The pressures of migration

The EU lacks a credible migration policy. Mrs Merkel hijacked the EU/Turkey summit in a desperate attempt to find an answer to her immediate political problem, the arrival of too many migrants in the EU wishing to move to Germany. She is under pressure to show progress in reducing numbers, with three state elections coming up where this is now a big issue. Her idea that the EU should return all migrants to Turkey who come from there without proper papers, is to be balanced by the EU agreeing to take an equal number of Syrians from within Turkey itself to balance the Syrians it has returned to Turkey.

It would be difficult to come up with a more difficult or undesirable policy than this one. How are the authorities going to get the Syrian arrivals in Greece to comply with the wish to send them back to Turkey? Are they going to use force if the migrants refuse to comply? Is it legal to refuse to consider their asylum applications, if they do decide to claim asylum on arrival? What can be done if migrants from other places arrive in Greece from Turkey, only to claim they are Syrian and to say they have lost their papers? Could it be a perverse incentive to some in Turkey to increases the numbers of Syrians who do turn up in Greece, as that will increase the number of Syrians the EU has to take from Turkey through the approved means?

Ironically at a time when most European politicians are united in condemning Mr Trump for his wish to build a wall across the south of the USA to keep Mexican migrants out, some EU countries are busy building their own walls or barbed wire fences to close their frontiers. They clearly have flexible morals when it comes to the morality of border controls. It is also an irony that those same fences and barriers which polite opinion rejects are serving to reduce some of the immediate pressures on Germany herself, as borders to the south on routes to Germany are progressively closed by smaller states fed up with the migrant routes through their territories.

Meanwhile we are debating can the UK have her own borders policy, freed from EU membership. The UK government wishes to argue in two contradictory ways. It claims we are out of Schengen so we are not troubled in the way full EU members are. It also wishes to argue that out of the EU we would still need to take large numbers of EU migrants.So in the EU they say we are fine, but out of it we would still have to accept large numbers of migrants which suddenly in their view become more of a problem.

The truth is very simple. Out of the EU the UK can decide what controls to place on inward migration. It can police its own borders, thanks to the island location. The government has sought to argue that out of the EU the French will renounce their agreement with us over the Calais border. This is most unlikely. This is a bilateral treaty, not an EU matter. France wanted it for good reasons, which will still be true if we leave. France does not want an open border in the north with a green light to all migrants, as that would make France a big migration corridor with all the policing and social issues that raises. Were France to do the unlikely thing of rejecting a treaty that is in their interests, the UK could place restrictions on ferry and cross Channel train companies, as we do with airlines, so they do not to accept any passanger without the appropriate papers.

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

98 Comments

  1. Cheshire Girl
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:19 am | Permalink

    There is plenty we could do about this problem, but our spineless politicians would rather wring their hands and lecture us about our ‘moral responsibility’ to take unlimited amounts of migrants. Would Maggie or Churchill have said there was nothing they could do? I dont think so! One would think that we couldnt police our borders, but I am convinced we could, if the will was there. We need a really strong Leader who tells it like it is, and puts this country’s interest first in all things.

    As for Angela Merkel – in my opinion, she should have resigned over the refugee crisis, as she was responsible for flooding Europe with her invitation to take them all in. She has put Germany (and others) in one almightly muddle. I understand there are elections this week. I hope the German people tell her exactly what they think of her ‘generosity’ to others!

    • Hope
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:48 am | Permalink

      Extracts from Laws book also makes it clear the Tory party has not made any attempt to reduce immigration and Osborne arguing how to increase it. The extracts claiming Hammand wanting a Schengen free visa and open our borders and how the Home Office does not consider it a priority. Perhaps this explains why there is twice the amount of immigration from the EU as claimed and why Underhand Cameron is hiding the figures. Based on this your party needs to walk after promising one thing and deliberately doing something different. Pure deceit. No wonder he is hiding the figures.

      • Timaction
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:19 am | Permalink

        Mr Redwood you write about Government. It is your leader and Gideon plus a few foolish followers. It is a disgrace that they lie about the deliberate immigration imposed on the English against our will. They lie and deceive about the EU and use English taxes to pay advisers and civil servants to support their campaign. In a different age they would be incarcerated for their known treachery against the people. They need to be removed as a threat to our National interests and never be allowed near the leavers of power. They have shown their incompetence and deceit. They are beneath contempt!

        • Hope
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 4:43 pm | Permalink

          Let us not forget the language used by Camerona no Co about UKIP when the party highlighted the issue. Also the slurs when Farage made it clear about Romanoan and Bulgarian immigrant numbers. His prediction was not only true but it was worse than he feared. With all allegations of racism Cameron needs to come out and apologise for his behaviour, he knew the reality and was hiding it from the public and still is!

          Urgent questions now need to be asked of Teresa May. We had her shinangans about the Border Agency. Now she needs to resign and let someone get to grips with the u fit for purpose Home Office and immigration. No wonder Cameron ran from parliament when you and others wished to question him about the 75 million Turkish people about to invade our island! Cameron does not have the moral fortitude to tell Merkel, no deal. Just the same when he caved in for her fiscal pact and got nothing in return.

          You must ask your party who is dopey enoug to think Cameron could stay in place after the referendum, he has not and does not act in the national interest. Yet again, it becomes crystal clear why he wants his MPs to ignore those who put them in office because he has been doing the same with the overwhelming public concern over immigration.

          • Hope
            Posted March 13, 2016 at 6:17 pm | Permalink

            We now read the last assessment for Turkey joining the EU was carried out by the EU and it predicted 4.4 million Turkish people would emigrate to the EU! The Unfit Home Office thought it was urgent to carry out an assessment five years ago but has not done so! Weasel words from Osborne how e UK could veto, more realistic is Priti Patel’s assessment- you cannot believe a word the remain camp say.

            Our national security is at risk with Cameron in charge. He has not done any substantive action to keep us safe. He makes threats about his own incompetence concerning migration. The substandard Home Office (May) does not consider immigration a priority. Perhaps they ought to cast their eye to the Paris attacks or serial attacks in Germany, Sweden, Finland and other EU countries on crime statistics particularly against women. Look at the events in Turkey today. It is difficult to understand why the government does not count people in or out the country or more pertinent ask what they are doing here? Then have the ability to refuse or throw them out! If the UK remains in the EU any convicted criminal has a right to enter our country without being supervised or monitored. When Turkey joins you could end up in a Turkish jail under the EU arrest warrant, like so many of the presidents opposition! How does this make us safe?

        • miami.mode
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

          Sorry Tim, but I just love the Freudian slip of “leavers of power”. However, “Power of Leavers” could be a great slogan.

          • Timaction
            Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

            Funny.
            I watched privileged Gideon on Marr this morning. When he was questioned on sovereignty, immigration and the EU he went into lie mode and couldn’t look at the camera directly. His body language could be seen for what he is. A quisling, who should be thrown from office for his lies and treachery. Another patsy interview by Marr with little challenge unlike Mr Johnston and Mr Duncan Smith. The EU is and will always be a political construct for the creation of a federal super state. Ask China, USA, Canada, Australia, Korea, Japan. Don’t have to accept movement of people or pay £10 billion net for an annual trade deficit of over £70 billions, £27 billion with Germany alone. Answer the the questions remaniacs!
            Out leafleting and campaigning with GO yesterday and had support from Mr Rees Mogg. A true intelligent patriot, who unfortunately is in the wrong party with awful leadership!

        • Anonymous
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:55 pm | Permalink

          Leavers of power indeed !

  2. stred
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:26 am | Permalink

    Whether migrants arrive in Lesbos, Sicily, Dover, Heathrow or anywhere else, if they throw away ID and claim persecution or even lack of wealth, lawyers will ensure that they cannot be returned. They only return pensioners who have lived here for 40 years and make technical mistakes with visas. There is a human right industry and many are working in the UK.

    Peter Sutherland, the UN migration chief, ex- Irish Attorney General of Ireland and GS banker has made this plain. The lawyers will make sure that the wishes of Deutchebank, GS and big business are satisfied. The only alternative will be that politicians change international law or tell the lawyers where to go and cut their lavish funding. That will take courage, as they will be threatened with prosecution for crimes against humanity and extradition.

    In addition there will be political forces such as the greens, anarchists, the educational blob, the extreme left and metropolitan rich liberals who will oppose any action to restrict immigration. In fact they welcome it and change policy and laws to achieve their aims.

    The average voter is not really aware of this and the choice must be made clear somehow.

    • stred
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:04 am | Permalink

      David Laws’ new book, extracts in the DM, blows the lid on the cabinet’s real attitude to immigration and why Cameron decided to allow the referndum.

      • Ken Moore
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

        It seems that Mr Cameron believes those that do not wish to be mere servants of Brussels are ‘mad’ if the stories are correct.

        Strangely he believes that being part of a massively expensive soviet style club that requires your country to accommodate between 3 and 600,000 extra people at a time when services are under pressure is quite sane ?.

        Could it be that Mr Cameron is a clever showman but underneath holds some pretty unpleasant views about the people he is supposed to represent.

        • buedog
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:12 pm | Permalink

          ‘Could it be that Mr Cameron is a clever showman etc’. Absolutely right. There is no other explanation for his attitudes and his behaviour. It was the same with Blair, hence the start of mass immigration from the third world ‘to rub our noses in diversity’, as Blair was quoted as saying. Both Cameron and Blair have had their minds colonised while at university by the worst teachings of the Frankfurt School.

          • Hope
            Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

            Today Blaire has the temerity to say do not blame migrants for not having a job,mciting British people get a better education!mwhat did he do for ten years starting with education education education, then sent his son to an alternative school rather than the local flee pit. The same as equality Haramn and Clegg!

            He needs to crawl back under a stone and count his lucky blessings etc ed

          • Ken Moore
            Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:07 pm | Permalink

            Agreed Cameron is the ultimate ‘sleeper politician’. Outwardly respectable with impeccable credentials but underneath he is a dangerous cultural revolutionary just like Blair.

            Cameron is a very dangerous man indeed and I make no apologies for saying it.
            His toxic influence has split the Conservative party from top to bottom ( I remember when Mr Hammond was a Euro sceptic before his need to keep his job and appease Mr Cameron made him rethink).
            I can forgive anyone for having principles and an opinion that differs from mine..but not a senior politician that uses scare tactics and lies to disguise the fact they have no credible argument.

            It beggars belief that after Blair and the troubles cause by Mr Majors European devotion the Conservatives elect ‘the heir to Blair’ who is arguably more Pro Euro than Major!.

            We know he is lieing about the Eu. Cameron knows he is lieing…but are enough of the voters out there awake enough to see through the phoney sound bites to see the true picture and save themselves from Eu slavery.

  3. Mark B
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:32 am | Permalink

    Good morning

    The EU should be renamed and called the. Mad Hatter’s Tea Party. Because that is what it is increasingly looking like.

    We are in the fortunate position of not needing to build any fences or barriers, as nature has blessed this nation with a moat. Trouble is, it is both taken for granted and poorly policed.

    The situation with Turkey, in my view, is easily solved. Threaten to sever ALL trade links with them if they do not comply. If they then threaten to flood Europe with so called refugees, immediately cut ALL trade and communications with Turkey and then see what happens. Turkey needs access to the Single Market. Without it she will go bust as business’s will relocate, probably to Greece, and the Turkish government will fall.

    Once again we are witnessing the vanity of a careerist politician putting their own interests either before those of their country or a continent. This is what happens when too much power is in the hands of a very few with no real democratic control or balance.

    We need to leave this mad house and get the hell OUT !!!!

    • bluedog
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:52 am | Permalink

      Did Vladimir Putin ask you to write this? Your proscription guarantees that Turkey becomes totally obdurate, revokes the treaties that require it to keep the Bosphorus Strait open to all shipping and thus prevents any maritime support for the Ukraine by NATO. Turkey has a very effective military and if provoked could easily complete the occupation Cyprus begun in 1974. Eviction of the UK from the sovereign bases would almost certainly follow. Cameron is no Thatcher, and given the weakened state of the British armed forces following Cameron’s 2010 disarmament initiative, a military enterprise to recapture the bases from well-defended Turkish positions would possibly end in humiliating defeat. And that’s just for starters.

      Such a scenario would probably fall upon the US to resolve by brokering a peace deal. The UK is unlikely to get favourable treatment. One detects from recent comments by Obama that the sunny days when he and Cameron could flirt with the Danish PM like school friends are behind us. Bear in mind that the US wants Britain to stay in the EU to try and curb EU expansionism. Obama is about to arrive to remind the British government of this objective. One can be absolutely certain that the US govt. is conducting its own polling on Brexit within the UK. It follows that US irritation and nervousness is potentially a very welcome sign for the Vote Leave campaign. It will be extremely interesting to see how the US reacts to Brexit.

      • Malcolm Stevas
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

        Alarmist. Turkey is not North Korea. An assault on Cyprus is improbable for various reasons, one of the lesser ones being the strong Russian presence there, with a great deal of investment – and an already irritated Russia immediately to the North… NATO should not even consider “maritime support for the Ukraine”. The Turks are engaging in a blatant protection racket and need to be checked vigorously.

        • buedog
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:18 pm | Permalink

          Alarmist? A matter of opinion, any defence planner would have to entertain that possibility, it is just a matter of calibrating the risk. A strong Russian presence in Cyprus is arguably another factor in favour of a Turkish Enosis. Purge them and teach them a lesson.

          As for ‘The Turks are engaged in a blantant protection racket…’. Depending on which side you favour, this is either quite right or a disgraceful slander of a valued NATO ally.

          • Malcolm Stevas
            Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:01 pm | Permalink

            I doubt even the stroppy Turks are so rash as to twist the Russian lion’s tale further by attacking Cyprus. Calibrate the risk certainly – it just doesn’t seem a high probability risk. “Valued NATO ally”? It was probably a US desire to have airbases there, plus a NATO partner next door to Russia: I doubt the value of being “allied” to a Muslim country of 75 million with a distinctly dubious attitude to democracy, which is now holding Europe to ransom through millions of other Muslims.

      • Hope
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

        Putin is not the baddy Cameron and co proclaim. Putin would not have agreed to action in Lybia if he were not assured it was not about regime change. He was deceived. It should not be a surprise for his stance in the Ukraine or Syria. Cameron speech about EU expansionism to the Urals might be a clue for the first and Cameron wasting our taxes helping the alleged Syrian opposition, which turned out to be ISIS. If you were Putin would you trust Cameron after Lybia, Ukraine and his actions to date over Syria? Only daft Tory MPs would. Cameron needs be held to account for the disastrous Lybian overthrow and the mess he helped create. In true heir to Blaire style and deceit.

      • Mark B
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 4:38 pm | Permalink

        No I write for myself and freely express views based on what I see, hear and read.

        As for Putin himself you only need to look at what he did to Turkey when they shot down one of his aircraft. He, Putin, stopped all trade with Turkey and has badly damaged their economy.

        As for the rest of what you write, I will say that it is an opinion founded on what ? Turkey has no reason to invade the rest of Cyprus and take our bases. This attitude that everyone from Spain to Turkey is just pure speculation.

        Some facts please and I might take you a bit more seriously.

      • James Matthews
        Posted March 14, 2016 at 8:49 pm | Permalink

        NATO probably has a strategic interest in bases on Cyprus, but, given the aforesaid weakened state of our armed forces , I am interested to know why, in the event of another Turkish invasion, there should still a be sufficient British one for Britain to feel the need to retake them without NATO support. What military action are we ever going to embark on in that part of the world without allies? More of a problem for Greece I would have thought.

        We had a direct national obligation to the Falkland Islanders. We have none, outside NATO to the people of Cyprus.

    • Yosarion
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:22 am | Permalink

      Along the same lines Merkel last year soon after the scandal with her biggest car manufacturer tells the World that Germany is having the biggest Rave Party on Earth and all are welcome, the reality we see on a daily bases, now she expects the neighbors not only to put up with her Folly Rave, but be ordered to join in with it.

  4. Mike Stallard
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:36 am | Permalink

    Mutti Merkel is slowly being revealed as a most dangerously starry eyed politician and, yes, Mr Cameron’s immigration policy is slowly being revealed as very sensible.
    What is also being revealed is that Mr Cameron is being inveigled into sending a lot of money to cover up for Mrs Merkel’s mistakes. And another thing is this: when all the Turks get visas, will they not be able, as EU citizens, to enter Great Britain? (Along with all the millions of migrants that we see on TV every other night.)

    • Alan
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:38 am | Permalink

      Visas merely lets them enter the Schengen area. It doesn’t give them EU citizenship.

      The Turks I have met (who have entered the UK with visas) have been nice people who work hard. They ought to be a benefit to any economy.

      • Graham
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:30 am | Permalink

        Oh that’s all right then – perhaps you should vet all of them then on our behalf

        Grow up

      • Malcolm Stevas
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

        The same might be said of any “nice people who work hard”, but it depends very much on numbers. A few hundred here or there, fine. But 13% of Londoners are already Muslims. You want to add even more?

    • hefner
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:45 am | Permalink

      It is not because you get a visa that you can go anywhere. Have you ever tried having a Mexican visa and going to the USA? A visa for a Schengen country will mean staying within the Schengen area, this does not transform the person into a citizen of a EU country, free to come to the UK.

      • sm
        Posted March 14, 2016 at 11:29 pm | Permalink

        And they all play by the rules etc.

        Having a legit visa for schengen or not will makes no difference to those will seek to make it into the UK fair by means or foul.

        What % of the world should we allow in the UK?

        This will create even bigger cohesion problems in the EU.

    • Hope
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:52 am | Permalink

      Read the extracts from Laws book, consider the failure to get immigration down to tens of thousands, no ifs or buts, remember we are an island and you must realise that Cameron has failed, deliberately deceiving the public along the way.

      • Robert Christopher
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:10 am | Permalink

        Cameron has succeeded, ‘deliberately deceiving the public along the way’.

  5. agricola
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:38 am | Permalink

    Confine all refugees and economic migrants in Turkey, Greece, and Italy at the expense of the EU with an emphasis on quality of life. Militarily sort out Syria, Iraq, and Libya, making them fit places for Syrians, Iraqis, and Libyans to live. As the UK was culpable in creating the chaos in Iraq and Libya, the UK is responsible for playing a major part in solving the problem. I know the UK is already involved, but the extent and prognosis for success is unknown.

    Return economic migrants whence they came. and I would include the estimated two million illegals already in the UK.

    If Germany wishes to increase it’s population by inviting some refugees to reside there, then fly them in, so putting an end to the misery and photo opportunities.

    For the UK lets make the Brexit campaign a success and then decide what sort of refugee and immigrant policy we wish to operate.

    • Timaction
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:38 pm | Permalink

      When are the UN and all the local……..Muslim Countries going to help? Saudi, Quatar, UAE. Silence!

  6. hefner
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    The last paragraph “The government has sought to argue … to accept any passenger without the appropriate papers” is completely counter-intuitive and very likely wrong.

    Due to its much better economic growth, lack of identity card system, flourishing black market, attraction of the English language, the major part of the traffic in immigrants is from France to Britain, not the other way around. This has again recently been pointed out by Xavier Bertand, the newly elected (Les Republicains) head of the Nord-Pas de Calais-Picardie region. The other Northern French borders with Belgium, Luxemburg or Germany are open as part of the Schengen Agreement, so irrelevant.

    I would think the question of a possible dismantling of the present agreement at Calais is very real, and the reestablishment of border controls in Folkestone and Dover not a question to be brushed aside with such an (uninformed?) comment.

    • John Bracewell
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:11 am | Permalink

      I have re-read the portion of the article you highlight and can see no reference to migration being ‘the other way round’ . The article acknowledges that it is the UK’s pull to the migrants that will cause the migration corridor through France which is the major reason France would not change that part of the agreement not covered by the Eurotunnel contracts, it is in their interests to keep it. I think the paragraph is very likely correct and the logic of the comment unimpeachable.

      • hefner
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

        lefigaro.fr 04/08/2015 Calais migrants (in French)
        FT 23/02/2016 Brexit threatens Calais border controls

        So we agree, the pull is from France to the UK. The migration path is already there. It essentially stops in and around Calais. The question is why would the French (with a few UK border agents) keep on doing Britain’s border controls. The Le Touquet agreement was signed at a quiet time when the main focus essentially was on how to facilitate the lorry traffic. As Bertrand has said, it will be impossible to put gates and barriers in all ports on the French side of the Channel to prevent immigration to the UK, and the Belgians in Zeebrugge might not like it either.

        You might put your trust in the Le Touquet agreement. I would not be so sure.

        Reply I put my trust in the power of an independent UK to require ferry and train operators to refuse passage to anyone without legal docs, just as airlines have to.

        • Hope
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

          JR agreed. If Cameron was to remain in position after a vote to leave what would you expect him to negotiate? Going by his last venture, sweet FA.

      • ChrisS
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

        If the French were stupid enough to cancel the existing treaty, all we need do is impose very large fines for every immigrant that arrives in the UK without papers. The carriers that operate the cross channel routes would be the ones that are fined.

        That should concentrate minds and solve the problem.
        These days, many of those companies are basically French.

        Haulage companies would still receive a fine as well where migrants are smuggled in their trucks.

        • ChrisS
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

          PS

          Fine the carriers at least £5,000-£10,000 per migrant, reduced by 50% after the individual is returned to France.

        • Timaction
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:42 pm | Permalink

          Truck design and security of external doors as a condition of entry to UK. It isn’t rocket science accept to Ms May!

    • Hope
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:56 am | Permalink

      You are correct about establish proper controls at our ports. However there needs to be a proper system implemented by the Home Office for counting people in and out the country and a proper system to question all those arriving and stopping those we do not want. Teresa May’s abject failure to get to grips with the Home Office civil servants and immigration after six years is evidence ought why she should have been sacked years ago. Incompetent and useless Home Secretary. Instead of attacking police her time would have been better spent sorting out the Home Office which John Reid claimed was not fit for purpose. What has she changed?

  7. Antisthenes
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:51 am | Permalink

    Where is Julia Caesar when you want him he knows how to deal with unwanted immigrants. He could manage this current migrant problem in the same way as he did with the Helvetii when they strayed from their homeland. However he did not have the progressives and the leader of the Germanic tribes to worry about in those days. Well not so much but he did somewhat so he gave the Germans a bit of a beating as well and lets not forget what he did to the French that was pretty awesome.

    Nostalgia is fine but it is no good harping back to the good old days they are not coming back. He did try a bit of an incursion into our islands but a bit of woad and a lot of abuse hurling did the trick and we sent him packing. Perhaps leavers can try the same thing on voting day to eject the EU in like manner.

    This new invasion is not so easily solved for as you say the EU and Merkel have no credible plan. As usual they are making a major crisis into a massive one especially as methods to treat the problem are as bad as the problem themselves and are incidentally impracticable as well.

    The EU has a new euro, banking and lack of growth crisis and the ECB is going to use monetary and credit expansion to solve that. Probably another inappropriate cure especially as the rest of the world is down turned as well. They have an enormous immigration problem that is not going to be sorted out any time soon if ever. Their citizens are becoming increasingly frustrated with Brussels as all their bungling’s end up being paid for by them. The UK especially is being taken for a ride and dragged into problems that if she was not a member of would not be. Lets leave now and cut our losses.

  8. John Bracewell
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:57 am | Permalink

    I am glad you have picked up on the double standards concerning EU behaviour and Mr Trump’s stated migration suggestions. In the EU case they are actually building barriers, so far, Mr Trump can only talk about the USA’s Mexican migration problem, yet he is more pilloried than the leaders of EU countries which have implemented the same policy.
    On Sky’s Press Review last night there was talk of Mr Obama coming to the UK to talk about keeping the UK in the EU. At no point in the piece did anyone mention ‘what has it got to do with the President of the USA’. I hope the Brexit spokespersons politely tell him to keep his nose out of the UK’s business.

    • Excalibur
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:58 am | Permalink

      On the same programme the previous evening, one of the reviewers stated in support of her obvious ‘Remain’ credentials, that it was “just ludicrous” that we have an immigration problem. She asserted the influx was ‘returning British people’. No one picked her up on this absurdity, of course.

      • ian wragg
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

        If they were returning Brits, they would not need new N.I. numbers. I worked and lived abroad for 20 plus years and retained my original number.

        • miami.mode
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

          ian. I would have thought that an NI number is vital when a State Pension is claimed so the current position of government being unable to give details of live NI numbers seems a bit far-fetched.

    • Cheshire Girl
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

      I suspect that he was ‘invited’ to come over, by an extremely senior person from the ‘Leave’ campaign.

      • Cheshire Girl
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

        Sorry, I meant to say an extremely senior person from the ‘Remain’ campaign.

        • Timaction
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:47 pm | Permalink

          Indeed. Returning a favour for their ride on Airforce one during his last campaign instead of preparing the budget! American National interest not British. Camsham and Gideon agents of the EU!

  9. Lifelogic
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:10 am | Permalink

    You correctly say:-

    It would be difficult to come up with a more difficult or undesirable policy than this one.

    The truth is very simple. Out of the EU the UK can decide what controls to place on inward migration.

    The UK especially is being taken for a ride and dragged into problems that if she was not a member of would not be. Lets leave now and cut our losses.

    Surely this is all self evident to anyone who thinks about it? Why would anyone, given these facts, vote to stay in the EU? The more one listens to the remain side the more it becomes clear they advance not a single rational argument. Listen to Anna Soubry on Any Question, if anyone still needs convincing of this.

    • Livelogic
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:10 am | Permalink

      another totally pathetically wet interview by Marr this time of Osborne (and indeed of John McDonnell too).

      Why not ask Osborne why Cameron keeps saying “we are reducing the taxes people pay” when Osborne clearly is doing the compete opposite, increasing taxes hand over fist. Yet he still fails even to balance the books.

      Why allow Osborne to get away with the complete lie that we will have to have open borders to migrants post Brexit? Also the lie that we will retain sovereignty should we foolishly stay in?

      Meanwhile John McDonnell just wants to buy votes by claiming he will steal of the rich to get to the poor (and pay the state sector better by “investing” as he absurdly calls it). Perhaps he has not realised the state sector are largely the rich being 50% over paid and pensioned relative to the private sector. Certainly no sensible questions car from Marr for him.

      The BBC is an absurdly pathetic pro EU, lefty joke. Marr is the best example of this in all its glory.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

      Why does no one at the BBC (or indeed elsewhere) ever ask Osborne about his blatant ratting on his £1M each IHT thresholds of many moons ago. Any his absurd claim they he is keeping this promise?

      What sort of a Journalist is Marr and the rest of the BBC interviewers?

      • miami.mode
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 6:48 pm | Permalink

        Ll. Unfortunately most of these interviewers seem to simply have a list of questions that are as easily swatted away by experienced politicians as a horse would swish its tail, rather than try and develop a discussion on any dubious points or claims.

        • Timaction
          Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:52 pm | Permalink

          Patsy interviews. Watch Marrs hands when he’s conspiring with Gideon today. Gideon actually showed fear at a couple of points as it’s hard to tell blatent lies and make it look like he means it.

      • R.T.G.
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

        ‘What sort of a Journalist is Marr and the rest of the BBC interviewers?’

        The sort that wishes to continue being remunerated by the BBC?

  10. Lifelogic
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:34 am | Permalink

    Hopefully on Brexit we can be rid of ratter Cameron, tax until the pips squeak & IHT ratter Osborne and especially Amber Rudd. Hopefully before all the lights to go out.

    How can a department run such an absurd energy policy based largely on a daft religion? Does no one in there have any understanding at all of the engineering and economic realities of electricity production?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/12184689/Energy-bribes-betray-Amber-Rudds-desperation.html

    • Robert Christopher
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:22 am | Permalink

      The IPCC and 2008 Climate Change Act are political constructs and are not influenced by reality.
      That is why a Science/Engineering degree/job/experience is so despised at DECC or the EA.

      Only PpEs, Marketing, Law or Public Sector Management applicants need apply.

  11. oldtimer
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:48 am | Permalink

    Mrs Merkel has made a number of mistakes on the migration issue (well documented on Spiegel Online). The UK public also needs to be aware that part of her solution to the migrant crisis is to allocate a “fair share” of the migrants to the member states. At the moment this appears to be the Schengen members only but it is only a matter of time before the UK is dragged into it with the demand that the UK takes a 100,000 or so extra. Unsurprisingly other Schengen members are refusing to play ball. This is compounding the domestic political opposition she faces to her immigration policy, which caused this latest u-turn from her earlier stance of welcoming all-comers.

    The twists and turns of policy to border controls and to migration reinforce the fact that the EU is a dysfunctional organisation, as already demonstrated in the ongoing crisis of the EZ. The advocates of ever closer union are right. Its realisation would help neuter the pesky independent thoughts and actions expressed by the member states and enable the enforcement of a single centrally determined policies – however wrong headed they might be or however long they take to be worked out. What EUrocracy want is the political castration of the member states. Mr Cameron wants that too – despite the smoke and mirrors deployed by the Remain campaign. A vote to Remain will commit the UK to that outcome.

  12. Alan
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    We don’t really know how the French will feel about running UK frontier controls in France if we leave the EU. For example, we may wish to exclude French citizens who want to come here to work. (We don’t know if this will be the case because we don’t know what agreement we will come to with the EU if we leave.) Will the French be willing to prevent French citizens from travelling to England?

    This is another example of Eurosceptics waving their hands and reassuring us that nothing will change, but everything will be better. It’s unrealistic wishful thinking. Only in the last sentence do we get down to a practical solution – that every ferry and train will be fined if they bring in people without the proper papers. More bureaucracy, more red tape, more infringements of our freedom to travel, more expense.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

      “For example, we may wish to exclude French citizens who want to come here to work. (We don’t know if this will be the case because we don’t know what agreement we will come to with the EU if we leave.)”

      We don’t even know what agreement the UK government would attempt to come to with the EU, because it refuses to make any contingency plans let alone tell us what they are. However I don’t think many people see relatively small numbers of French citizens coming here to work as being a big problem.

  13. Anonymous
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:54 am | Permalink

    Out of the EU we will still have the problem on a political and celebrity elite not understanding what nationhood is.

    Both elites will still see British citizens and migrants as equals and don’t actually believe in borders. Because they are of elites they can afford to think like this on a personal level.

    We are reaching the point – globally, as Trump indicates – where we have to decide whether to continue being borderless or not.

    If we are to have unlimited immigration into Britain (and there are no limits at the moment) then there is only one limiter on the numbers making their way here. It will end when people in this country are as poor and suffering from the same levels of corruption as the average African.

    We could easily double our population with people claiming asylum. The scenes at the EU borders are truly biblical in proportion. The numbers of people in the world of asylum seeking status and now able to cross the borderless EU are truly overwhelming. It is time to harden our policies on asylum but the elites don’t want to.

    It has reached the time to ask if it is to be them or us. If we are to accept all asylum seekers who reach here then the effects will be destabilising for our country and our people.

    We are not going to be asked this but the first small step is to win an Out vote at the referendum.

    *** Let us not forget that there is – in Britain – now a vast slave underclass which will be demanding rights sooner rather than later. We will not kick them out, we will not be able to ignore them etc ed.There will have to be an amnesty and the numbers are already set to swell without accepting more at our borders.

  14. turbo terrier
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:04 am | Permalink

    Following the “rousing speech” by Empress Nick to the party faithful about again trying to turnover the electorate here in her dictatorship, then England had better start making preparations for the 770,000 odd who will be leaving Scotland. Mostly it will be the older generation and if one assumes that the average pension for most of them will be about £20k then it is £1.540 million coming down south to help out Gideon and his seemingly never ending problems.

    Will we have enough houses and facilities for all of them? At least they will not need schools!!!

  15. Lifelogic
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:09 am | Permalink

    You say:- The EU lacks a credible migration policy.

    The UK, rather unfortunately, also lacks a credible energy policy, health policy, housing policy, budget policy, taxation policy, education policy, transport policy, defence policy, law and order policy, pension policy, long term care policy and very much else too.

    Hopefully post Brexit something sensible can be done about this for a change.

  16. Kenneth
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:41 am | Permalink

    Most people agree that immigration is a good and healthy thing if it is controlled.

    What annoys me, though, is that those who want to maintain high immigration rates then start to target the actual immigrants. They personalise the issue, bringing up individual cases.

    Whatever their motives, immigrants are not bad people and we all know this (there are some good and bad in any crowd). Most of us would probably do the same as them whether they are fleeing war and persecution or simply want a better life.

    Why then, do those who want to maintain high immigration personalise the argument? These are the only people that refer to immigrants as ‘the other’.

  17. bluedog
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    Once again, Dr JR, the current British government displays a supine dependency on the EU.
    Your point regarding contradictory positions, highlighting the naive assumption that post-Brexit Britain will still be accepting EU migrants, shows a pathetic subservience on the part of the government.

    One thing absolutely clear. Post a vote in favour of Brexit by the electorate, there must be a House of Commons vote of no-confidence in David Cameron. If that vote succeeds he must join the backbench in June 2016, not at a time of his choosing in 2020. The prospect of allowing a man suffering the humiliation of defeat being appointed to negotiate on behalf of the victors is another contradiction. Michael Gove is being gallant in pretending otherwise.

    • Robert Christopher
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:41 am | Permalink

      You are very generous to wait that long.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

      As Cameron has chosen to become the de facto leader of the campaign to keep us in the EU, rather than adopting a neutral position and leaving it entirely to us to decide, I would say that he should actually stand down now, before the referendum.

      • Know-dice
        Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

        Agreed.

        The Government needs to provide the people of the UK all relevant information, whether it’s stay in or leave.

        The Government needs to be totally neutral and have published plans in place for whichever way the people decide.

    • Mark B
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

      A vote of no confidence in Cameron and the Government may result in the fall of the Government and a GE.

      To remove Cameron from office all you need is for someone to challenge him for the leadership. Our kind host can advise better on this matter than any here.

      Over to you, JR

  18. Original Richard
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:23 am | Permalink

    The French know that if the UK were to suddenly start accepting some or all of the 6000 Calais migrants then this camp would quickly expand to 60,000 migrants all wanting a chance to enter the UK.

    For years the French have been complaining that their Calais camp is the result of our welfare system being too generous, our systems for checking illegal migrants and working is too ineffective and our ability to remove illegal immigrants is non existant.

    • Mark B
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

      I am affraid I agree with the French but . . . The French can send these people back to the first country they arrived in. And if they refuse, just deport them or relocate them to the Island of Corsica.

      Like Australia and the immigration problem they had, they took strong measures and stemmed the tide.

  19. James Matthews
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:47 am | Permalink

    Off topic, but perhaps our host will allow it. The Independent reports that the outgoing US President is to visit Britain on or about 24th April to urge the UK to stay in the EU.

    Even United States Presidents do not visit foreign countries uninvited, so presumably this has be instigated by David Cameron, possibly in the hope of mobilising Afro- Caribbean votes.

    It sounds as though he may not stay long enough to address the House of Commons, but whatever platform he is given I hope that some of our elected representatives will be as outraged as I am about this extraordinary interference in Britain’s internal affairs (imagine the likely response to an equivalent action by a British Prime Minister in the United States) and will vigorously and if necessary undiplomatically express that outrage.

    Meanwhile I shall be writing to the US Ambassador:

    His Excellency Mr Matthew Barzun,
    The Embassy of the United States
    24 Grosvenor Square
    London W1A 2LQ

    And urge others to do likewise (or you could telephone (44) (0) 020 749 9000).

    • Know-dice
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 7:14 pm | Permalink

      American’s only have ever done what is/was in America’s best interest…

      Take it as read that they believe it’s in America’s best interest for the UK to stay in the EU, nothing to do with what is best for the UK.

  20. ian
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    Out of the EU the cabinet of UK government and establishment with protesters decides which will be the same one in office now with the same leader and in EU the same set up with input from the EU unless you going to have a ref on it and the people decides.

  21. Bert Young
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:10 am | Permalink

    Hopefully today Merkel will receive a slap on her wrists from the German electorate . She has made a terrible mistake in encouraging migrants to Germany with the knock-on effects reverberating across Europe . Her demise will weaken Germany’s influence and further wreck Schengen .

    If , as Cameron states , Schengen is no concern of ours , why are we taking part in the financial deal being brokered with Turkey ?. Our Foreign Aid budget is intended to be spent on our own objectives and should not be blackmailed into it by Merkel’s mistake . Germany has a huge surplus , let them spend it with Turkey and leave us out of it .

    The disjointed EU will not be able to broker a common deal on this issue ; it signals its break up and the need for us to be no part of it . Osborne today has emphasised the priority of spending within our means – another way of saying we have not got money to burn and we have to be careful how we decide to allocate .

    The German power in Europe needs adjusting ; they have benefited enormously from the post-war Marshall Plan rebuilding their industries at a time when we were required to pay heavily for our Lease Lend . This equation has to be rebalanced and reflected in the way we stand in international affairs ; Obama seems to overlook this but his successor should not . China and India are major influences of the future and we are well placed to do deals with them .

  22. ian
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:20 am | Permalink

    I would of thought that as it something that affect the people so much in there everyday life like getting a job, school places, doctors, housing that the people would want a referendum on this one as well and do not know why they have not been given one before and what ever the people decide in or out of the EU it should be written into are law and all courts in the UK and EU informed what the british people have decreed and if your still in the EU when a treaty change come around to be written into it.

  23. The Active Citizen
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    JR, yesterday I posted about the costs for Germany and the EU of its current immigration policy. I wrote: “For the EU as a whole the net cost will be many, many hundreds of billions in my opinion and will have a serious effect on the EU’s prospects.” I’ve now dug out some of the research I’d done on Germany’s situation.

    A study from the ‘Kölner Instituts der deutschen Wirtschaft’ (Cologne Institute for Economic Research) predicts the cost of accommodation, food, and language courses will be €22 billion this year and €27.6 billion in 2017. In other words, €50 billion for this year and next, purely for some of the direct costs. And this assumes immigration will decline dramatically over these two years.

    Importantly, the costs don’t include all the other costs associated with Germany’s immigration policy e.g. policing, extra border security, social services, new teachers and schools, new doctors and healthcare, benefit payments, new house building, new contributions to the EU in respect of additional Turkish and Schengen costs, etc.

    Surely the total cost for Germany alone will be over €100 billion this year and next. Goodness knows what it will be across the EU as a whole.

    [Sources: Many German press articles 01 Feb 2016. The actual report is here: http://www.iwkoeln.de/infodienste/iw-kurzberichte/beitrag/fluechtlinge-folgen-fuer-arbeitsmarkt-und-staatsfinanzen-263939 ]

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

      Apparently, according to the news this morning the far right parties in Europe and in Germany are gaining ground. Oh, I do hope so and we can see the back of the likes of Merkel.

  24. bigneil
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:35 am | Permalink

    JR – you comment that the migrants wanted to move to Germany. The news videos of the big march last year showed lots of placards in English. Wouldn’t people who wanted to go to Germany have their placards in German? Add that Germany has apparently “lost” a good amount of these people, can we assume that the “lost” people actually didn’t have any intention of staying in Germany at all, but saw Ange’s invitation to get their feet on European, and eventually, UK’s (benefits laden) soil.
    Ange has started the destruction of Europe. The invasion will continue, knowing that the suffering of the journey here will be well worth it in the long run and end up with them living off the taxpayer.
    Immigration is claimed to be needed as the birth rate in the UK isn’t high enough. Try another look. Anyone English who wants to buy a house has to have both adults working to earn enough to buy ( and therefore cannot afford to have children of their own ) but also has to pay ever increasing taxes to pay for the costs of housing, treating in hospitals etc and also handing money to, an ever increasing number of new arrivals, many of which have zero intention of ever working or contributing to the country they love to come to. As these people aren’t bothered about owning a house here ( knowing that the taxes of the rest of us will provide/maintain one free), they then can go on to have as many churn out as many sprogs as possible to increase their “earnings” from our benefits system.

    • fed
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

      God, Bigneil, I’m glad you stopped there because I was worried about my blood pressure rising to intolerable levels. I totally agree with everything you have said here. My own children are struggling to pay their mortgages and bills so are not having children as they cannot afford not to work full time and are not really wanting to live on benefits. Meanwhile it is reported that in Southampton thousands of immigrants are piling off the ships and putting real pressure on services and housing. How long can all this go on before something gives and the country is done for??

  25. Shieldsman
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:39 am | Permalink

    How did we come to have a Prime Minister who is so delusional. Mind it makes for a good confidence trickster. A bag of lies with a microcosm of truth mixed in.

    He is a bit like Nero, grandstanding in Public about the disasters he says will befall us if we leave the EU, (Just carrying out orders Sir), at the same time as the EU is falling apart. A migrant invasion of biblical proportions and a EURO with the printing presses working overtime and a negative interest rate.

    What were those promises made to the Tory faithful and the Public?
    The EU is too bureaucratic and too undemocratic. It interferes too much in our daily lives, and the scale of migration triggered by new members joining in recent years has had a real impact on local communities.
    Conservatives believe in controlled immigration, not mass immigration.
    When immigration is out of control, it puts pressure on schools, hospitals and transport; and it can cause social pressures if communities find it hard to integrate.

    We will negotiate a new settlement for Britain in Europe, and then ask the British people whether they want to stay in the EU on this reformed basis or leave.
    now what was that reformed basis?

    The best knock-down was: Euractiv.com – Cameron’s renegotiation is nothing more than a rebranding exercise. There is nothing of substance to the United Kingdom’s renegotiation agreement, but it has been sold as a full revision of the country’s EU membership, write James Bartholomeusz and Daniel Schade.

    None of this, of course, is in any way true. The concessions that Cameron claims to have won are entirely cosmetic, if that: many, such as cutting regulatory red-tape and the involvement of national parliaments in law-making, were already permissible under treaty law or form part of the European Commission’s current legislative plan; others, such as welfare support for intra-EU migrants, tinkered at the margins of the issue whilst failing to alter anything substantial. A haphazardly choreographed attempt to manage the divisions within the British Conservative Party.

    Having conceded to rising Eurosceptic sentiment in his own party and the British public more widely for over five years, he could not be seen to support continued EU membership in its current form; however, it was also abundantly clear that other European countries had no appetite for British special pleading, beset as they were by a chain of crises and impatient with Cameron treating European Council meetings as a series of domestic media opportunities rather than as forums for serious diplomacy. There was only one solution: to launch a ‘renegotiation’ that would change next to nothing, but sell it as a wholesale rewrite of Britain’s membership conditions.

    The Spinelli Group of MEPs recommends the Fundamental Law for consideration by the Convention which will soon be called upon to amend the EU treaties, and the Five Presidents report. Not for Public ears or sight.

  26. Tom William
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 11:58 am | Permalink

    Apologists for Germany’s influx of migrants point to the need for more people in the ageing work force.

    Why does Germany not encourage the unemployed youth in Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal to move to Germany rather than invite hundreds of thousands of non Europeans?

    Isn’t that what the believers in the EU are supposed to want?

    • Mark B
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

      It’s part of what is known as; “The beneficial crisis.”

      You manufacture a crises and tell the people, that the only way to resolve it is to pool more resources and work together. What they really mean, is further integration and more loss of sovereignty.

  27. MPC
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 12:39 pm | Permalink

    I always thought the decision last Summer to rescue people from the Mediterranean and bring them into Greece was knee jerk and wrong headed, and may well turn out to be historic in terms of its likely effect on European way of life. Turkey was then and still is a NATO country, albeit not perfect but relatively safe. Anyone, even with dependant children, with personal funds able to pay traffickers substantial sums to be transported into the EU from Turkey can be regarded as economic migrants seeking a better life rather than refuge in the first safe country. It would still be possible to use EU member state naval vessels to patrol at the edge of Turkey’s territorial waters and turn the boats back/ safely escort them to shore. Combine this with expertise to Turkey to assist in asylum claim processing within Turkey to the highest standards. That would surely soon break the people smugglers’ business model, but it looks as though things have to get even worse before the EU realises its current approach is practically and morally flawed.

  28. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

    These measures are part and parcel of forming a European Federal SuperState. There must be full control of the Federation’s external borders so that internal freedom of movement may continue. Securing Turkish co-operation is, in the short term at least, a matter of making it worth Turkey’s while.

    A common European external border must be easily enforcible, which will be difficult unless the land area is contiguous. If Greece is in, so must be the whole of the Balkans.

    Now let’s look at EU immigration policy, led by Germany. Germany admitted 1.1 million immigrants in 2015, mostly from Islamic countries and mostly economic migrants. Angela Merkel has announced that Germany will take another 0.5 million per annum for each of the next 5 years. They will be given German passports after 8 years (that could be shortened), after which they may live and work anywhere in the EU. Under the Cameron proposals, Britain’s ’emergency brake’, such as it is, will lapse after 7 years.

    Still feeling comfortable in the Remain camp?

    • Anonymous
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:27 pm | Permalink

      Of course the Remain camp is feeling comfortable.

      The Remain camp is already IN the EU. And while we continue to debate the referendum mass immigration continues apace.

      Shouldn’t a temporary halt be put on it since public disatisfaction about immigration was so great that it forced a referendum in the first place ?

      Visa free travel could be issued to Turkey before we’ve even had the referendum.

      How bloody insensitive of the PM to put other people first at this of all times… yet again !

    • ChrisS
      Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:47 pm | Permalink

      Trouble is there is only one politician in the UK prepared to stand up and say exactly what you have posted here and he’s in the European Parliament, not Westminster, despite several attempts.

      It needs many more equally credible figures from mainstream parties like Boris, Duncan-Smith or Gove to openly say it before it will sink in with the electorate.

      At last we really know why the migration issue has never been tackled, even though it was an election pledge in 2010, downgraded to an aspiration in 2015.

      From the extracts just released from David Laws’ book, the Sir Humphries in the Home Office and Treasury aren’t bothered about the numbers coming in, never mind what the public wants. If they are happy with the situation, nothing is going to get done about it.

  29. ian
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    Under this government rough sleeping has doubled yet asylum seekers and refugees on there own and over the age of 18 are given hotel rooms with a free meal and found a place to live, is this not breaking the laws in more ways than one.
    Why do all 650 politician allow it, shouldn’t rough sleeper have the same right as refugees and asylum seekers because they are homeless and persecuted in there own country, when is a charity or politician going to take this government court for inequality and human rights because if nothing is done it going to double again under this government, when you have the whole of parliament and the establishment and councils against you not to mention most people in this country I think there is a case to be answer here.
    As I said the other day Spain has thousands of empty homes to rent and these people if they want to can go and look for jobs on the internet there because they are not going to find to job living on the streets. It like these people have sentence to death, like people who cannot get in to the hospital in time because of the queues.
    This seem to be deliberate policy with all concerned.

  30. ian
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

    I suppose its a combination of them be dislike intensely, money and the want to make room for more overseas people for them to uses as cheaper labour who will not complain.

  31. ian
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 1:57 pm | Permalink

    I see labour shadow chancellor in the paper complaining about the homeless death in his area, as usual just using them in a speech for him and the party own supposes to try to get in to government while they stand by and watch them die, just like charity, no court action or anything because it dose not suit there aim, would lose a valuable supply of stories and so would the media and the tory government with counter claims, so you see they have to die.

  32. ian
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

    I would of thought it is obvious to any one that the tax system has broken down, with 6 to 7 hundred thousand NI card issued last year and employment taxes going down it will not last much longer no matter how many cuts wet & mad makes and tax cuts he gives to the better off, his only hope is sell everything he can including downing street, now whether he and the government have the guts to bring nirp and tax your wages in your bank account before you have a chance to spend it and do away with cash so you have to pay it because now he can go into to your bank account with the law past last year or was it the year before, I have lost count because this is the four budget of tax, cut, sell off, borrow and bamboozle in a year, maybe he should have six budgets a year because that how fast the money going and take out what he like, so in the case of a bail-in he can take 90% of your money with no notice.

    It is just the way people like it and if you think voting for the other parties it might not happen think again. Loving it hear.

  33. DaveM
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

    OT, and just out of interest, when will the PM or the Queen, or anyone else for that matter, be visiting the US or any European countries to lecture them on how they should vote?

  34. ian
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    I do not think anyone would like to be in government when asset sales run dry. That will leave the biggest hole ever to fill.

  35. forthurst
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    Why has the issue of Erdogan’s (relationships with ed) terrorists, both Daesh and al Nusra, and his (actions towards ed) Kurdish civilians, including (military action? ed) in Northern Syria not been the subject of Merkel’s negotiations? It is the continuation of the war in Syria, promoted by CMD and the rest of the neocon (word left out ed) that is the source of the millions of refugees living in refugee camps in Turkey who have finally decided that they have no hope of rebuilding their lives in their native land.

    Having read the David Laws revelations in the DM, I am no longer surprised by the fact that none of CMD’s policies are attenuated by patriotism or a consideration of the longer term interests of our country.

  36. Maureen Turner
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 9:21 pm | Permalink

    Uncontrolled migration into the wealthier nations of the EU is proving a disaster for these countries and this is highlighted most tragically by the Sweden of today.

    We learned last week via the Press that Mr. Andrew Tyrie Con. MP has been attempting to find out the true number of individuals who have come into the UK over the past ten years and it would appear, putting aside the official stats., 1,200,000 are unaccounted for. Having been initially denied this information he used the FoI Act to get the figure but yet again a request for the info. on the number of NI forms issued is being thwarted. The reason given is it is too costly to research even although David Davis Con. MP advises it would take one individual only three and a half days to produce a reasonably accurate figure from the department’s database.

    Poor Sweden, probably the most liberal of all the EU nations, hasn’t been able to cope with the deluge of migrants as they attempted to conform to the EU’s open border policy and now, even in small towns, the female residents have been advised to remain indoors in the evening. Never mind Sweden it’s supposed to be all part and parcel of your cultural enrichment.

  37. Iain gill
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:09 pm | Permalink

    Your analysis John rather misses the point that UK politicians have been and are pro mass immigration just as much as European politicians, promising one thing at election time and doing another thing entirely in office. Our own ongoing massive influx from, for instance, India is nothing to do with refugees from a war and little to do with Europe, it’s all to do with lying pricks in elected office here.

  38. fedupsoutherner
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 10:16 pm | Permalink

    After what has happened in Ankara, how long before it spread all over Europe and eventually into the UK? All really worrying and to think this is because EU leaders cannot get a grip around the situation of migrants. Europe is a mess and God only knows what it will look like in another years time.

  39. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted March 16, 2016 at 2:07 am | Permalink

    I know that we are supposed to use respectful language about foreign heads of state but I have a simple question for everyone:

    Do you want that (woman ed)in Berlin to dictate the UK’s immigration policy?

  • 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