31, 2014 at 11:16 pm | Permalink

          Ive read this post a few times now Baz.
          I thought it was meaningless nonsense the first time I read it and now I’m convinced it is.

          • Bazman
            Posted August 1, 2014 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

            Flat taxes giving more to the rich to trickle down Edward! Raising the boat for all! They would pay much less than say a middle income earner so would spend more. Better to tax the rich less and the poor more. It is after all they that need the work and the should pay for the services that they largely use.

          • Edward2
            Posted August 3, 2014 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

            The poor pay little or no tax now and would pay even less under a flat tax system.
            So wrong again Baz

          • Bazman
            Posted August 4, 2014 at 6:58 am | Permalink

            They would pay a flat tax that is why its called flat tax, so they would pay more. Might even be in debt for it! In the real world less. The middle of course would pay more and the rich much less. Duh!

        • Anonymous
          Posted August 1, 2014 at 10:56 am | Permalink

          The point is that the substitute products aren’t cheap and nasty.

          You talk about the ‘trickle down’ effect but what about the ‘pull down’ effect ?

          How does it figure that richer people being able to pay less results in more spending and that poor people earning less … guess what… results in more spending ?

          You have designed a slave economy (it’s the one we’re getting) and it was all so necessary. Others mentioned that we needed cheap labour in the 50s and so the undercut-by-immigration model was created. What was actually needed was proper wages.

          A war was fought and ‘won’ and our people had kept the infrastructure going throughout. It was not about a shortage of labour and if it was why pay immigrants so little anyway ?

          It wasn’t ‘cheap’, not by any measure and now we witness the true intention. And the trajectory we are on I can see favelas cascading down Streatham Hill within a generation.

          None of it had to happen. It is not wealth creation and it is not progress. It is idiocy and any idiot could have done it for a fraction of the price we were charged.

          I read your comments a lot and there seems to be much inconsistency in them. I am not entirely sure that you aren’t some kind of professional commenter. What is your political persuasion ? I am confused.

          • Anonymous
            Posted August 1, 2014 at 11:19 am | Permalink

            unnecessary (4th para)

          • Bazman
            Posted August 1, 2014 at 4:27 pm | Permalink

            See above. Why should the rich be taxed more just for being rich? The poor should be taxed more to give them an incentive to get rich. The rich need incentives to stay rich so are given tax cuts and bonuses as they would do nothing sending the economy in a downward spiral. It just obvious and sensible politics.

          • Edward2
            Posted August 3, 2014 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

            Total nonsense Baz
            The poor pay little or no tax now and would pay even less under a flat tax system
            With a less complex there would be less loopholes for avoidance.
            So a lower percentage rate but greater revenues from the better off compared to now
            But still you are against the idea.

          • Bazman
            Posted August 4, 2014 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

            You don’t get it do you edward many rich do not want to pay any taxes or believe they should. The less loophole argument is a myth and in many ways creates more loopholes. You need to check your facts as usual.

  40. Bazman
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 7:23 pm | Permalink

    Why should I not be able to employ a person from abroad to do my work? As a potential employer harassed by absurd laws maybe right wing supporters could tell me why they are so anti business.

    • Ted Monbiot
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 8:02 am | Permalink

      No one is saying you should not be allowed to do this.
      The debate on immigration is about what numbers should we be accepting at a time when millions of people, who are already here, are unable to get a job.

      I’m sure big business likes the continual supply of cheap labour coming here from all over the world, but individuals like me, who find their standard of living lower now than years ago, are not quite so keen.

      PS A friend of mine who works for a big American company who wanted to promote and transfer him to the USA, was turned down by USA immigration who said the post could and should be filled by an American citizen.

    • Anonymous
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 8:54 am | Permalink

      Bazman :

      a) because it is subsidised by welfarism

      b) because a borderless country is no longer a country

      c) because we live in a democracy and your right to import people at will should be voted on

      d) you SHOULD be able to employ anyone but under a visa system, not a subsidised free-for-all.

      e) in totality a welfarist backed immigration system does not make economic sense as our national debt shows.

      • Bazman
        Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:36 pm | Permalink

        In a world market this is not my problem. I do not want to subsidise a massive state of pointless spending and scrounging. I could just transfer all transactions through a tax haven and what business would it be of the state or yours as long as I am within the law. A law that is anti business it seems. BBC nonsense. From a deluded left wing communists would blush. Why should a wealthy person in the west work when Billions in the world could do it for us? Work camps and cheap jets could solve this. The minimum wage is a fortune to them!?

        • Edward2
          Posted August 1, 2014 at 7:26 am | Permalink

          You are just being very silly Baz, you old teaser.

        • Anonymous
          Posted August 1, 2014 at 11:17 am | Permalink

          Bazman – You asked why you shouldn’t be able to immigrate workers into our country and I answered you fully.

          To allow you to profit from state subsidy (particularly whilst you avoid contributing to it) is an abrogation of duty by our elected representatives.

          It is they who are accountable to us. We little people still have the bulk of the vote. That we dislike what you like (playing along with your claimed persona) should be enough in a democracy.

          As it happens, what you offer us is not cheap and would be uncompetitive if we stripped away welfarism.

          By all means outsource your work if our laws don’t suit you. The British have adapted to outsourcing in the past – but what is unacceptable is in-sourcing to compete for their housing, healthcare, education, jobs etc and then to use their taxes to tilt the playing field away from them.

          Faced with arrogance such as yours and the present Government’s and a refusal to listen UKIP is not stupid or ignorant but a bloody good choice.

          • Bazman
            Posted August 3, 2014 at 6:15 am | Permalink

            The problem is in a nutshell. You buy say small item such as padlock. Do you buy the six quid British one or the 4 quid Chinese one? Obviosly most will by the Chinese one and the same applies to services. The british need to learn that they have tolowr thier living standards to compete especially in housing. East Europeans are very efficent at this as well as transport and hence get the work. Why should the British not do the same?

          • Edward2
            Posted August 3, 2014 at 8:28 am | Permalink

            They are.

  41. yulwaymartyn
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 8:15 pm | Permalink

    Ease the pressure on schools?

    Build more of them.

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:03 am | Permalink

      Subsised foreign labour which in turn increases our costs of living while being paid for by our crippling taxes. You couldn’t make it up.

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:16 am | Permalink

        Reply to another post above in error. Posted too quickly for the site apparently.

        Yulaway how does spending more on school places for immigrant and immigrants’ children at a large cost to national or local taxpayers square with the assertion by those of your ilk that an average immigrant is a net contributor? Just the revenue element of each pupil is over four thousand pounds per annum without the capital requirements.

        • yulwaymartyn
          Posted July 31, 2014 at 9:59 am | Permalink

          Four thousand per school place.?

          In a 1 thousand billion pounds economy.?

          Bargain. Simple.

          • Narrow Shoulders
            Posted July 31, 2014 at 5:10 pm | Permalink

            Four thousand per pupil times several million.

            Change your record sir, I am fed up paying for these benefactors

    • Mark B
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 7:54 am | Permalink

      I take it you have heard of this ?:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

      Because what you suggest, is no different and does not even come close to solving any of our problems.

  42. Stevie
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 9:31 pm | Permalink

    How can we complain that immigrants are not becoming integrated with British values? I have always thought of myself as British but I’m currently being forced to re-consider this premise. In the 1830’s my family left the Black Ditches in Ireland to find work in Scotland where they married local girls and headed for Newcastle upon Tyne. The lack of will power or birth control produce sixteen children one who became my great grandmother and in her turn my grandmother who married an Irishman working in the city who produced my mother again one of sixteen, although not all survived in common with the period. With the possible annexation of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland I’m only left with England as my home, so now I’m English but with no representation in Parliament.

  43. TJS
    Posted July 30, 2014 at 11:30 pm | Permalink

    750 bogus colleges? The mind boggles!

    What I find very difficult to understand why any conservative government would want to
    Sign up to the EU arrest warrant or indeed anything they don’t have to.

    The EU institutions are full of ex communists Maoists and failed politico’s.
    How can they be allowed to rule our country?

    The EU wants to become a country, possibly called Europa. But no nation has ever been asked if this is what they want.

    The whole construct of the EU has been based on lies and deception, starting with Jean Monnet who didn’t want the people informed but slowly over many years it would be too late for anyone to do anything about it.

    This is what we have now. Another evil empire hardly different from the old Soviat Union
    As yet without the gullags

  44. Mark B
    Posted July 31, 2014 at 6:31 am | Permalink

    .You touch on a number of issues that I wanted to comment on but, for some strange reason, our kind host felt it necessary not to post. Fair enough !.

  45. a-tracy
    Posted July 31, 2014 at 11:41 am | Permalink

    I’m not really sure I understand about benefits equality, if an English, or UK twenty year old arrives in London and has a job to pay for a fourth room in a shared house and then loses their job after six months, does the benefits system pick up the rent for them? Same if a member of the UK rolls up in Scandinavia has a job but loses it do they have to rehouse the family and that person loses the job for any reason?

    How do other Countries in the EU pay out benefits, who has the best system for their taxpayer base to stop this being an issue?

    When these issues are being discussed we need to say what exactly it is that Conservatives are opposed to, if its not working immigration it’s people claiming benefits, housing and tax credits for families that don’t reside in the UK, and getting precidence above British born residents any Country in the EU can understand that complaint and they would feel the same if we displaced their children in their Country, surely tax credit laws can be changed that the child has to be a resident in the UK to get child tax credit, just add a line in the child tax credit rules for everyone including British families that this is the case and if someone is posted abroad claim their tax credits or benefits for their children.

    Most British people I know have as many issues with home-grown benefit system abusers and take-for-granted benefits for life, with no work at all, because they’ve happened to have children. We need to be more careful of the language used and more clear about what we want to stop and why and how you are going to achieve it, by when.

  46. Posted July 31, 2014 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

    We need to look no further than the housing situation to know that we simply have to reduce the number of net migrants to no more than DC’s stated 10,000.

    Only this week we have been told that the net immigration figure for the last year was more than 200,000.

    That number will require an absolute minimum of 50,000 additional homes and I suspect the real figure is actually 100,000 housing units.

    At the same time we are now being told we need to build 300,000 homes pa but the number of housing starts in the year to March 2014 was “only” 133,650.

    Am I thick or would it not be the case that if we cut the number of net immigrants to 10,000 or, better still, zero, our housing “problem” will almost disappear ? The backlog of housing demand is only there because over the last 20 plus years no Government has dealt with the immigration problem.

    Even if all of this year’s 200,000 net immigrants were healthy young adults, had good jobs and paid taxes, it would be many years before they contributed enough in taxes to cover the additional costs to our national infrastructure of their increase in population.

    In fact, a good many of them will not work, be children who will need educating and many will need healthcare for pre-existing conditions. Others will claim child benefit for offspring abroad which will probably us cost more than they will every pay in income tax and NI.

    Then there is the hugely inflated overseas aid budget which is costing us almost half as much as the grossly inadequate amount this government spends on defense.

    Whatever happened to the 1st obligation of Government being the defense of the Realm ?

    What fools we are to put up with all this !

    I’m a Conservative supporter and it grieves me to see DC allowing UKIP to make all the running on these issues. I am sure, Mr Redwood you must feel the same.

    • Catalpa
      Posted July 31, 2014 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

      “What fools we are to put up with all this !

      I’m a Conservative supporter …… ”

      It is because you are a Conservative supporter that you are having to put up with all this. Open your eyes – your beloved leader, David Cameron, loves the EU, wants to stay in it and will campaign to stay in it if there is ever an in/out referendum.

      Until you and the rest of the tribal voters start voting for someone other than the LibLabCon, you will have to put up with all this and it will only get worse.

      • Posted August 1, 2014 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

        I will be voting Conservative in May because I’m a realist and my MP is Christopher Chope, about as Eurosceptic as they come.

        The electoral system will prevent UKIP from winning more than a handful of seats if they are lucky, so, if you want a referendum the only chance of getting one is a Conservative Government.

        Yes, I would prefer to see someone other than Cameron leading the party but, again, I’m a realist. The country has changed since the 1980s : it’s gone soft and in the 21st century it is not going to vote for a Thatcherite manifesto. So we have to put up with the Cameroons and just hope that members like our host and my MP can push a more right wing agenda once in power.

        The Navy desperately need more surface ships so diverting some of the overseas aid budget to defense would be a good start.

  47. Richard
    Posted August 1, 2014 at 9:34 am | Permalink

    Immigration is one issue where there is complete agreement between all 3 major parties.

    And all 3 are very happy to see mass migration into England, although each for a different reason.

    For Lib Dems it is simply their wish to have mass migration across the EU to mix up the peoples of Europe to create a single European empire. Any regrettable consequences for England are just bad luck.

    For Labour, they believe that the mass immigration into England of poor people from across Europe helps them electorally, being the party of the poor. The fact that this mass migration leads to social instability, pressure on services and a furthering lowering of GDP per capita they believe helps their ability to gain power.

    For the Conservatives, being the party of multinational corporations, they love the idea of being able to import cheap labour into the country, particularly when the taxpayers are paying working credit so they can pay their employees less.

    In addition it means they can eliminate any need for training schemes and can continue to rely upon immigration to provide the employees required.

    We are seeing a massive Ponzi scheme in operation.

    So voting Con/Lab/Lib will not reduce immigration, as can be easily seen from the figures.

  • About John Redwood

    John Redwood has been the Member of Parliament for Wokingham since 1987. First attending Kent College, Canterbury, he graduated from Magdalen College, and has a DPhil from All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has been a director of NM Rothschild merchant bank and chairman of a quoted industrial PLC.
    Published and promoted by Thomas Puddy for John Redwood, both of 30 Rose Street Wokingham RG40 1XU
  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page