Securing our borders


One of the compelling reasons the UK needs a new relationship with the EU and needs to be outside the current Treaties is the lack of control we now have over our welfare system and  borders.

The news this week that Calais cannot cope with all the illegal migrants who wish to come to the UK highlights the problems.

First, in a common border area your border is as weak as the weakest border in the EU. If the southern states will not police their borders more effectively to prevent first entry to the EU, then the northern countries will end up with more and more problems with  migrants.

Second, if the UK has to offer under EU rules  the same in work and out of work benefits to all recent arrivals from the EU as we offer to our own citizens, it will  attract more people.

Third, if the UK economy continues to generate a lot of jobs, but the Euro area economies remain mired with high unemployment, the UK will attract a large share of the illegal migrants to the EU.

The UK answer to this problem is to remove ourselves from the common border and welfare policies. We could do a better job controlling our own systems than we can do under EU rules.  The EU answer should be effective border controls throughout the EU. It would also help the EU case if they changed their mind and allowed the UK to take tougher action over access to benefits.

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


  1. Lifelogic
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:01 am | Permalink

    This is all true and obvious – but what is actually being done by the coalition to address these issues? Nothing at all substantive they will not even discuss the issue?

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

      I see the chances of a Tory majority (from electoral calculus) seems to have fallen further to just 11% (and that is just a bare majority including lots of Ken Clark types). The chance of Cameron having sufficient majority to be sure of pushing through any meaningful referendum is thus perhaps less than 25% of this. Even if he gets all this then the chances of Cameron keeping his word and delivering a fair/meaningful referendum (this time) must surely be at best 50%.

      So overall perhaps slightly over 1% chance of a fair referendum next parliament?

      Chance of Lab Majority 57% coalitions 20% no overall control 12%.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 8:09 am | Permalink

        The chance of a referendum in the next Parliament may be 1%, taking into account the 11% chance of a nominal Tory overall majority but as you say not one which could be relied on to vote through the legislation, plus the 100% chance that the Lords would try to block it and some imponderable chance that they might actually succeed in delaying it for long enough to stop it altogether, what with the 50% chance that the UK will be in the throes of disintegration after September 18th, with consequences which are quite incalculable but unlikely to be as simple as just getting rid of the Labour MPs elected in Scotland as some Tories hope.

        However the chance of a fair referendum in the next Parliament is not 1%, it is vanishingly small.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

      Nothing, and nor would anything be attempted during any renegotiation of our EU membership terms. We have three mainstream parties all in favour of mass immigration under any pretext whatsoever, and the only distinguishing claim that could be made by the Tory party is that they would slightly prefer it to be legal mass immigration rather than illegal. But even there one of their popular heroes, Boris Johnson, would be perfectly happy to give an amnesty to however million illegal immigrants there may already be in the country, thereby of course encouraging more to come. What the established body of citizens may think about this is seen as being totally irrelevant; their views are clear enough from opinion polls, and it is obvious that many of them are labouring under some kind of delusion that this is their country, their national homeland, and they should be able to say who can come to share it with them; but that is not is certainly not the view of the Labour, Tory and LibDem politicians they foolishly keep electing to Parliament. The mistake that we made was to cut our birthrate down close to replacement level, following the strong recommendations of our government through the NHS; because the British people were having an insufficient number of children to keep the population expanding as the politicians really wanted they are punishing us by importing millions of other people’s children from abroad, and there is nothing we can do about that while we continue to vote for them.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

      I see Mathew Parris is doing his very best to help UKIP with his article on Clacton:

      Illustrating perfectly everything wrong with the sneering attitude of the current Tory leadership towards voters. He is, as usual wrong, wrong, wrong. If the Tories want to win they need to move hugely from their current position and very quickly. Typical of pro EU “modernisers” he thinks UKIPs policies are wrong, yet fails to give a single reason why.

  2. zorro
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:01 am | Permalink

    I can see what you are saying, but I can see a few issues too. It is the ease of access to the UK benefit system – in practice – which is driving the magnet towards us, and the ease with which we grant a status and subsequently citizenship which gives access to even more of those benefits which drives them to the UK. Other European countries clearly don’t offer as good a deal otherwise they would be claiming asylum there in greater numbers….. Admittedly, Germany and Sweden have been struggling with high numbers in recent years.

    I am convinced that it is weak decision making by the UK authorities and the very small likelihood of forcible removal by arrest and detention, less than 10,000 over year in country, which is one of the pull factors.

    The only thing stopping this getting worse is the operation of juxtaposed controls and, trust me, they will be going if there is a real threat to leave the EU. The mood music is pick early moving that way with the French. At the moment, the UK border is in Calais so people who try and get in illegally can just be stopped and handed back to the French Police. If the juxtaposed controls go, then the French will allow the illegals to get on the ferries after making a perfunctory attempt to control exit from the EU. There would then be absolute chaos at Dover as there would not be enough staff to deal with the people arriving at Dover and process them. They would then not be able to enforce removal to France as was always the problem in the past. This is something that any UK government will fear….


  3. Margaret Brandreth-J
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:03 am | Permalink

    It is sad to see those people camping out in Calais, however why if France have allowed the migrants to get so far should they not house and care for these people themselves? Why is it the UK the illegal migrants want to get to?

    GB’s plans for our futures many years ago have been spoiled by overcrowding and erosion of our culture.We have had to have less children , take less money , find ways of making ends meet, think about the economy ,find ways of dealing fairly with multi culturism without the help of any other .

    You talk about the borders being as weak as the weakest.Using the analogy of diffusion , this is the overall situation; we attract and then our own strength is diluted.We are still what some may speak of in derogatory terms ‘islanders’ and should use that sea more effectively as a barrier .

    Border control is indeed the most important aspect of freeing ourselves from those who trample over our society and welfare.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

      It is mainly because we were having fewer children, as urged by our government through its NHS over several decades, that our government then abandoned the longstanding policy of “would-be zero” immigration and flipped over to allowing and encouraging the mass immigration of other people’s children from abroad.

  4. Mark B
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:05 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    I am sorry Mr. Redwood MP sir, but you could not be more wrong. Yes, there is an EU dimension, but you have failed to mention it.

    The reason the illegal immigrants wish to enter the UK, is because our benefits system is far too generous and easy for non-UK residence to access. The Mayor of Calais has said as much. What OUR Government needs to do, and this is NOT reliant on the EU, is to change our benefits system to be less attractive compared to any other country. Therefore, it is OUR fault that these people come, NOT the EU’s.

    So, apart from the generous welfare benefits OUR Government gives to these people, why do they come ? I have asked this on other forums to see if those commenting on them understand the problem. I think they do not.

    It all goes back to one of our fellow contributors (acorn) and some maps he posted up a while ago. It also has an EU dimension which has more to do with the Customs Union of the EU and trade with other countries from the Third World.

    To deal with the last of those first. A Customs Union imposes a tariff on all goods entering. If you are a country that sells goods too the EU, you are already working at a financial disadvantage. As the Euro falls in value, it becomes harder and harder to remain competitive, and so, your business fails. You make people unemployed and, those unemployed migrate to pasture new and where there is plenty – ie the UK.

    Therefore, abolishing the Customs Union would be of real benefit. But it will not happen. And here is the irony. Business and farming in the EU is very pro-Customs Union. Why ? It ensures a closed and protected market in which they can sell there goods and services at a price that maintains there profits. Yet those self same business that like a closed market to sell their goods, also like an open market in labour. This further helps them in their profits by depressing labour costs, something the last Government did rather a lot to achieve.

    When these migrants arrive (and they are ALL men), they go to places like Greece and Italy and find nothing, as they too are suffering from the above effects. They then turn up at either Germany of France and, because their benefits systems are contribution based, ie you only get out what you put in, they cannot access services, so head for the only country that does – UK.

    This is a problem of both OUR and the Euro / Customs Union’s making. We cannot deal with the latter, but blaming the EU, when it is not directly responsible does not help us in our quest to solve this problem. It needs research and an open mind.

  5. Cheshire girl
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:10 am | Permalink

    John, you are stating what every sensible person in the UK already knows, but it does not address the problem of those wanting to come in from countries outside Europe. We could do something about those if the politicians had the will, but they only tinker round the edges. Those in Calais are not our problem. The French could do something about them but choose not to. In my opinion, we should rigorously enforce the rule that people should claim asylum in the first safe country they reach. Instead we are desperately making excuses to build more houses for our ‘growing population’ blaming it on anything but immigration. I don’t see this changing in the future. Frankly i believe the extent of the problem is being hidden from us by politicians whose only desire is to be re-elected!

    • Mondeo Man
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:12 am | Permalink

      Cheshire Girl – The demonise our old people by blaming the health crisis on them.

      The early arrivals to Britain are sending the message back to their homelands “The British authorities – they don’t care ! Come ! Come !” and so they do.

      They are coming because senior Tories like it.

      We know the Tories like it because it happens under their watch.

      What jobs are those storming the fences at Calais likely to do in Britain ? And if they are coming here to do legitimite jobs then what of our race rioters and aspiring gangstas who tell us that we don’t offer them any fairness or job opportunities ? Are they lying ? (Of course they are)

      But we cannot talk straight about these things because of Political Correctness which was born of lies about the nature of the British people.

      It emanated from places such as Tower Hamlets and took over the country like bindweed. We used to call them loonies but now it’s we they call the loons. What next from there ? Third world political corruption ?

      • APL
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 1:36 pm | Permalink

        Mondeo Man: “What jobs are those storming the fences at Calais likely to do in Britain ?”

        Foreigners forming mobs and forcing entry to a country is called an invasion. We have the army and navy to deal with such situations.

        That the French have permitted these people to travel unhindered across their country and congregate at Calais suggests the French are not behaving in a manner you’d expect a friend and ally to behave.

    • JoeSoap
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:08 am | Permalink

      But gradually people are coming to realise that the three traditional parties are doing nothing about this problem, which is one of the reasons for the rise and rise of UKIP. There was the chance, in 2010, for Cameron to have stated in his manifesto that he would deal with this and other problems. He had the clear choice at that time to either accept that his original promise for a vote on Lisbon had been thwarted by the weasel Scots Brown and Darling, and to propose a deeper referendum (also promised by the LibDems in 2010) or to forget the whole thing. He did the latter.
      The irony is that the weasel Scots are on the point of removing themselves from the EU by default, and Cameron is on the point of losing office anyway, leaving the poor English Welsh and Irish up a creek without a paddle.

      • JoeSoap
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:09 am | Permalink

        Northern Irish of course…

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

        Cameron still had the choice of putting the Lisbon Treaty to a referendum, and don’t let him or anyone else (including our host) fool you into thinking that this was no longer possible on the specious argument that the treaty no longer existed as treaty.

        It did still exist as a treaty, and it still exists as a treaty to this day as can be seen here in the EU’s own Official Journal on the EU’s own website:

        “Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon, 13 December 2007”

        Moreover if the Treaty of Lisbon no longer exists as a treaty, as Cameron falsely claimed on November 4th 2009, then why is this non-existent treaty still included in the list of treaties in Section 1(2) of the European Communities Act 1972 as amended?

        (2) In this Act . . . “the Treaties” or [F2the EU Treaties] means, subject to subsection (3) below, the pre-accession treaties, that is to say, those described in Part I of Schedule 1 to this Act, taken with …

        … (s) the Treaty of Lisbon Amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty Establishing the European Community signed at Lisbon on 13th December 2007 (together with its Annex and protocols), excluding any provision that relates to, or in so far as it relates to or could be applied in relation to, the Common Foreign and Security Policy;]”

    • Bazman
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:48 am | Permalink

      Its interesting to see how these non EU citizens get anything, in particular if they are single ones with no children. Who supports them here? They are entitled to next to nothing, so the only conclusion is that they support themselves by illegal employment. No job no point in coming here unless you have a sponsor who will pay for everything and even this is questioned very thoroughly at the point of entry in the UK.

      • JoeSoap
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

        There is a job for you to do in Calais!

      • libertarian
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 4:09 pm | Permalink


        You’ve got yourself a little confused. If they are NON EU citizens then they are either illegal & therefore of course they get no support OR they are entitled to come here by way of sponsored work or education visa’s. So how is your post relevant? What do you think of LEGAL immigrants from the EU, taking jobs/benefits/housing in the UK, do you think that it presents a problem and why are you still an ardent Labour Party supporter ? After all it was them who as they admit deliberately engineered this

        • Bazman
          Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:29 pm | Permalink

          If you come here aboard lorry or caravan then you ate illegal. How do you propose to stop this? Legal immigrants from the EEC are just that. WTF!?

          • libertarian
            Posted September 7, 2014 at 3:36 pm | Permalink


            Ah stopping illegals, whilst not 100% effective if we 1) Had proper boarder controls and 2) Where not in the EU we could detain and RETURN those trying to gain illegal access.

            You are the one who keeps repeating there are no jobs, so what are the legal ones doing? They cant be working according to you so they must be draining benefits from UK citizens. Please explain why you are a supporter of this and how it benefits the UKs workers

    • Tad Davison
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 10:27 am | Permalink

      Well said. Yet it carries on.

      Mr Carswell must have been so frustrated by the inability of the government to address these problems, and could see that change wasn’t about to happen any time soon under their tenure. These pro-EU types are a walking disaster, but still they hold power and still they won’t change. Instead, they continue to assure us they are right when patently they are not.


  6. Mike Stallard
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:17 am | Permalink

    “The UK answer to this problem is to remove ourselves from the common border and welfare policies.”
    Yup – and the rest of the EU as well!

    Incidentally, that is not Mr Cameron’s stated policy is it.

    • Bazman
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:43 am | Permalink

      They probably would not want to come here after that as Britain pursues beggar thy neighbour policies and forces the British to work for poverty wages to fill the gaps left by cheap foreign labour by cutting benefits. Pay will not rise and to argue it would show the level of ignorance that the right has. There would be ‘panic’ over wage inflation and how to stop this as burden on business. Such as we saw with the minimum wage legislation. No such panic exists over bosses pay which tells us all we need to know. It cannot be justified why a British man with three children who is out of work due to government policies should live like an East European immigrant away from home working for poverty wages.

      • libertarian
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 4:11 pm | Permalink


        Your post is non sensical, contradictory drivel. Please sit down take a deep breath and at least make an attempt to rationally analyse the problem

        • Bazman
          Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:34 pm | Permalink

          Hello! No job. No sustainable life. What do you not understand? A British person is to compete with East European and third world young desperation? Not understanding is not a way out for you.

          • libertarian
            Posted September 7, 2014 at 3:45 pm | Permalink


            Try not contradicting yourself.

            There are jobs but according to you they are all below living wage because LEGAL EU workers come here to do the jobs. You support this. You then claim that if benefits are cut to legal immigrant workers this will force British workers to take up the low paid jobs… hmmm you aren’t really up to speed with supply and demand are you. Also if you and your party hadn’t signed us up to this then the job market wouldn’t be flooded with cheap labour as you claim AND there would be MORE benefit money available to UK workers. Like the rest of the Labour party you talk utter nonsense when it comes to business and economics.

            Oh and you are back to you I know one person who this applies to so it must be everyone schtick . What is bosses pay and how much is it? As I told you so many times the panic over minimum wage wasn’t employers it was workers who suffer from that lunacy. Get over yourself

  7. Excalibur
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:21 am | Permalink

    It is singularly disingenuous of you , John, to be talking about securing our borders when DC has opened the flood gates to Indian immigration through the EU/India Free Trade Agreement. Ostensibly an EU trade arrangement, it will primarily affect England. In return for access to the Indian financial sector by the City of London, it grants what one commentator called “a virtually irreversible flow of temporary (believe that at your peril) cheap, skilled labour from the sub continent.
    Thus we have Sky ‘softening up’ the populace with a plethora of pro India clips. Meanwhile India proceeds with the purchase of fighter aircraft from France !! Etc ed

  8. zorro
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:26 am | Permalink

    ‘Why Britain and not France, I ask them all. Benjamin answers: ‘First, it is a language issue. We speak some English, but no French or German. Second, our families are already there. Third, you get your paperwork much more quickly in Britain than other countries’….

    This the result of UK policy and not the EU. No need to ‘debrief’ them, they happily talk to journalists. As soon as they get the paperwork, the befits will flow. No one gets removed back to Eritrea, just look at the statistics.


    • Kenneth R Moore
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:03 am | Permalink

      Very true, other countries operate under similar rules it’s just that we enforce them deliberately to the letter. We make little or no distinction between those that have been in the country 5 mins or 50 years. We are supposed to live in a democracy but only a few in a politically correct clique at the top are happy about this.
      It’s all done with a nod and a wink , signalling to newcomers they are welcome here whilst pretending to actually care or do something to those that are alarmed. Remember the chairman of the home affiars select committee welcoming Romanians migrants at Heathrow.

      The Lib, Lab, Con creature despises and distrusts the native people.

    • Mondeo Man
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:31 am | Permalink

      Zorro – If their families are already here then why take the illegal route ?

      One feels that it is all too late.

      No hope.

      That politics operates in two parallel realities. Ours and theirs.

      That there is no point in voting Tory and nothing to lose by voting UKIP.

      There is the desire for revenge at the polling booth for Tory betrayals and Mr Cameron’s condescending manner towards those of us who are alarmed at what is happening on this issue and on Europe.

      Such is the mountain that the Tories need to get over by the next election on this, the #1 issue.

    • Alan
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:40 am | Permalink

      The Daily Mail does say the migrants are mistaken in thinking they will get ‘the paperwork’ quickly in the UK. So presumably the benefits do not flow.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

        And yet the flow of migrants, legal and illegal, continues.

  9. Old Albion
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:56 am | Permalink

    We could just invoke ‘article 50’

    Reply How? There is no majority in Parliament for that.

    • Old Albion
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

      There’s a majority in the country who want it desperately. It’s only the EU puppets in Westminster who wish to remain wedded to the EU(ssr)

      • David Price
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 5:52 am | Permalink

        The only way to prove that is what the majority want is to hold a referendum, even a GE is no strong indication.

      • Richard1
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 7:35 am | Permalink

        That is very unclear. At general elections the public consistently return a eurofederalist majority. Only if there is a majority conservative govt might there be a referendum which would really test this.

    • matthu
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:07 pm | Permalink

      There would be … if you put that in your manifesto at the next election.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

        There is no majority in the Tory party for anything even approaching this alas.
        Cameron’s renegotiation list is merely arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. It seems he prefers to throw a second election.

      • David Price
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 5:58 am | Permalink

        At the very least there has to be a Conservative Party guarantee of a referendum, independent of whether Cameron leads it or not.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

      Nor will there be on May 8th 2015 – probably even further from one.

  10. Chris S
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 7:31 am | Permalink

    Clearly the French Government is deliberately not doing anything to help the Mayor of Calais to deal with these illegals in order to pressurise London to take them in.

    The question is, are conditions and benefits for asylum seekers really so much better in the UK than France ? I have never seen a definitive article on the subject. It would be nice to know.

    I did ask yesterday whether you intend to put a pledge to vote to leave the EU in your personal manifesto at the GE. I am sure that almost all of your regular contributors would love to know if you do intend to do so.

    Reply I have already repeatedly made clear that if the choice is our current membership or Out I will campaign and vote for Out, as I did last time when I objected to the Treaty of Rome.

    • matthu
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

      You know that any choiuce weill never be for the “current membership or Out”. You appear to be adopting the weasel words of Cameron here.

      The choice will be between some negotiated settlement offered to Cameron and out. On what you have just said, I assume you will settle for Cameron’s negotiated settlement.

      Reply Why do you assume that. I have consistently made clear my opposition to the treaties and stated I want a relationship based on trade and political co-operation. That means no EU mandatory government, no loss of veto, no Rome to Lisbon.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:48 pm | Permalink

        Even if we get everything on Cameron’s list we should leave. His list contains nothing of substance.

  11. alan jutson
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    They want to come here because tens of thousands of others, friends, relatives have already settled here and tell them how good it is, how easy it is to get money, some sort of work or benefits, health treatment, and that it is better here than where they may come from.

    That is why they are prepared to risk their own lives to jump on the next lorry coming this way.

    All this nonsense about the Governments new delays in getting Benefits is simply treated as a joke.

    The simple way to get around the new rules is to live with people who have been here for some time (on Benefits or working) at their expense, until they time qualify to get benefits themselves, in their own right, and so it goes on.

    We really must be daftest country on the planet to keep on funding people who have never paid into the system in their lives.

    Eventually these people will break the welfare system, break the National Health service, and eventually our education system.
    Then those who have paid in all their lives will get nothing because there will be little left when it is their turn.

    The sad fact is that in most cases those who are leaving our shores are Nationals who are looking for a better life, who presently pay taxes.
    Most of those arriving seem to have nothing, and need, and it would seem can get, some support from the system funded by those here who are paying taxes.

    Why politicians of all Parties cannot understand this is beyond me.

    We cannot support the population of Europe when the borders of the EU are so easy to enter from outside, and EU citizenship seems so easy to gain.

    Of course we need better border controls, but above all we need a new welfare system where you only get out, after you have paid in for a very long qualifying period.

    At the moment it would seem you only have to be here for five minutes before you are entitled to housing benefit, health care and a whole range of other services and benefit entitlements.

  12. Ex-expat Colin
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 7:52 am | Permalink

    And total concentration is upon destroying Russia and our trade with it. Stick NATO on Russia’s border in a very dubious manner.

    Its the EU that’s the real problem…mainland Europe. Its them who are the threat to us. Plus the maniacs running the likes of the Kiev government. Kneel down in front of the Ukrainian Army….freedom of speech still absent? Would you want them in your organisation.

    The sight of two military aircraft at Newport, one on the golf course, the other in front of the meeting building says it all…total waste and stupidity.

    Finally the killing has stopped…for a while.

    • Tad Davison
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

      Interestingly Colin, one was an F35, an abomination of an aircraft that has so many faults, even the Pentagon are having second thoughts. An aircraft that seeks to do too many things is a compromise – and an expensive one at that. A jack of all trades, and master of none according to many experts even in the US.

      Not so long ago, there was a campaign by some in the Canadian military to re-instate the Avro Canada Arrow from the late 1950s. That had a far better flight envelope – faster, higher, better range, better pay-load – than the F35 and would have been cheaper, but alas, that was cancelled by the Canadian Prime Minister of the day, John Diefenbaker, under very dubious circumstances in favour of second-hand, clapped-out ex-USAF Voodoo’s. All the jigs, plans, and patterns were destroyed by unknown people.

      It was Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned us of ‘The Military Industrial Complex’, and it seems they’re still alive and well. We in the UK once had an aircraft industry worthy of the name, but don’t even get me started on the TSR2 which had a similar fate to the Avro Arrow. And this is where it gets relevant to this thread. We elect our politicians to look after our interests such as stopping immigration, fraud in the financial institutions, keeping us safe from real enemies not creating them for a gullible public, and not allowing another country or countries to hold sway over us.

      Can we really say with any conviction that the three main Westminster parties have succeeded in the modern era?

      Tad Davison


  13. Liz
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 7:55 am | Permalink

    Last week the news media covered the situation at Calais where hundreds of non EU citizens are trying to get illegally into Britain. When interviewed the right questions were never asked. Why do they particularly want to come to Britain and not other democratic European countries – is it our generous welfare system? Why are they not returrned to the first safe country they entered? If they are destitute as claimed, where do they get the thousands £ needed to pay traffickers to get them to Calais/Britain? Why does France just accept these camps and seemingly determined to see the people on their way to Britian rather than try and settle them in France? There is no political will here to solve illegal immigration and the true figures are being hushed up both by politicians and the liberally inclined media – because basically they think it is a good thing but dare not say so outright.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

      Maybe it’s because the Italians are happy to help them when they first arrive in Italy and then assist them on the next leg of their journey from Italy to France, whereupon the French can pass them on to us.

      This is how our so-called partners and allies on the continent behave towards us, these people are a problem that can be passed on to the British.

      Of course if we had a British government which was serious about stopping illegal immigration then they would be sent straight back to France, if necessary just deposited on a French beach with directions to the nearest police station where they could turn themselves in, but the reality is that we still have a government which wishes to maximise immigration on every possible pretext.

    • sjb
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 4:59 pm | Permalink

      Illegal immigrants are not entitled to benefits, Liz.

      The House Of Commons’ Library provides well researched briefing papers on immigration and asylum:

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:49 pm | Permalink

      “When interviewed the right questions were never asked.”

      Such is the nature of the BBC and Channel 4 – they have an agenda.

  14. They Work for Us?
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:02 am | Permalink

    Immigration control is a battle of wills between the will of the UK to keep them out and the immigrants perseverance and will to come. Why is the UK border at Calais? Why not pull it back. We should operate a simple premise that all illegal immigrants that have obviously crossed the channel will be deported to France no exceptions. No processing, no consideration of individuals, straight back. If necessary stop ferry crossings to Calais for a while. Close the tunnel, show we mean t prevail. Do what the French do in certain condions, ignore the rules, say yes we can and just do it. If this results in people going back and forth because France won’t take them, ignore the PR and remain resolute.

  15. Bryan
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:14 am | Permalink

    Many of those now at Calais entered the EU in Italy, often Sicily. How come they end up on the Dover Straits coast?

    This should be an EU problem and the EU’s to solve.

    There are enough Commission civil servants with nothing to do but make up directives for household appliances and other such nonsense. Time they had something useful to do!

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 1:24 pm | Permalink

      Because the kind-hearted Italians look after them and then help them on their way here, even though they know full well that we do not want them.

  16. John E
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:17 am | Permalink

    I agree with all that – but your solution is years away from reality and the crisis is now. What is being done here and now to fix our border security. Presumably we don’t need EU permission to catch people hiding underneath caravans? I’m convinced the reported events are the tip of the iceberg.

  17. agricola
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:24 am | Permalink

    You quantify the obvious admirably. The answer should be that Government answers to Parliament and Parliament to the people, but we all know that there is a massive disconnect in this respect. Government is totally independent of the democratic process. You know there is an election in the offing when Government begins to articulate what the people are thinking. However do not kid yourself that this means that Government is going to change it’s ways.

    There has to be a seismic shift in the way we do politics in the UK. MP’s first loyalty should be to their constituents and then very loosely to a party that can accept that constituents come first. We need to see an end to the school, university, party hack, MP route into politics. We desperately need MPs with real life and work experience. A hose full of Douglas Carswells would be no bad thing.

    The tank trap to democracy is the EU and the Lib/Dem, Con, Lab, BBC, FO cabal that support our subjugation by it. They have to be cleared out before we can expect any progress. On the side of the good guys are about 100 Conservative MPs, maybe a few Labour MPs, and the potential of a tsunami of support for UKIP. I do not know how to quantify the support they will get on May 15th next, nor does any current poll tell us. While I will vote for my dissenting Tory MP I hope the rest will get swept away because they do not reflect the aspirations of the people of the UK.

  18. stred
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:29 am | Permalink

    We saw the jams and chaotic situation in Calais this week. There were gangs of illegal immigrants gathered around fuel stations, where drivers fill up before having to pay around 20% more in the UK. A reduced duty fuel station should be allowed in the port waiting area or in Dover before exiting. This way the lorries would be safe and the chaotic sitation in Calais would be eased. The Treasury would receive more tax and the French less. The suggestion has been made before, but the taxman disagrees.

    On the Ferry, we followed a minibus with 10 Indian passengers who were speaking German. In the bar, which had an English and French flag on the wall, we were the only British in the area. There were groups of Polish young people coming back, a French couple who live in London, a family in white Islamic robes, and prosperous educated Africans with their children. All were citizens of the EU and as entitled to come to the UK as natives. They all know that our politicians and civil servants, who believe in ‘one World’, have made the UK the best destination in Europe.

  19. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:39 am | Permalink

    The UK answer to this problem is to remove ourselves from the EU.

    Reply Why go on arguing about this? The issue has always been how do we get out of the current EU, and what kind of new relationship do we have? You always fail to engages with these 2 questions, and try to lie about me suggesting |I want some kind of pathetic deal which means we stay within the current treaties. How do you propose getting out of the EU if you do not back the Conservatives to get you an In/Out referendum? UKIP are on a polling level for the GE which will give them no seats like last time.

    • Ken Adams
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 11:33 am | Permalink

      Reply to reply, Sorry Mr Redwood but your internal party problems are not the issue. You may want a real return of powers, but clearly your leader and his close advisers do not, otherwise they would be very open about what powers they intend to demand and would be prepared to take this country out if those demands are not met.

      That way there might even be a Conservative majority in the Commons. Until then I will continue to believe Cameron will use a referendum on a fudge to close down the debate.

    • Brian Tomkinson
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

      Reply to reply,
      You keep accusing me of lying about you when all I do is refer to your own words.
      I will not vote for your party because it is in favour of keeping the UK in the EU and preparing to have a re-run of Wilson’s deceit in 1975.
      To quote Douglas Carswell:
      “They’re not serious about real change. They’re only interested in holding office.
      Ministers have specifically ruled out a trade-only arrangement with the EU. The Prime Minister said so specifically at a meeting of the 1922. It won’t even be on the table.
      His( Cameron’s) advisers have made it clear they won’t contemplate any deal with UKIP. They’re more comfortable doing deals with Nick Clegg than with a party that wants real change in our relations with the EU.
      His (Cameron’s) advisers have made it clear that they seek a new deal that gives them just enough to persuade enough voters to vote to stay in. It’s not about change in our national interest. It’s all about not changing things.”

      Carswell could see through the deceit and realised that he could no longer remain in your party. When he wins in Clacton we should have another discussion about how many seats UKIP will have after May next year.

      • MARGARET
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:42 pm | Permalink

        Come on Brian …you are talking semantics

    • JoeSoap
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

      Reply to reply
      So you are happy to wait until 2017 for the small likelihood of a referendum yet unhappy to wait for UKIP ideas as they catch on and their poll rating rises? What happens when you lose the 2015 election in less than 9 months’ time as the polls say, and this pipe-dream of a 2017 referendum goes up in smoke? Will you be talking a 2022 referendum on the assumption that another Tory government forms if it forms under a Eurosceptic leader?

    • Graham
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

      Reply to Reply

      Why JR do you then still pose these questions in your blog knowing full well that we cannot do anything about it. Clearly you don’t feel too strongly about it because you are not prepared to swim against the tide.

      You should be realistic yourself and accept that you are not going to change anything and on that basis what actually is your role in parliament?

      Reply I have changed things, am changing things and intend to change more.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

        Keep up the good work JR but I tend to thing the battle is lost. Cameron was the last hope, but he chose to throw the election with his ratting, lefty agenda and Clegg on TV. He seem determined to repeat his mistake.

    • BobE
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

      Brian you are rather out of date. Ukip will get an MP in October.

      • Chris
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

        I suspect UKIP will get a minimum of two seats for Carswell and Farage through their personal popularity. There can’t be many people who would not like to see Nigel outwitting Cameron or Miliband at PMQs.

        The electoral numbers under our FPTP system will make it almost impossible for UKIP to get any more seats at the GE.

        This means that a vote for UKIP in any other seat where the Conservatives have a chance of winning is almost certain to help Miliband into No 10.

        UKIP Voters : You are burying your heads in the sand if you don’t realise that the result will then be :

        No Referendum and another huge surge in public expenditure.

        Chris S

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted September 7, 2014 at 7:28 am | Permalink

          You really are behind the times here.

          Firstly the Tories are short of about 10% of the public support they would need to win the next general election, assuming that it takes place as scheduled. Not to get more seats than Labour, mind, but to get an overall majority and form a government on their own.

          Secondly if you look at Lord Ashcroft’s recent polling in marginal constituencies:

          and work through out the breakdown of the identifiable sources of UKIP support then it comes out as roughly:

          6% from people who voted Tory in 2010
          3% from people who voted Labour in 2010
          3% from people who voted LibDem in 2010

          Straight off it can seen that if there were no UKIP candidates and everyone reverted to how they voted in 2010 then the net benefit to the Tories vis-à-vis Labour would be 6% – 3% = only 3%.

          But that is far from the end of the story because by the end of 2010 about half of those who had voted for the LibDems had switched their support to Labour – see the yellow and red lines at the left hand side here:

          so now the calculation of the net benefit to the Tories becomes:

          6% – 3% who voted Labour – 1.5% who voted LibDem = 1.5%.

          Moreover a substantial fraction of those who intend to vote for UKIP would not vote at all in the absence of a UKIP candidate, or they would vote for an independent or minor party candidate, not for any of the three old parties all of which disgust them.

          This is why I say that even if UKIP were to completely disappear from the political scene so that nobody anywhere had the option of voting for a UKIP candidate then the net benefit to the Tories in their contest with Labour would be slight, maybe 2% at most as a generous estimate, and it would be nowhere near enough to make up their present 10% shortfall.

          The question which opinion pollsters should really ask avowed UKIP supporters, but never do as far as I know, is not how they voted in 2010, if they can recall that, but what they would do if there no UKIP candidate standing in their constituency.

          My bet is that their answers would shatter the myth that UKIP is a serious obstacle to the Tories winning the next general election, in comparison to the greater consolidation of the leftish anti-Tory vote on Labour and the continuing anti-Tory bias in the system because the LibDems blocked the boundary changes.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 7, 2014 at 7:51 am | Permalink

      As an aside, JR, how do you feel about an electoral system which means that a fifth of the population could vote for UKIP but still get zero representation in Parliament, while a tenth who voted for the LibDems would at least get a couple of dozen MPs, albeit that is less than half the number they would get on strict proportionality? Hasn’t this FPTP system so beloved by the Tory party been a major contributing factor in the near extinction of their party in Scotland, which by leaving the field vacant for separatists and further exacerbating the divisions across the country will in turn contribute to its disintegration?

      • Chris S
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

        Denis, I agree with a lot of your points : the FPTP system cannot be justified on grounds of fairness.

        I think it was Jim Callaghan who admitted this but he said the alternative was worse. He obviously meant having someone like Clegg permanently in Government !

        In our current position, if there were some form of proportional representation we would end up with a UKIP/Conservative coalition which would accurately reflect the feelings of the majority, at least in England.

        Whether or not Scotland votes to leave, any new settlement will have to look at devolution for England : there is a very large majority in support for this, particularly for English MPs to sit as the English Parliament.

        Surely, a fresh look at PR will have to be considered at the same time ?

        If Scotland votes to leave and UKIP win a large share of the vote in 2015 but almost no MPs, the pressure will really be on, who ever ends up in Downing Street.

        Under FPTP we could end up with The LibDems getting 4-5% of the vote and 20 MPs and UKIP with 10-12% and just Farage and Carswell.

        What ever happens in Scotland, there is going to be a huge and fascinating upheaval in our political landscape.

  20. Alan
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    I think this is a problem that the UK has brought about by not joining the Schengen agreement and I have a lot of sympathy for Calais, which is being forced to cope with the consequences. We ought to do more than shrug our shoulders and say it is not our business. I think people ought to be treated humanely, whether they are ‘illegal migrants’ or not.

    We ought to find a better method of processing people at our borders, or let them enter the UK and have a proper method of dealing with them once they arrive. If we can’t do that I think we have to let these people settle here, not treat them inhumanely. There are not actually that many of them – 2000 according to the Daily Mail article that Zorro quotes.

    Of course, the French should also treat these people humanely, and they do not seem to be doing that. The French have a system of ID cards that I imagine enables them to distinguish more easily between those entitled to benefits and those who are not. Maybe we ought to re-consider some sort of ID or ‘entitlement’ card, then we could do away with all the delays at borders and control who gets what inside the UK.

    Reply We did not invite these people and they do not qualify under our rules, so surely it is best we tell them that at Calais and not let them waste their time and money coming to the UK to be told No. The French should do the same at their border if they do not want them in France.

    • bigneil
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 12:16 pm | Permalink

      So your idea is to let the “2000” in and deal with them here. Then what? 5000 turn up and we let them in. Then what? 10,000? 100,000? – – All knowing they will walk in -totally unhindered. The immigration people have a massive backlog NOW – and that is with a supposed “working” system and laughable controls. -So what happens with your method when the rest of the third world walks in asking for their house, their money, their “entitlement to NHS? – -how long till ebola arrives along with every other disease? – -These 2000 would vanish here if they thought there was ANY chance of not being sent back. This country would be overrun in months.
      Presumably the 2000 think that by forcing their way here – and now apparently claiming the famous “open sesame” words – HUMAN RIGHTS – they will be granted their new address and free life – watching out of their windows on a freezing morning as their English slaves have to go to work – to keep a roof over their own heads – and also anyone who decides to force their way in here.

    • Alan
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

      The Daily Mail article says that some are invited by friends and relatives. Presumably they do not qualify for legal entry. They are people who will not take No for an answer, so whether we tell them that in Eritrea, France, or the UK makes no difference.

      These people are not going to disappear unless we deal with them very inhumanely, which we don’t want to do. If we let them in the problem we are discussing goes away. There will be other problems, but that one goes away.

      It’s not a borders problem, it’s an immigration problem. The two are not the same. We are going to a lot of trouble and expense over the security of our borders when there could be easier and more humane ways, such as better ways of dealing with benefit applications, use of the Health Service, and access to employment, to deal with the problems that immigration can bring.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

      The French don’t want them in France, but they want them to complete their intended journeys to the UK rather than sending them back to wherever they came from when they entered France. And doubtless we would have similar problems if Scotland became an independent country like France.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

      Alan, so how does our absence from the Schengen agreement prevent the French controlling their own borders with Italy, and Spain, and other countries which act as the conduits for illegal immigration to this country? It doesn’t, the fact of the matter is that the French are perfectly happy to provide a transit route for illegal immigration into somebody else’s country, and especially of course ours.

      • David Price
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 6:55 am | Permalink

        I recall the influx of immigrants from Ital to Spain got so bad a couple of years ago that France threatened to suspend Schengen between the countries so clearly the pro-EU countries don’t see Schengen as the answer either.

  21. Martin
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:47 am | Permalink

    What part of the UK Border system do you have problems with?

    Is it the lack of exit checks? (Schengen does this)
    Lack of checks for forged passports? (Schengen does this)

    Do Conservatives expect borders to be like the old communist Berlin wall? Perhaps you should look at the real world where borders are secured by a farmers fence. Use google earth to look at parts of the USA’s border with Canada!

    Visit the coasts of Britain – there are thousands of places where folk could (can?) slip ashore! Even during the second world war when the coast was ringed with barbed wire and minefields spies still slipped ashore!

    Reply Illegals do not come to the UK by row boat – they come to Dover, Folkestone,Gatwick and Heathrow. We need to have the powers to deny access to those we do not wish to let in, and to decide for ourselves who receives welfare benefits. The EU prevents us making both those crucial decisions.

    • Martin
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

      From what you say about illegals entering via LHR it looks as though as well as wasting my time the long slow UKBA queues at Heathrow are a waste of money!

      Do you think the UK should leave the Commonwealth as according to Conservative papers lots of characters come on the Lagos Shuttle to use the NHS ?

  22. evad666
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:47 am | Permalink

    Yet more excuses why we have to silently permit the mass rape and abuse and even murder of our children.

  23. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:48 am | Permalink

    JR: “One of the compelling reasons the UK needs a new relationship with the EU and needs to be outside the current Treaties”
    Why can’t you bring yourself ever to write: ‘the UK needs to leave the EU’?

    Reply I have often said we need to leave the present EU and we will be better off out. Why do you keep trying to undermine me when I voted for Out in the last referendum and would do so again today if we had one?

    • Ken Adams
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 11:39 am | Permalink

      Because you represent a party whose leader wants to keep us in, I don’t know why that is so difficult to understand. It is not personal but whatever you may say unless it is real party policy your words work against an exit because people might believe you speak for the Conservative party.

      Reply I speak for my constituents and express my own views.

      • David Price
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 6:40 am | Permalink

        Messrs Tomkinson and Adams (as you seem to be a double act), what do you mean by “leave the EU”? Do you mean absolutely no contact and no trade or simpley not part of the polictical union, or what?

        It is not clear what you are demanding John agrees to, or the voters come to that.

        Is it to be an utterly black and white separation or actually quite complicated involving many varied agreements, what is it?

        And by the way, considering the lack of public manifesto and debate on the UKIP website you and other UKIP commenters are the face of UKIP, your comments provide an insight into UKIP intent, whether you like it or not.

      • alan jutson
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 7:40 am | Permalink

        Reply -reply

        “I speak for my constituents”

        Thank you.

        Your record, and postings on this blog shows that you have always only ever wanted trade and co-operation agreement with the EU, or out.

        I appreciate that it must be so frustrating for you in attempting to gain support and traction within your own Party for that view.
        But do keep on trying, many out here do appreciate your efforts, and are as frustrated as you, that traditional conservative values on so many things now seem to be out of favour with the majority of Mp’s in your Party, as they support the position of your current leader.

    • Brian Tomkinson
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

      Reply to reply,
      I asked you yesterday if you would be one of the 100 Conservative MPs set to defy David Cameron by pledging to vote to leave the EU no matter how much power he manages to claw back from Brussels. You could have said ‘yes’ or you could have said ‘no’ but, as so often, your reply said neither and left me to draw my own conclusion. I replied to you saying that I had decided that your answer to my question was ‘no’ but you chose not to publish it.

      Reply Because my answer is not No. I am not your problem, You are deliberately trying to lie that I will; sell out to a poor negotiation when there is no reason to suppose I will. I a m against our current membership and do not believe we can be the independent democracy I want back within the current treaties.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 6:20 am | Permalink

        Well, JR, if you are a problem then you are one of the least problems! On the other hand there are plenty of Tory MPs who express fake opposition to the EU to try to string people along, and they are a real problem.

    • Paul
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

      I think the reason why JR cannot simply state that the UK needs to leave the EU whatever the outcome of the renegotiation in 2017 is down to party discipline and loyalty to our fake and hopeless PM. UKIP has long realised that Cameron and the Conservative Party are the problem not the solution, have no interest in sorting this country out from the mess it’s in, and come 2015 will be out of office. JR et al still cling to this dying party.

      Reply I have made it crystal clear that I want out of the p[resent EU and want out of the treaties I have opposed! I am not your problem!

      • David Price
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 6:43 am | Permalink

        @Paul, what do you mean by leave the EU? Do we continue trade or put up a big wall. Is what is left of our navy supposed to sink EU trawlers in our waters?

        What exactly is the UKIP expectation of leaving the EU?

      • APL
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 8:16 am | Permalink

        JR: “I am not your problem!”

        Maybe, but your support of your party is.

  24. ian wragg
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    Of course CMD and the LibLabCON will do nothing to address the issue. They are all Common Purpose Bilderbergers and fully signed up to the homogenisation of the state , the destruction of the English identity etc etc.
    The Home Office has lost 175,000 illegals. That’s what they own up too.
    Yours and Millipedes government are beyond parody John. Just when will the flow of 500,000 foreigners stop. When will the benefits run out. More to the point when will the taxpayer start to riot.
    I see one of your clown friends wants to stop OAP benefits to finance the welfare state. How about stopping the b
    £billions to foreigners for a kick off. Only 37 weeks to go before Milipede can have his turn destroying England. Bring it on, the sooner we will get the backlash that is surely coming.

  25. DaveM
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:04 am | Permalink

    Another post by JR which reinforces the fact that most of the problems in this country stem from the EU. But watch UK Border Force for half an hour, and it’s no wonder – half of the employees seem to offer asylum to people who don’t even know what asylum is, and who have already resigned themselves to the fact that they will be sent back whence they came. The illegal immigrants manage to get through the checks with a sob story and some tears. They then go to ‘holding houses’ from where they mysteriously disappear!!
    The only answer is to have total control over UK borders, maritime patrols, more ruthless immigration rules and more tough officers to enforce them, and a restriction on EU migrants. Stating the obvious, I know, but if any of you have 18 year-old kids who are completely unable to get summer jobs or part-time jobs of the kind we would have got 25 years ago, it brings the situation home. I wonder if any of the politicians have experienced a similar depressing situation with their kids?! If so it might prompt them to do something meaningful.

  26. Bazman
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    Illegal immigrants are exactly that. Illegal.
    Germany being one of the richest EU countries also has the very long borders with other countries and often poor ones with porous borders of their own. How do they police this? You could have guard and checkpoints all along if you wanted, but anyone could just walk further down. Plus a large proportion of the German population was born outside the states present day territory, so this idea that we with the English channel just pull the drawbridge up further is for the birds, besides how do you physically stop the immigrants from attempting to get here. This idea that non EU citizens are entitled to benefits and work is tabloid nonsense. My wife who is Russian was entitled to nothing even have to pay full price for a course in English which for non EU citizens is about three times the cost. No work is allowed either. Most of the EU workers do not come here to claim benefits but to work. Not a small point and illegal immigrants are employed illegally by business for their own cost cutting reasons. The UK is generating a lot of low paid jobs hence the need for employees who can undercut the British worker. Should they be forced to compete with five to a room/car and with often very sharp, fleet footed young people who can live like this. Not real.

    • Ted Monbiot
      Posted September 7, 2014 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

      The sad reality is that yes, they are being forced to compete with these new arrivals.
      Just as many companies are being forced to compete with fierce world competition to survive.

      I’m not sure having read numerous posts by you recently if you are for open borders for trade and workers or against Baz.

  27. English Pensioner
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    Is the problem our borders or our benefits system?
    The French are convinced that it is the latter, we hand out benefits to immigrants far too easily and it is also easier to find “under the radar” work, where of course they pay no taxes. The French, of course, have identity cards and it is illegal to work without one or a work permit.
    For once I agree with the French, a very rare event, so we must be right!

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

      No, you are wrong. Why should we all be forced to carry ID cards because of the quite deliberate failure of our government to stop unwanted immigration? Who was it who decided in his very first budget in 2010 that he would cut the budget for the Border Agency? Can that be interpreted as the mark of a man who was determined to reduce immigration? Of course not.

      • David Price
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 8:19 am | Permalink

        It may come down to ID cards though. Would illegals still come here if the only way to have housing, work, buy goods and services and use transport was dependent on a legal ID.

        I am against ID cards on the grounds that our public sector seems incapable of protecting our data and I would not trust them to enforce them properly and not to abuse the data. However, if the situation has become so extreme then some sort of appropriate action would be needed to address it.

  28. majorfrustration
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:48 am | Permalink

    I think the first political party that comes up with a solution and is in a position to implement vigorous border controls and also sort out the overflow that we already have will get my vote. But perhaps its already too late – you would have thought that the Tory party, if only to limit an increasing immigrate Labour party vote would have taken stronger action to deal with the problem of our borders. If as I suspect DC and Co will be on different benches at the next Parliament I do hope some of those not re-elected will think on their sins of omission. Lets not have the argument that ” we did nothing cos of the Liberals”
    If one party or the other fails to get a real grip real soon then the English will snap.

    • Anonymous
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

      This is what I hear all the time from people who are either not voting, or going to vote UKIP:

      – “They’re all the same”

      – “None of them care”

      And ain’t that the truth !

  29. Richard1
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    Interesting that the mayor of calais attributes the crisis of huge numbers of immigrants congregating in Calais to come to the UK to the UK’s welfare system. Conservatives need to keep up the focus on welfare reform and not let up on pointing out that it is Labour and the LibDems who resist any and all attempts to reform welfare, which is at the root of much of this.

    Reply That is what we are doing – and lost another vote on it yesterday!

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

      It’s a secondary issue; the main driving force is that the rewards for their work are much higher here than in their countries of origin.

    • Margaret Brandreth-J
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:51 pm | Permalink

      Why should we spoil things for our own welfare system to prevent the abuse from others. It is the abuse of the system which should cease. Why do we always have to pander to others and spoil it for ourselves. NO NO NO This is our welfare system , not anyone else’s. We have paid NI and taxes for years and years.

  30. peter davies
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    Time and time again you state the blindingly obvious yet most of our politicians and their lapdog civil servants clearly don’t see anything wrong.

    Time to extract ourselves from this rotting corpse and move on. The EU has been a thorn in all our sides for far too long now – we need a free trade agreement and cooperation in areas of mutual interest and that’s it.

  31. Border Boy
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 11:03 am | Permalink

    I agree with the basic proposition that the UK should have full control of its borders. It will, however, to put in place the right legal framework to exercise control. Over the last 25 years or so an interventionist judiciary, facilitated by judicial review and the Human Rights Act, have substituted their political and social opinions for those prescribed by an elected Parliament.

    Any government really serious about dealing with this problem will need to ensure that aggressive judicial activism does not sink any policy or law they can persuade Parliament to put in place to manage this difficult problem.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

      Not really; the problem lies with Parliament, which has far too many advocates of mass immigration, not with the courts trying to obey the will of Parliament.

  32. Atlas
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 11:20 am | Permalink

    In the end being overrun by peoples from outside your borders did for the Roman Empire(s) – both West and East.

  33. Excalibur
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 11:49 am | Permalink

    Once again you have decided in your wisdom not to publish my post, John. That is your prerogative. However, what I wrote is indelibly true i.e factual. I do not think it helps any of us to avoid facing facts. Do you really want England (for which you often profess so much concern) to be transformed out of all recognition by encouraging the scale of immigration that this agreement will precipitate ??

    • Kenneth R Moore
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 7:40 pm | Permalink

      There is much censorship around the subject of immigration. Even nearly 50 years onMr Powell’s ‘Rivers of blood’ speech is widely misinterpreted – he never actually predicted ‘rivers of blood’ – it waw a literary reference to his forboding of what the likely outcome of mass immigration would be.

      But those on the left will continue to use reference to the speech to silence those with legitimate concerns.

      AFter the 96 leadership election Mr Powell Wrote to Mr Redwood :-

      “Dear Redwood, you will never regret the events of the last week or two. Patience will evidently have to be exercised–and patience is the greatest of the political virtues-–by those of us who want to keep Britain independent and self-governed”

      Let us hope his prediction is accurate – that Mr Redwood’s strategy is fruitfull.

      • Kenneth R Moore
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:35 pm | Permalink

        I should add that Dr Redwood has been very patient – 18 + years of debt, humiliation and unwanted change from the wholesale dismantling of a once proud and independent country.
        I think the public has to share responsibility for being too passive.

    Posted September 6, 2014 at 11:55 am | Permalink

    The paying by Bradford Council of migrant children’s school meals by using an NHS emergency/community fund noted by the BBC earlier this year. when Mr Cameron “cut ” benefits to migrants was not an action of the EU.

    Oddly UKIP and every other political party have not used this theft of resources from the tax-payers contributions nor mentioned even in passing that Bradford is not alone in this fraud.

    Perhaps it is not politic for a politician or his party to actually, really, truly cut benefits to children. And not politic, so it seems, to tell the truth.

  35. sm
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

    Whats new?

    Who knows if Scotland at last regains independence and its democracy with lets say more direct democracy, it may break the current power equilibrium enough to force change.

    Parliament automatically in our eyes becomes void without a new GE ,without the exiting nation & MP’s.

    If Scotland is not allowed fully in the EU and not in the UK. The rUK may have to leave the EU to enable fair trade and good relations with our friendly neighbours.

    We could even arrange some federal structure to take on areas like island defence and immigration etc.

    We have no need to negotiate with the EU. Just call it as it is – immediate exit.

    The current incumbents only bend with the wind like nature to survive. Looks like only short grass and a mess will be left behind.

  36. They Work for Us?
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

    A previous poster said that we should not treat those at Calais in humanely, should let them come and settle here and there are only 2000 of them etc.
    Treating them inhumanely would be beating them or shooting them. Stopping someone from doing what THEY want to do and making them do what we want to is not inhumane treatment. The logical progression of the “dogooders view” would be that criminals must not be impeded in any way because it would inhibit their freedom of expression!
    Firm action must be taken. The presumption must be not to let anyone “land” without the proper paperwork, with immediate return to the port or airport of origin.

  37. Denis Cooper
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    JR, how much do you think it would cost us to secure our border with an independent Scotland? Both in terms of the capital outlay for border fences and control points, and helicopters and drones for aerial surveillance, and the flotilla of naval vessels to intercept illegals trying to get around by sea, and also in terms of the annual cost of the thousands of personnel that would be needed?

    Would you be prepared to threaten war with Scotland if the Scottish government continued to allow its territory to be used by migrants as a route into England, which would probably be the preferred destination for many of them just as it has been for many Scots?

    Do you regret the fact that for the decades successive Conservative governments were so careless about the need to hold the country together, preferring to give priority to the European Union rather than the Anglo-Scottish Union, that now there is a very good chance that it will break up?

  38. Bazman
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

    As John points out they do not come across in a rowing boat they come here illegally in lorries or under other vehicles looking for illegal employment not benefits. So clamping down on illegal employers is the way forward. How does anyone propose to stop these illegals any other way? They have to cross the channel and one poster even talks about installing fences!? Is this how Germany stops them?
    They are illegal what do you not understand about this? Do many propose to install some sort of fortress protection against them, because this is what it sounds like? Do tell us how leaving the EU will help this situation? They will still want to come here for the large amount of illegal low paid work and accommodation available provided by rogue employers and landlords which the British worker is supposed to compete with.

    • agricola
      Posted September 6, 2014 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

      Leaving the EU would in fact allow us to control our borders while at the same time removing the ECHR as a barrier to removing them and all the other criminal elements that have been allowed to take up residence in the UK. By all means let whoever we desire to come here and take up legitimate work for mutual benefit. Legitimising it puts the illegals on both sides out of business.

  39. Max Dunbar
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 7:21 pm | Permalink

    Let’s get the idiotic Scottish Referendum over with and the decision made on whether we are going to commit national suicide, then we can worry about border controls.
    If the subversives of the SNP win then England is going to have a very serious border issue to deal with.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 7, 2014 at 6:11 am | Permalink

      It’s hard to predict what effect Miliband’s comments will have. On the one hand he is laying it on the line that if Scotland votes to become independent then it must expect to be treated as a foreign country by the continuing UK. Perhaps that will cause some Scots planning to vote “yes” to think again. On the other hand it seems that for many Scots Salmond’s word is now gospel and so whatever valid warnings may be given by whomsoever they will be dismissed as scaremongering and moreover resented as perceived attempts to bully and so the reaction will be the opposite to that intended.

    • David Price
      Posted September 7, 2014 at 7:15 am | Permalink

      In the event of a Yes vote I think the very least will be ID cards, followed by an enforced border.

  40. Mark
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

    It would seem , that for all our shared history of wars and loss , in the name of freedom democracy love hate . What ever . It is all forgotten as though no thought feeling nor guilt . All as though it had never ever been worth a !, oh! What’s the point we are governed by laws by people who care nothing for us but for themselves . Our pain is not there pain it is ours . And they do not care one thought of it . Greed , power , hate , love, all mixed up in their heads . Accept they cannot deal with it , so they hide the truths tell there lies and hope we do not notice . They are what should be removed , not us . Greed we do not need , hate is barbaric . We just want to live our lives control our borders be left alone . Is all we ever wanted . So lie all you want . But we know you all that lie because you do so often . So to hell with you your time is up . Get the hell out of here we are done .

  41. ian
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

    This is about a power fight between right wing and middle and left wing of the conservative party. The right wing of the party want to lose the next election so they can take over the running of the conservative party behind the senses and also the leadership, that is why Mr carswell join ukip, they do not want a in/out vote, they want it as a election pledge because if they lose a in/out vote to the media the right wing of the party is finished in the conservative party because of the people remove the Eu question. The middle and left wing of the party want to win the election and have a in/out vote and win to stay in with the media and lab/lims on there side. The right wing figure that with a labour win or another hang parliament the country will fall apart and election will be called before that parliament is finished.

    That”s why i say we need to move away from party politics to a new system of individual politician for each constituency which the people of that constituency control, not party.

    Then you will be able to control your borders and passports. At the moment they control you. Each party is in the business of making promise on welfare because over 60 percent of the people in this country get government money and promise on pensions and so on to which people under the age of 60 will nether get and all promise made before will be rolled back as the country breaks up.

    Reply. All nonsense. I want to win the election so we can have an In\out vote!

  42. Kenneth R Moore
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

    Mr Powell had the measure of our political masters. This was written by him in 1970 but the words are as relevant today.

    “Have you ever wondered, perhaps, why opinions which the majority of people quite naturally hold are, if anyone dares express them publicly, denounced as ‘controversial, ‘extremist’, ‘explosive’, ‘disgraceful’, and overwhelmed with a violence and venom quite unknown to debate on mere political issues? It is because the whole power of the aggressor depends upon preventing people from seeing what is happening and from saying what they see”.

    ” The public are literally made to say that black is white”

    • A different Simon
      Posted September 7, 2014 at 3:06 am | Permalink

      One of the few Great Men .

      Mentioned so infrequently by the media that it’s almost as if they are trying to erase the memory of him .

      When he is mentioned it’s only sound bites designed to incorrectly associate him with prejudice .

      Wonder whether he would have been surprised that so many of the people have adopted the progressive consensus of their masters ?

      As an aside it became apparent to me that the advertising standards association is a form of press regulation and not entirely a-political .

      They seem to feel the need to own every horse in the race .

      • David Price
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 7:34 am | Permalink

        I agree that he was one of the greats with a depth of experience and judgement that puts the leaderships (plural) to shame.

  43. Tad Davison
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:34 pm | Permalink

    After reading today’s comments, it would seem the popular view is that we are governed by the same type of politician no matter which party we elect. Ones who would see the indigenous broadly Anglo-Saxon population overwhelmed in their push towards multiculturalism. So I am left to wonder, if faced with high levels of immigration, what would Israel do to stop it?

    Tad Davison


    • A different Simon
      Posted September 7, 2014 at 3:14 am | Permalink

      Tad ,

      I used to travel to Israel quite a bit .

      If people ever stopped “making aliyah” , the economy would be in trouble without the constant expansion , constant construction .

      As for illegal immigrants they used to pay them to leave the country .

      In these days of equality I suppose the UK would have to pay Britons who wish to emigrate too .

      • Tad Davison
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 9:26 pm | Permalink

        I can’t quite see that somehow Simon, the US would never let the Israeli economy falter. They already bail them out to the tune of billions of dollars each year.

        ‘I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it’

        Ariel Sharon 3rd October 2001


  44. Bazman
    Posted September 6, 2014 at 9:47 pm | Permalink

    Saturday when kid come out to play.

  45. Monty
    Posted September 7, 2014 at 12:37 am | Permalink

    They have come all the way across Africa to get into the UK. And they have tried to storm their way onto a ferry. They were repulsed this time with fire hoses. Next time they will be armed, they will get on board, and they will turn the passengers and crew into helpless hostages.
    I do not advocate treating them with “humanity”, if that means they have nothing to lose by trying their luck day in and day out. If the worst that can happen to them is another night in Calais, that is no deterrent. Being dumped in a vast resettlement camp with no exit into Europe, that would be a deterrent. That would make them think twice about trying to get in.

  46. Patryk
    Posted September 7, 2014 at 7:33 am | Permalink

    John, I think this is misunderstanding of free movement. As a Polish citizen, I have to produce a passport or national ID each time I enter the UK. I can imagine that if you have an Asian, African or no document then you need a relevant visa. It’s always easiest to blame the EU when the fault most likely lies closer to home.

    Reply We restrict entry for non EU citizens in ways we cannot for EU citizens.

    • Patryk
      Posted September 7, 2014 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

      I’m glad you agree with me. Thus, your assertion that ” in a common border area your border is as weak as the weakest border in the EU” is wrong.

  47. Richard
    Posted September 7, 2014 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    When Mr. Cameron speaks about immigration he always tries to confuse the electorate by mixing up the two separate issues of EU (legal) and non-EU (illegal) immigration.

    EU immigration we are powerless to prevent and consequently our country is open to all 485 million EU inhabitants and, if Mr. Cameron’s wishes are granted, also shortly to the citizens of all eastern European countries as far as the Urals and also to those of Turkey.

    Since we must treat all EU citizens equally, we will eventually either have to restrict benefits and the NHS to only those who have made NI contributions or leave the EU. In the end we will not be able to fund a continuous stream of poor EU immigrants.

    The issue of non-EU immigration is quite different and as far as I know there is no EU requirement as yet for us to offer free healthcare, housing and other benefits to the entire world.

    I do not understand why the government is totally ignoring the situation in Calais. These people are illegal immigrants. They are not asylum seekers and they are not even economic migrants. They would simply stop coming if our government made it clear that they will not be allowed to live here.

    However, they know that if they make it across the Channel and into London they will be hidden within their own tribal communities and helped by numerous charity organisations.

    Unfortunately our current politicians think there is really no harm in letting these tribal communities grow in our midst (multiculturism is good for us) and Mr. Cameron even goes abroad to invite more non-EU migrants to come and study and then live in our country.

    Rather than deal with the Calais problem, Mr. Cameron would rather spend his time setting us on a path to fighting a war in the Ukraine and yet another war in the ME.

    I despair.

  48. Terry
    Posted September 7, 2014 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

    ‘It would also help the EU case if they changed their mind and allowed the UK to take tougher action over access to benefits’.
    “Allowed the UK to take tougher action” The operative word is “Allowed”.

    We must ask some unelected bodies in Brussels for permission to do something in our own country?
    We should have let Napoleon win or allow (a foreign country ed)to take over the country for it amounts to the same thing. Wars were fought and millions died to preserve our independence from the rest of the world and it is all freely shoved aside for the megalomaniacs in the EU. The fallen dead must also weep, for their surviving families most certainly do.

    And both Labour and the Liberals wish this capitulation nightmare to continue unabated until we are all back under the (control ed)of Europe?
    What is the matter with them? Are they no longer British?

  49. fedupsouthener
    Posted September 9, 2014 at 10:29 am | Permalink

    Oh for God’s sake. Can we please just get out of Europe, close our borders, get rid of the lib dems and work with UKIP who are the only party to talk any sense about our stupid, shoot yourselves in the foot, energy policy, and mass, totally out of control, illegal immigration. When are we going to stop pussyfooting around and cowing to the EU over what we want for our country. I say ‘our’ country when it is clearly disappearing before our very eyes while our handwringing politicians just stand by and watch. Oh, and by the way, if Mr Salmond gets his way in Scotland then border controls will have to be put in place as when and if we ever get some control in the south, illegal immigrants, who will be welcomed with open arms by Salmond will just pop over the border into England and the whole mess will start again. Let’s get real.

  • About John Redwood

    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • 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