Mrs May changes her mind on the EU and borders.

Mrs May has travelled a long way since 2002 and her modernising  agenda. More recently she asked the Conservstive party to vote to sacrifice criminal justice powers to the EU when we had no need to do so.

Yesterday she posed as a resolute fighter against the EU having power and influence over our borders and migration policy, and warned that allowing too much migration into the UK was damaging to our society.

Mrs May is the senior Minister charged with the duty of getting net inward migration down to tens of thousands from the current level in excess of 300,000 a year. This is a good and popular policy. I am glad she is taking it seriously.


It it happens to be remarkably similar to the policy offered by the Coalition government in the last Parliament, when Mrs May was also the responsible senior Minister. Maybe it was too difficult to do with Lib Dems using a veto on measures required to achieve it. Now she is freed of that problem, what we want to hear from Mrs May is the practical steps that she is taking to achieve the policy aim. We do not need dramatic language or warnings. We need her to preside over a harmonious and successful society, and to find fair and effective ways of carrying out her prime policy goal.

I  suspect she knows that we do need to regain control over migration from the EU to fulfil the policy objective.  Her new anti EU rhetoric needs to share with us  how she intends to get back lost powers over our borders from within the EU and how she is contributing to Mr Cameron’s renegotiation. I wish her well with that endeavour.


  1. Lifelogic
    October 7, 2015

    Indeed but for five years Theresa has done almost nothing. So far it is all mouth and zero action or worse actually negative action. Cameron made it fairly clear yesterday that he in not even trying to regain control over migration from the EU. He only talks of changes to initial benefits for new migrants which is about as much use as rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

    The BBC nearly always frame any discussion of this along the lines of:- is immigration a benefit to the economy or not. Needless to say coming down on the it’s is a huge benefit side shortly after. This is clearly an absurd way to frame discussion, just as one would expect of the BBC. The real choice is between open door immigration and some well designed but selective, points based, immigration. Clearly some immigrant are a great asset to the country and some are a huge liability. If follows as night follows day that taking the former and rejecting the latter will produce the best net economic benefit to the country.

    Almost no one is against all immigration, the BBC are just putting up an absurd Aunt Sally as an easy target.

    1. Lifelogic
      October 7, 2015

      There was nothing other than common sense in Mrs May’s speech but look at the absurd reaction it causes in the left wing press and BBC. This even though she is clearly not even taking any actual action, and has not done so for five years.

      The real question is when will she actually do something. Even non EU immigration which she could control is totally out of control. Just how far off the “no if no buts 10s of thousands” are they? She did not say, nor did she even say what her new target is nor what methods she will adopt. I conclude it is empty hot air as we have come to expect.

    2. Mark
      October 7, 2015

      I noted the tone of May’s speech reflected the research done by Prof. Rowthorn for CIVITAS and their criticisms of the BBC’s favourite Dustmann and Frattini study by Prof. Stone. I guess the Home Office fails to provide.

    3. Lifelogic
      October 7, 2015

      So Cameron thinks people are paid less in the UK because of their gender. Complete and utter tosh as he surely must know. Females get paid less because, on balance, they choose different careers and a rather different work life balance, one that fits in with their families, more part time and they take career breaks. They study different subjects at University and at A level to a very significant degree.

      Woman without children and younger woman already earn just as much as men.

      Perhaps Cameron is stupid enough to believe what he says but I doubt it. The only other explanation is that he knows full well it is complete tosh. Yet he is happy to say this drivel because he thinks their are votes in it. Also happy for the large anti-male discrimination by law that would clearly be needed to “correct” (as he sees it) this position.

      Nothing substantive on the EU as expected. A speech Tony Blair could have made.

      1. Hefner
        October 7, 2015

        Have you ever considered that you might be wrong? How do you, oh clever one, explain, that the average woman salary is 63 % of a man’s in the UK, 72 % in Austria, between 75 and 80 in Switzerland, Germany, Netherlands, Finland, Czech Republic, Spain, Denmark, Slovakia, Iceland, between 80 and 85 % in France, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Sweden, Norway?

        These are figures from Eurostat, 2013.

        1. libertarian
          October 8, 2015


          You forgot to explain the bit about female AVERAGE earnings is severely impacted because the measurement is NOT like for like. That average female earnings are NOT a discrepancy in salary offered for the job but in total earnings based on the amount of time worked in a year.

          The clue is in the VERY FIRST LINE of the Eurostat report . It says UNADJUSTED wages.

          The gender pay gap is just another left wing myth

          1. Hefner
            October 8, 2015

            So, according to you, it means that UK women work less than UK men, but more and more related to men when going up the list of countries. Rather curious …

    4. Leslie Singleton
      October 7, 2015

      Dear Lifelogic–You are correct that nobody would ban all immigration–I for one would be perfectly happy to ban only 99%. It cannot be emphasised enough that even without immigrants we are not able to educate, house and look after own and till that changes it passes my understanding why we should let others in, especially when immigrants are essentially immediately and routinely granted the same rights as British subjects whose ancestors might have been here for centuries. Of course fewer immigrants means less depression of wages

    5. Javelin
      October 7, 2015

      She is famous for her hot air.

      On a related point. How many of the 200,000 new starter homes over a few years are going to the 300,000 immigrants every year.

      It simply isn’t sustainable.

  2. Lifelogic
    October 7, 2015

    You say:- “Mrs May is the senior Minister charged with the duty of getting net inward migration down to tens of thousands from the current level in excess of 300,000 a year. This is a good and popular policy. I am glad she is taking it seriously”.

    Why do you think she is “taking in seriously”, “talking it seriously” perhaps?

  3. Mark B
    October 7, 2015

    Good morning.

    Talk is cheap. Just ask CMD.

    As has been said many times before, we cannot control EU migration, but we can control non-EU migration, although the EU seeks to change this also.

    The attitude, is not the policies, are more in line with UKIP than with any other party.

    Perhaps Mrs. May has one eye still on a being the 2nd woman PM in history ?

    1. Timaction
      October 7, 2015

      After 50 years of uncontrolled mass migration we have more talk from Mrs May who has been in office for over 5 years. All hot air and rhetoric. Open borders to 485000000 million people. Your leader was quick to dismiss freedom of movement and talk about his minor ambition for a few minor benefit changes. Does he have any evidence this will stop the invasion? When am I and the rest of the English people going to stop paying taxes for health, education and building 200000 houses for migrants every year? We cannot control anything whilst we are under EU rule. Even ITV were at the propaganda nonsense last night.
      I see Calais hasn’ t improved. Any movement on minimum standards of Lorry construction, padlocks etc? This has only been going on fort 15 to 20 years.
      How many of the estimated 2000000 illegal immigrants has she removed? It would appear that once they are here they can’t be removed. Only the English don’t have human rights!

      1. Lifelogic
        October 7, 2015

        Indeed. All is hot air.

        1. Timaction
          October 7, 2015

          It was reported today that even Mr Cameron’s own advisors burst into laughter when they were asked how the renegotiation was going. We all know its totally false and he is just spinning this out as long as possible.
          Our Country cannot have a welfare state, free to all who arrive here and immediately claim health, housing, education and totally open borders.
          It’s not really a surprise that the leaders of the Government have never had proper jobs but people still think they are capable of delivering……….anything. I watched a clip today where Mr Cameron promised the EU £1.7 billion surcharge was unacceptable and wouldn’t be paid. Of course he did and the msm haven’t even taken him to task. We live in a dictatorship with controlled media. This will all end in serious trouble.

    2. A different Simon
      October 8, 2015

      Mrs May comes across as a humourless ambitious female .

      Who is the most deluded , Mrs May for believing she is PM material or me for thinking that it surely cannot happen ?

      1. Hefner
        October 9, 2015

        Very relevant question: how many on this blog are deluded, thinking that because they vent their frustrations, anything is going to change.
        It simply shows that they do not seem to know how the British system of government works. Once the leader of a party has been elected, and once he/she has chosen the Cabinet, even the MPs of the winning party are almost irrelevant, specially when they are not of the PM’s tribe within that party.

        Furthermore, the electors might be cajoled just before an election, after that the relevant MP is free to act and vote as he/she more or less wishes, (while taking or not notice of the whips) independently of what the electors have been saying, or … the bloggers on the MP’s site.

        So, there is a lot of huffing and puffing on this site, but to me, it looks very much as a useless exercise, as far as influencing the MP.
        But it is clear that some people appear to have a lot of time on their hands, and if CEOs rely very much on their executives to do any real work, while they produce hot air.

        And if one doesn’t want to watch TV, reading this blog can be quite entertaining.

  4. Richard1
    October 7, 2015

    The simple point to make on this is that any country such as the UK which provides extensive benefits – free health, education, housing, pensions, welfare, and makes those benefits freely available to all residents, must be able to control who has access to them or UK taxpayers have an open ended liability. If we have completely open borders to some countries – those in the EU – then we can only exert any control on total numbers by having an undesirably restrictive policy towards other countries. This is the balance that needs to be re-set in this negotiation.

  5. Mike Stallard
    October 7, 2015

    It is so very easy to slam the government – and especially the Home Secretary.
    I want to say that, in spite of the most terrible opposition, where a few years ago it was “raaacist” to mention” immigration”, she, and the Prime Minister have done a splendid job in very difficult circumstances. At last the clumsy old EU is coming round to providing money for some refugee camps in Syria/Turkey and at last they are realising that the policy by Mrs Merkel simply does not work. Our government have been doing this now for some years already.
    I think both of them should take a lot of credit.

  6. alan jutson
    October 7, 2015

    Perhaps she is changing her mind, perhaps she is just playing to the media, but actions speak louder than words.

    Results are even harder to achieve.

    Only time will tell.

  7. Pete
    October 7, 2015

    So you know she is merely posing as a “resolute fighter against the EU” yet you expect her to do something to regain sovereignty? I’d say that’s as likely as Dave getting a better deal from Brussels.

  8. Ian wragg
    October 7, 2015

    With the majority of the cabinet in favour of the EU and mass immigration she has her work cut out. Big business and universities like immigration as it keeps the costs down with the taxpayers subsidising wages and the free public services for students. How many so called mature students have underlying health problems. How many bring their families and enjoy free education for their siblings. These people should be exposed and companies and universities should be made to pick up the bills if they employ foreigners.
    The British taxpayer is treated like a mug.

    Who’s going to pay for these hundreds of thousands of new houses being built mainly for immigrants.

    1. John C.
      October 7, 2015

      And another aspect of mass immigration which is rarely noticed: how much money is shipped “home” to Europe or South Asia, which would otherwise be spent in Britain? Has this ever been calculated, even roughly, by the economic gurus who announce to us the wonders of immigration?
      Let us say there are 5 million immigrants who regularly support or invest in their country of origin a mere £10 a week. This is £50 million pounds a week, or £2.6 billion, which would normally be spent in the U.K.
      This is speculation on my part. Does anyone know of any research on this topic?

  9. Rita Webb (Mrs)
    October 7, 2015

    Yeah, yeah blame the Lib Dems for everything. Its about as believable as Osborne announcing that any financial institution getting itself into trouble in future will not be bailed out by the taxpayer. Sorry but you lot in Westminster have made it appear to the rest of the World that the UK is a land of milk and honey.

    LL are you in the IoD? Any views on what they are saying at the minute?

    1. stred
      October 7, 2015

      It is good to hear Mrs May has caught on to the problems of immi.. sorry, net migration and not to mention emmi…oops, outward migration, where highly qualified British people leave to become economic migrants too. Perhaps she has been reading blogs like this one and press reports about the proportion of economic migrants to refugees. It’s never too late.

      But she does seem to get rather heated when talking about people who are not helping the Home Office to do its job. She thinks universities must do their job properly and send overseas students home after finishing their courses. Perhaps they could lock them up and hire Pickfords to export them. Lorry drivers could do more too, by buying armoured lorries and tasering illegals trying to jump on. Then fishermen and sailors could do their bit and keep an eye out for boats landing illegals in creeks, estuaries and beaches.They could take any illegals back to France and help them swim back where they came from.

      As she said, the Home Office is having enough trouble dealing with human rights lawyers and Mrs May has told them to think about the real refugees instead of their clients. Hopefully they too will do their bit to help.

      Reply IN a free society it does require assistance from people and institutions to uphold the rule of law. The government cannot and should not be everywhere.

      1. Lifelogic
        October 7, 2015

        To reply: Indeed and the people are, in general, very helpful. Far more so than the authorities – but if illegal migrants are not sent back anyway, by the authorities, what is the point of helping? The chances are they will fine or inconvenience you and take no action in relation to the migrant.

        Similarly what is the point of reporting things to the police when you know they will do virtually nothing other than send you a victim of crime letter?

        Cameron in his lefty speech pointed out that 50% of prisoners re-offend within one year. And this is just the few crimes the police trace and prosecute successfully. So in fact the figures will be far, far worse. Many may well reoffend perhaps 20+ times and still not even be caught, given the low police record of crime detections. What sort of a deterrent is that to these serial offenders?

        No mention of the EU open door immigration needless to say. So the EU deal will be no benefits for new migrants for a week or two and changes to the wording of “ever closer union”.

        Totally pathetic and totally worthless.

      2. forthurst
        October 7, 2015

        “Reply IN a free society it does require assistance from people and institutions to uphold the rule of law. The government cannot and should not be everywhere.”

        The tripwires have to be put in place by government; we either live under the rule of law or that of a hippy commune; furthermore the onus should not be put on people going about their lawful business; the government must ensure that those who do not belong here have no access to taxpayers’ facilities whatsoever.

        Furthermore, I find it bizarre that our neocon infested government believes it legitimate to bomb indescriminately countries that have not threatened or attacked us, yet for when one of those who claims to have come from such a country appears here by whatever means, we fall over backwards to sympathise and treat them more fairly than our own people. On the contrary, we should be minding our own business and altering perceptions by making sure the whole world knows we are not a soft touch by starting to act far less sympathetically with those that arrive here uninvited or overstay their welcome.

    2. Lifelogic
      October 7, 2015

      Yes, but I have not really been following what they have been saying, I will take a look. They are usually more sound than the CBI but not much.

    3. libertarian
      October 7, 2015

      Rita Webb

      I’m a Fellow of IoD. They are not taking a position as an organisation. The latest member survey shows the following ( This isn’t the full survey so numbers don’t necessarily compute)

      60% Continue to support the EU PROVIDED there is successful reform & repatriation of powers

      Only 11% think the EU as it currently exists is socially and economically viable ( that is the most devastating statistic I’ve seen and its from the real representatives of UK business, so the inners trying to tell us that the EU is good for business is cobblers)

      24% would like us to be in the EFTA but not EU, now

      The Federation of Small Business also recently surveyed their members

      47% said they would vote to stay

      41% said they would leave

      The majority of those voting to stay was made up of:

      Those exporting goods/services to EU

      Those employing workers from other EU countries

      A majority of Scottish & Northern Ireland businesses

      Its on a knife edge as far as the referendum is concerned. No one can factually cite business wanting to remain in as a viable position as clearly almost half want to leave now and the half staying want significant changes.

      Only 6% of business report that they want to see further EU integration and expansion

  10. Rita Webb (Mrs)
    October 7, 2015

    And how is Ms May going to be more effective in dealing with a problem that is far greater than it was prior to the end of the coalition? “Bild” reports that by December, from the numbers turning up on it’s borders at moment. Germany will have to house, feed and teach German to the equivalent of the population of Frankfurt. None of these refugees have been screened to see if they are who they say they are, if they have a criminal record and what is their state of health. In the meantime Mrs Merkel is in India trying to tie up some business deals.

    1. Bob
      October 7, 2015

      @Mrs Webb

      “None of these refugees have been screened to see if they are who they say they are,”

      Most of these refugees are not who they say they are. Packages are now available in Pakistan to deliver the customer right up to the EU border with a Syrian passport that will pass any examination for authenticity. A cursory test of their ability to speak Arabic would expose them for what they are.

      1. ian wragg
        October 7, 2015

        Not so Bob. As someone who worked in the Middle East for over 20 years I can tell you most Pakistanis speak passable Arabic. The Koran is in Arabic and many learn it at the Madrassi.

        1. UKIP Person
          October 7, 2015

          “Not so Bob. As someone who worked in the Middle East for over 20 years I can tell you most Pakistanis speak passable Arabic. The Koran is in Arabic and many learn it at the Madrassi.”

          Ian, alas you did not learn in your 20 years in the M.E. that a “Madrassi” is a resident of the port of Madras, now Chennai, in south-east India. A “Madrassa” is a Muslim religious “school”.

          Perhaps it didn’t occur to you that Pakistanis you encountered working in the Middle East (Pakistan itself is not in the M.E., it is part of the Indian subcontinent i.e. S.E. Asia) have learned a smattering of Arabic while being there. Thus, they aren’t at all representative of the 190+ million Pakistanis in Pakistan.

          I’m pretty sure that you are fluent in neither Urdu or Arabic, else you couldn’t possibly hold these views.

          Let’s take this right from the top.

          “All” (well 99%, as in some remote hilly regions I guess it is possible that some remain resistant and speak _only_ their local hill dialects, Pashtuni, Chitrali, Khowar etc.) Pakistanis speak Urdu. Afghans, virtually the same.

          Note for Bangladeshis, the % will be much lower because Bengali – a totally different language – is prevalent there. In 1971, India set Bangladesh (then, East Pakistan) free of the yoke of what was then West Pakistan. That’s a long time ago.

          And here, we are talking Pakistanis, not Bangladeshis. For Bangladeshis aren’t able to make the migrant land journey as they would have a thousand miles of India to traverse – or the Himalayas to bypass plus Tibet/China to cross – and they’re simply not allowed to. If India opened that border (Bengali is spoken in that part of India too – the partition of India was done on religious, not linguistic, grounds) millions of Bangladeshis would cross over, for financial prospects are markedly better in India and there is no ethnic or linguistic divide.

          Further, Bengali is linguistically much further from Arabic than is Urdu.

          So we are exclusively discussing Pakistanis and Afghans here.

          Now, Urdu and Hindi are 99.9+% the same language (except the written script is totally different – I can’t read a word of Urdu).

          Urdu is the national language of Pakistan, and has been since the country’s formation in 1947.

          I speak, understand, read and write Hindi perfectly (“pukka”). This is because it was a compulsory school subject for me in India for a long time, from the age of about 6 till 15 when I finished school. The other 2 languages I learned there, French and Gujarati, were each for a much shorter period. At home, we spoke only English, but travelling to rural parts of the land, I necessarily conversed in Hindi.

          Therefore I speak and understand Urdu perfectly, as it is the same as Hindi. Indeed, a person hearing me will have no idea if I am speaking Hindi or Urdu, whether or not he or she knows either or both languages.

          When I speak Hindi to people from Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc., they often express surprise/shock at my “perfect and accentless Urdu” (since I am white).

          But I cannot speak or understand Arabic (besides familiarity with a few common phrases like Salaam Alaikum; the word “Salaam” is common across the Middle and Far East and the Indian subcontinent).

          Surely, at least I must know when *I* cannot speak or understand something?

          I have travelled through, to and spent time in countries where Arabic is the lingua franca. Most recently, Muscat. Shortly before, Dubai. When it is being spoken, I understand nothing or next to nothing. Remember, my oral Urdu is perfect.

          I am sure most devout Pakistanis are familiar with Arabic phrases, verses etc. found in the Q’ran.

          And the script is much the same (Urdu and Arabic). Yes, confusing to outsiders: Urdu and Arabic vaguely share script (to non-readers, they are all but indistinguishable) but rarely share meaning. Conversely, Urdu and Hindi fully share meaning but not at all script (Hindi being written in Devanagri, which isn’t even vaguely similar-looking to Urdu or Arabic).

          But speak to Pakistanis and Afghans *conversationally* in Arabic, say about how a car basically works (something into which the Q’ran doesn’t go very deeply), or any number of other mundane and practical things, and with rare exception there will be no fluency and, indeed, near incomprehension.

          When I speak Hindi=Urdu to Arabic acquaintances, they can’t comprehend me, except for understanding the odd word here and there.

          So it works both ways, as would logically be expected.

          Therefore, a perfectly sensible way of filtering out Pakistani / Afghani migrants who have somehow or other obtained Syrian documentation (as the Republic is selling its passports, not that hard) or claim to be Syrian or Iraqi refugees is have a native Arabic speaker engage them in comversation at the EU border.

          Easy as that. And as hard to fool as, say, someone who doesn’t really understand more than a smattering of English being able to fool me for more than a few seconds into thinking they are fluent. Laughably impossible.

          OK, a few linguists might get through. And checking those unable to speak and who are also illiterate would not work. But there are ways to check if they are genuine.

          The EU isn’t doing this only because it has no desire or will to do this. Quite possibly, it wants more fake refugees, to serve its own expansionist and nefarious ends.

          And millions, perhaps tens of millions, are considering the move. Whole streetfuls of businesses in Lahore etc are now devoted to the forthcoming exodus – lots of money for facilitators/arrangers.

          All this while the shameful Frau, the third German leader in the past hundred years to try and ruin Europe, eyes her expected Nobel Peace Prize.

          You simply could -not- make it up.

      2. backofanenvelope
        October 7, 2015

        I expect that even now, Mrs Merkel is recruiting some genuine Syrians to help sort out the other sort – those from Pakistan etc.

    2. Timaction
      October 7, 2015

      Once they are granted citizenship they can come here. Same as the Dutch Somalians as we provide more free benefits! Are these the EU citizens Mrs May talks about asking for asylum here?
      A total mess as usual from the politically correct legacies who continue to wreck our Country.
      Action this day Mrs May? No chance.
      We need our freedom and democracy returned from EU rule.

  11. bigneil
    October 7, 2015

    Why has it took the “elite” so long to say what the working class ( like me) have known for years? Is there any wonder people say most MPs live in the Westminster bubble. . . and why do illegal immigrants get looked after better than someone who has paid in for 45 yrs?

  12. Bert Young
    October 7, 2015

    Theresa’s speech yesterday was right on the button ; we cannot and we should not allow any form of uncontrolled immigration . Unlike other European countries we have a dense population mass and it is utterly ridiculous to ignore this basic fact ,The EU can shout and rave all it wants about the free movement of people in its attempts to show the world what a wonderful ethos it has , but in doing so it ignores the differences that exist between one member country and another .

    Our infrastructure is already strained to its limits and , adding to this condition would be foolhardy to say the least . Her speech was a strong message to the EU to keep its fingers out of our affairs and an indication that , when necessary , she will not give way to pressures within the Cabinet ; as such she clearly makes herself a candidate in the succession race .She should be applauded for her strong willed approach .

    1. Timaction
      October 7, 2015

      All talk and no action I,m afraid. It was all about her leadership ambitions. She’s had over 5 years already!

      1. Mark
        October 7, 2015

        She did have Mr Willets and Mr Cable to fight over getting student immigration under proper control in the last government. She has made a point of the issue this time, and now has the more friendly Sajid Javid as Business Secretary:

        “What we need to make sure – and we do have this – is that our immigration system allows those from abroad that want to come to Britain to study in our world-class universities, our fantastic colleges to come here,” he told the Today programme.

        “But we’ve also got to have a system that doesn’t allow any abuse when people are using the right to study as a way to achieve settlement in Britain. So we’ve got to break the link and make sure it’s focused on people who want to study and then, once they’ve had their studies and completed that, then they leave.”

        1. Timaction
          October 7, 2015


          We shall see but I have yet to see a policy completed that the public want and the legacy parties all support the EU and therefore free movement to 495 million people. Mr Cameron’s renegotiation is a total farce.

        2. Denis Cooper
          October 8, 2015

          Yes, but read what she said in her speech:

          “Overall, after my first two years as Home Secretary, net migration – which had reached 320,000 in 2005 – fell to 154,000.

          Since then, however, the numbers have doubled once more. One of the reasons is student visas. And let me be clear about students.

          We welcome students coming to study. But the fact is, too many of them are not returning home as soon as their visa runs out. If they have a graduate job, that is fine. If not, they must return home. So I don’t care what the university lobbyists say: the rules must be enforced. Students, yes; over-stayers, no. And the universities must make this happen.”

          Note that sentence:

          “If they have a graduate job, that is fine.”

          In the first place, with the great expansion in numbers of graduates a “graduate job” no longer means what is used to mean. In the second place, as I recall the salary threshold is set a bit below average wages, when the criteria should be much more selective so that those allowed to stay on are exceptional rather just run-of-the-mill. And in the third place, what about the native graduates who are now in competition with large numbers of foreign graduates?

          Saying “that is fine” might be OK if the criteria were much more selective and the numbers were much smaller; but when her boss has invited the entire youth of India and China to come here and study, with the promise that they can stay on if they manage to satisfy inadequate, excessively lax, criteria, it is not “fine”.

          1. APL
            October 11, 2015

            Dennis Cooper: “with the great expansion in numbers of graduates a “graduate job” no longer means what is used to mean. ”

            Employed for a while by a well known nationalized and collapsed bank, during my period of employment the routine involved copying and pasting from one system to another. Hardly graduate work, but apparently it was necessary to recruit a rather nice degree qualified gentleman from India to help.

  13. Iain Moore
    October 7, 2015

    I cannot be so generous about Mrs May’s political journey.

    She hung a political albatross round the Conservative party’s neck when she called it nasty, making life difficult for people who saw the problems of mass immigration to raise the issue.

    She has been the Home Secretary who has failed to get a grip on immigration.

    Then we are supposed to accept this change on the basis of one speech and forget all that has gone before? No way!

    1. APL
      October 11, 2015

      Iain Moore: “Then we are supposed to accept this change on the basis of one speech and forget all that has gone before?”

      No way!

  14. Bob
    October 7, 2015

    Talk is cheap, especially when there is no chance whatsoever of getting support in the HoC, even from her own party, many of whom would be more at home on the Labour benches.

  15. bratwurst
    October 7, 2015

    Firstly, there is no ‘re-negotiation’. Cameron is undoubtedly relying on an announcement in 2017 by the EU colleagues of a forthcoming treaty change to bring about further political & economic integration. The UK and others will be offered second class ‘associate membership’ on terms dictated to us and which will just mean a slower track to eventually joining the euro & ‘more europe’. Cameron will no doubt announce this as a successful re-negotiation shortly before the referendum which will be held in late 2017.

    May is just playing political posturing to the public gallery – she is currently losing out to Osborne in the succession race. She probably doesn’t need to worry too much – like Miliband, Osborne is unlikely to be prime minister unless he takes over from Cameron prior to a General Election. The electorate just couldn’t see Miliband as a credible PM and will, I am sure, think the same about Osborne. That was the real reason Labour lost the last election.

  16. Bob
    October 7, 2015

    Alex Wild was right, people have short memories.
    It’s no thanks to Mrs (nasty party) May or Mr (closet racist) Cameron that we can now discuss immigration.
    UKIP ran the gauntlet of disapproval from the politically correct “progressives” in order to get immigration and the EU onto the agenda.

    1. Timaction
      October 7, 2015

      Absolutely right. That is the only reason we will get our referendum. All the legacies still want to retain EU rule. Only UKIP don’t!

  17. Horatio McSherry
    October 7, 2015


    I’m afraid Mrs. May is merely talking a good game – perhaps trying to project an image that shows the Conservative front bench are jolly cross with the EU and that we should trust what they say come referendum time. (The referendum which will be quietly put off until the migrant crisis has died down sufficiently in people’s memories. Notice how the media have stopped coverage of these poor migrants now they’re burning down hostels and rioting in German camps, and that not one of the news channels has covered any of the anti-immigration rallies in any continental country).

    I’m also afraid the Conservatives have done what I posted on here after Corbyn’s victory. I said they had the chance to show a clear divide between prudent conservatism and irresponsible spending of the socialists, but being a bit cynical of the front bench I thought they’d chase Labour left…which they now seem to have done going by the speeches at conference, even to the point of nicking policies and slogans (yes, we’re looking at you Mr. Osbourne) from previous labour campaigns.

    The Conservatives aren’t alone; UKIP have also started chasing to the left, which leaves some of us wondering who the hell there is to vote for who is actually – like your good self – a proper, responsible conservative.

    1. Leslie Singleton
      October 7, 2015

      Dear Horatio–Except that the Conservative party no longer exists best I can tell and I am not sure I would place John in it even if it did, this despite his once being the “standard bearer of the Right”

      1. Horatio McSherry
        October 7, 2015

        Leslie, I think that’s a bit harsh on John; if you read the things he’s published and seen some of his speeches on YouTube I don’t think we can really doubt his Conservative credentials.

        However, I do agree about the Conservative party not really existing. In one of my previous posts I did suggest that New Labour and a good chunk of the Conservatives might as well start a new party together (Blue Labour?) as they would feel very much at home with eachother. That would leave Labour traditionalists and Conservative traditionalists back in charge of their respective parties, and, would/could scythe support for the SNP and UKIP as people perhaps return to the traditional parties.

  18. oldtimer
    October 7, 2015

    Actions will speak louder than words – when they are taken. What she said sounded sensible obvious to me, though it appears to have caused outrage in the media!

    I do wonder if she had one eye on what is happening in Germany right now. An article in SpiegelOnline yesterday gave the impression that ihe migrant issue is close to being out of and, possibly, beyond control. Apparently the government came close to deploying the German police and the army to border control duties – only to be advised that there were practical difficulties, such as lack of facilities, for processing people. That much maligned word “swamped” came to mind. The EU is in deep trouble on this issue; it is certainly failing to get a grip on the problem.

  19. English Pensioner
    October 7, 2015

    The problem will politicians of all parties is that most tend to tell us what they think we want to hear. Clearly Mrs May’s decided that a large number of voters liked what the saw in UKIP’s manifesto and has decided to adopt most of it in so far as immigration is concerned.

    Some of the lines seem to have been lifted directly from an interview that Farage gave before the election! Whilst imitation is said to be the sincerest of flattery, I have no confidence that she will be allowed, or even genuinely want to do what she says. She certainly can’t impose the restrictions that she tells us are necessary whilst we are in the EU as the EU has made it very clear that freedom of movement is sacrosanct.

    Mrs May has been at the Home Office for some years; one would have thought that by now she would have produced some draft legislation on the issue, even during the coalition period. At least then she would have been able to say, during the election campaign, “This is what I want to do, but Clegg wouldn’t let me”. But she hasn’t done so.

    So, on balance, I think, as usual, it will be all talk, but no action in spite of her apparently adopting virtually all of UKIP’s policy on the subject. To me it is all part of the manoeuvring to try to become Cameron’s successor.

    Reply When Conservatives were last in government we had a policy of controlled migration which resulted in typically (from memory) a net 50,000 a year coming to the UK. In opposition we have argued for better controls on migration and opposed Labour’s open door policy. All this took place before UKIP arrived, and has continued since UKIP’s involvement in UK politics.

    1. graham1946
      October 7, 2015

      Reply to reply

      When the Tories were last in government, the population was many millions less than now, our culture was not under challenge, Europe was not the basket case it is now due to the Euro and Bush/Blair had not stoked up wars and terrorism, the internet was in its infancy so the West was not so ‘advertised’. Are you really saying that millions wanted to come then, but the Tories kept them out? If so, pull the other one. In opposition you talked a good game but in government have proved useless on this issue with record numbers coming in since CMD said ‘no ifs or buts’. UKIP has made the difference, no use denying it.

      Reply Yes we did control numbers – Labour then came into office, changed the rules, and the numbers went up sixfold.

      1. graham1946
        October 7, 2015

        And CMD would have had the referendum if UKIP had not existed? Just like we would have had the income tax allowance increases without the LibDems? Excuse me if I doubt it. I submit that neither of these would have occurred to him, left to himself. Of course we must be grateful when a sinner repents, but some of us are still a tad suspicious that he will find a way out or that it will be a dishonest contest, just like the last one in 1975 in which I voted ‘no’ to staying in, when all the media BBC, political parties etc said it was about trade

        Anyway, all that aside what has changed to stop your government ‘controlling the numbers’ like you reckon you did before?

        Reply Yes, the referendum came from Conservatives and had nothing to do with UKIP. We all wanted tax cuts and the threshold rise was the only cut Lib Dems would accept.

      2. zorro
        October 10, 2015

        Reply to reply – the most effective control for immigration to Western Europe was the Iron Curtain. Once that went, the trafficking routes through Eastern Europe were established…..


      3. APL
        October 11, 2015

        JR: “Yes we did control numbers – Labour then came into office, changed the rules, and the numbers went up sixfold.”

        So, change the rules back, repeal the specific Labour legislation that had this effect, and make the old legislation effective retrospectively.

    October 7, 2015

    Many good people of all parties throughout the years of inaction about unmanageable quantities of immigration said nothing publicly.. They were afraid to raise a hue and cry. Afraid to shout a tribal muster. (words left out ed)

    Mrs May shouting from a national televised platform with the highest authority has pointed out (unwanted illegal economic migrants ed) in our communities. Yet she speaks on stage with a well-known backdrop of complete inaction and it is not believed that she will actually repel (illegal migrants ed).

    Mrs May’s tribal clarion call must be immediately backed up by practical action on excessive immigration. Otherwise any act of a “lack of cohesion” by an individual in our neighbourhoods can be attributed with some justification to a politician of little account.

  21. JoosB
    October 7, 2015

    Let’s not forget 90% of all immigrants settle in England or that the mass flooding of England’s borders was deliberately started by a Scots dominated UK Parliament and has carried on under another anti-English UK Parliament, first a coalition and now a Tory one, all against England’s will and with England being denied a voice or any democratic means to object.

    I see this morning’s Tory conference will start with a speech by the Secretary of State for Wales, followed by the Secretary of State for NI and then the Secretary of State for Scotland. Needless to say, there will be no-one making a speech for England. No doubt, as usual, England won’t even get a mention. As a lifelong Tory John, your party makes me sick. Stephen Crabb at this very moment is attacking Welsh Labour for taking Wales for granted. The irony of the Tories doing the very same thing to England is totally lost on them. Let’s just hope at the end of this administration under Cameron, the English will finally wake up and stop voting for a party that treats them with as much contempt as Labour and the Lib Dums.

  22. agricola
    October 7, 2015

    She was well on the way to espousing UKIP’s policy on immigration. She is an intelligent woman, well versed in the practicality of the situation. What she said yesterday was the result of logical reasoning while avoiding a clash with the apparent stance of her leader. He in the meantime seemingly wafts about waiting for something to happen within the EU that makes a rational approach to run away immigration possible.

    I look forward to his speech today, it will need to be of substance which for CMD is alien territory.

    1. agricola
      October 7, 2015

      Well now we have it. Derisory on one Jeremy Corbyn, and quite rightly so , but remember JC has done nothing apart from consigning Labour to the backwoods for a while. When they awake they might find much of their old territory occupied. CMD was kicking a dead corpse.

      Very good on aspirational concerns in the UK and not short of ideas on how to re-balance the country in terms of equality of opportunity.

      Very thin on the European question. He says he is not interested in ever closer union within the EU which is great, but nothing about reversing the EU takeover of the UK to date, Nothing about our sovereignty. Nothing about what he really, really wants our future relationship with the EU to be. He will I predict let events in Europe drive him rather than the reverse.

      In dealing with terrorism and it’s frequent birthplace in the madrassas of the UK, underage marriage, and FGM he could find himself up against the ECHR. On past performance he will fail to deport the perpetrators.

      When the rhetorical dust has settled we will still have the mass immigration and it’s distortion of the labour and wages market. It’s ever increasing burden on education, the NHS, and social services. We will still be paying the EU £12 Billion PA., and their legal edicts will still be falling like a suffocating chlorine cloud upon the very British way of life he aspires to support.

  23. DaveM
    October 7, 2015

    The Home Sec, and in fact parts of Boris’s speech, said what we all think and want to hear. But the fact remains the EU will dictate on immigration.

    At least no-one has told us that our country is going to change beyond recognition. Poor old Germany.

  24. Iain Gill
    October 7, 2015

    Correct in everything you say John and thanks for saying this.
    But Ms May and Cameron need to take real action not just talk tough. The business community need to be told they cannot rely on getting cheap workers subcontracted from the outsourcers, who the outsourcers have brought into the country on uncapped intra company transfer visas. That whole outsourcing model of using cheap foreign staff from very low cost base countries has got to stop. And any work visa holders need to be paying at least as much tax as locals, so no more first year free of national insurance, no extra money tax free as supposed “expenses” that a Brit working away from home would not be able to claim. We need to push for reciprocity, so if it should be no easier for a foreign national to get a visa here than it would be for a Brit to get an equivalent visa to their home country, they should get no more healthcare or schooling for their kids than a British family would get in their home country – otherwise they need to be paying privately and demonstrate they have the funds before they get the visa.
    We need to return the incentive to business to hire, train and retain British staff with the skills they need, rather than training cheap workers from low cost economies up and bringing them in often via outsourcers.
    We need to apply the resident skills test to intra company transfer visas. So any large company should be allowed no more than say 12 staff, and certainly a small minority, in this country on intra company transfer unless those extra staff can be proven to have skills not available locally. We should not tolerate companies with multi-hundred or thousand workforces in this country of which the majority are i) here on intra company transfer visas ii) from lower cost base economies iii) subcontracted on into other companies for less than it costs to hire a Brit iv) here in skills not in clear overwhelming shortage.
    The criteria for determining whether a given skill is in short supply need tightening up too for other visa categories. Often the Brits with those skills are around working close by in other European countries, or “retired” early, and could be easily tempted back with a decent financial offer. The test should not be whether there are the people prepared to do it for the money a foreign work visa holder will do it, but rather whether there are Brits able to do it at all. And so on. The way the information technology workforce here has been decimated by lax and poor application of the rules is outrageous, this should not be allowed to continue. Experienced British practioners should be consulted not just businesses with their own biased views.
    Moving onto spouse visas. If you come in as the spouse of a student or work visa holder you should not get the right to work.
    Moving onto indefinite leave to remain visas, these should absolutely be completely and utterly stopped for people who only “time served” here as a work visa holder or family member of same. If they have no other claim to the visa they should be going home at the end of their work visa. And this includes people “already on the path to residency” as the officials call it, I don’t care how long they have been here on work visas expected to get indefinite leave stop them staying.
    On student visas one of the biggest scams is failing a module on purpose. The number of people taking 5 years to complete a one years masters course is ridiculous. They fail a module on purpose to get invited back to do a resit, as the cheapest way to get a student visa extension. Maybe one year or two for people who were genuinely ill during the exams or whatever, but not an ongoing never ending student career by repeatedly failing the same course. I would go further and stop the students right to work, I don’t see why they should be here if they cannot fund their course and living expenses and are relying on working cheaply in the local economy. Especially in towns where there is already a mass of unemployed Brits able to do the typical student jobs.
    And yes students should be paying a deposit which they only get back if they go home at the end. (Unless they meet and marry a Brit while they are here or other exception).
    Remove the right of commonwealth citizens without indefinite leave to remain here from being able to vote in our elections. There is no reason their citizens here on student or work visas should get the vote.
    If and when there is any real action on any of this maybe we will believe the rhetoric.

  25. Antisthenes
    October 7, 2015

    If Teresa May is ever elected leader of the Conservative party I will be appalled she does not inspire me with her competence or her oratory.

    To be fair to her she cannot control immigration alone as she is up against too many obstacles that she has no control over; the EU, the current welfare system that encourages immigrants, the human rights acts and the left who play on the emotions and not the common sense of the public.

    Give her a level playing field by changing the environment she has to work with of course the loony left cannot be curbed but they can be circumvented and then even she has a chance of success.

  26. Martyn G
    October 7, 2015

    She is right but how to properly reduce and manage immigration is becoming close to impossible, given the numbers involved and especially the potential for those being inducted into Germany deciding to move elsewhere and probably to the UK.
    Why is the BBC and mainstream UK press not reporting (as does Der Speigel via this link the serious violent incidents occurring across Germany? There is little good news in the article, because what predominates are statements concerning violence between races and religions – especially regarding the appalling treatment of women, who some peoples consider being beneath respect and open to the sort of abuse that in this country would be considered a serious crime.
    There are many such articles with little good news in them such as the on-line source ‘The German Local’ which make frightening reading – the rise of right wing and organisations for example. We are no doubt going to see similar tensions here, as and when who knows how many of those let into Germany turn up in the UK, about which we can do absolutely nothing. This has got nothing to do with economics, it is all about what to do with them when they arrive – housing, health, infrastructure and so on and how to prevent ghettos springing up as they band together by race and religion for safety. A disastrous situation right across the EU about which none can tell how it will all end.

    1. Maureen Turner
      October 7, 2015

      Reply to Martyn G. You are absolutely correct in your forward thinking re the “invited” immigration into Germany. Already there is discontent so what happens next year when it is estimated that a further 1.5 million (coming from where no one knows) arrive in Europe onward bound for Germany. It’s pretty safe to assume that many will see their first destination as merely a staging post from where to fan out to other affluent countries in Europe.

      A meeting was held in Brussels today to discuss the migrant crisis with the decision being made that all EU countries must take their share of those fleeing persecution.
      I’m beginning to wonder if the good lady’s compassionate invitation to 800,000 was always intended to bring about this result. Come to think of it where does the disastrous euro sit in all of this – destabilisation?

      1. Martyn G
        October 8, 2015

        Maureen, at risk of appearing paranoid I suspect that her decision, although perhaps well meant, in fact fits very nicely into the EU ever-closer drive to more Europe, whereby nations become a polyglot mixture of races and religions and lose any sense of having a national identity. That is actually what the EU is all about and it follows that allowing millions of immigrants from all around the world – let alone Syria – precisely fits that purpose.
        As for the Euro, it is difficult to conceive at the moment how it can survive without all those in it hand over control their financial affairs, lock stock and barrel to the EU – like Greece, for example. I suspect that within the next 3 years the Euro will either collapse or, more likely, will be run by a central EU bank, a lender of last resort to control the financial affairs of all those in it, as does the UK and the USA. Either way, allowing millions of immigrants into Europe helps the EU in its drive to ever-closer ‘more and more EU’.

  27. Iain Gill
    October 7, 2015

    Cameron housing announcement has gone down like a lead ballon in my family. Why oh why does he think under 40’s should get special treatment? Why repeat the mistake of government manipulating things to determine who gets heavily subsidised housing and who does not. Needy people should be getting money to spend in the market, and the market should be sorting out supply and demand. Planning needs relaxing and immigration needs controlling, and stop hyping house prices with one silly scheme after another. Prices need to rebalance downwards too.
    The over 40’s with young children forced to move repeatedly for work and use private rented accommodation will be massively cheesed off to be once more (indirectly) subsiding another sector of the workforce most of whom need the help less than they do. And so on.

    Reply The problem is we have a hugely distorted market at the moment which is doing damage to home seekers and to taxpayers alike. Many people rely on Housing Benefit and private rent. Many would like to buy, so why not find a way to help them to reduce the numbers in rented accommodation enjoying various types of state financial support through Housing Associations, Councils and benefits.

    1. Iain Gill
      October 7, 2015

      “why not” because the government should only be redistributing money, if at all, from the richer to the poorer, and not from the poorer to the richer.

      fact is large numbers are in private rented accommodation, and will continue to be so, and fixing the out of control abuse from many landlords is surely good politics with this many voters worried?

      fact is we need workforce mobility, and we need to fix all the things in the housing market, social, private rented and mortgaged which make it harder to move than it should be.

      fact is there are plenty of people over 40 who have been saving for years to buy a house.

      fact is massive subsidy given by lottery or similar to social tenants, help to buy crowd, right to buy, and now this housing subsidised by other house prices on the development is not helping the most needy. Its not even increasing home ownership as much of these properties end up as private rented anyways.

      Its a confused overly complicated set of measures which lets the country down once again. Take all the state manipulation away, stop hyping prices, and just help the most needy. Enforce decent standards against landlords. The people left to their own devices will fix things.

    2. Iain Gill
      October 7, 2015

      Giving a 90 K discount to the chosen few, in London, who manage to get to the front of the queue in London is bound to lead to the usual state rationing problems. For one corruption will creep in where those with connections will get favoured access. Folk able to afford these properties will not be those who would qualify for state financial help, and mostly they currently live further out and commute in. So I just don’t get it as a solution to anything. Same but not quite as extreme outside London. If you are going to throw 90 K discounts around why carnt I have it? that’s what everyone will be asking…

  28. Mark
    October 7, 2015

    It seems that May has one important victory against the EU:

    If we are able to insist that EU migrants must be properly exercising their treaty rights then perhaps we wouldn’t have 63,000 coming here to reside for a year and more “looking for work”, as the immigration statistics report.

    Now she needs a victory over the student lobby who want to hide the truth that students are the largest immigration back door into Britain, accounting for half of net immigration as they stay on after their courses, many of them illegally.

  29. Martin
    October 7, 2015

    I thought Mrs May was absurd yesterday when interviewed by Mr Neill on the BBC.

    She just ducked and weaved. Perhaps she thought she was facing the Australian pace bowlers. On the subject of cricket perhaps you should ask her what she plans to do about spin bowlers for England.

    Mrs May does not have a good record on controlling non-EU immigration but survives all the same.

  30. Richard Cooke
    October 7, 2015

    I wouldn’t trust anything that Mrs May says. I believe that she will say anything that she thinks will get her into the top job. If Conservatives want to support a leader with the good of England and the UK in mind then they should support you or Boris.

    Reply Boris is unable to make up his mind about whether to stay or leave the EU

    1. Mark B
      October 7, 2015

      Reply to reply

      I think your find that, Alexander is very pro-EU – in my opinion.


      1. forthurst
        October 7, 2015

        Boris has only got one policy, that of him sitting in no 10.

    2. Richard Cooke
      October 7, 2015

      Your qualities are well known here. But another alternative would be Iain Duncan Smith, a fellow eurosceptic and strong proponent of the British sense of fair play. Born in Edinburgh the son of a decorated World War II Royal Air Force flying ace and a descendant of the admiral who defeated the Dutch Navy at the Battle of Camperdown in 1797 he would be a strong choice for Conservative leader. Even though a Catholic, he is probably a more loyal supporter of Britain than most. In Sept 2001, Duncan Smith won the Conservative Party leadership election, receiving the public support of Margaret Thatcher. In the 2002 and 2003 local elections, the only elections in which Duncan Smith led the party, the Conservatives gained 238 and 568 extra seats on local councils, respectively. Both of you have the makings of a good Prime Minister.

    3. Brian Tomkinson
      October 7, 2015

      Reply to reply,
      That can be said about the majority in your party but eventually they will follow their leader and put party before country.

  31. Iain Gill
    October 7, 2015

    Camerons speech:
    On equality he nearly got there but missed out the harsh discrimination against working class accents, and failed to move equality on to helping those discriminated against in this way. If you want to end discrimination then fix this.
    On segregation he nearly got there but of course our state schools are still segregating children by religion into different schools, and this is a massive problem he should be tackling head on.
    Housing don’t think he gets it at all. More blooming state manipulation when what we need is the state manipulation rolling back.
    “Big society” has gone at last I see.
    No critique of the poor service most of us get from the NHS.
    He needs to look at how the likes of Bradford, Luton, Slough, and so on are policed. All the FGM, forced marriage, extremism, and so on rhetoric means nothing when the front line officers in these areas are under massive pressure to turn a blind eye in all sorts of ways including not using stop and search as much as they know is needed. And the layer of political senior officers refusing to tell power (Ms May) the truth on this needs fixing.
    Such a shame he could have done so much better so very easily.

  32. fedupsoutherner
    October 7, 2015

    Mrs May is playing to the crowds in the hope she impresses us for the next leadership election. No hope. She has achieved nothing in the time she has had and in fact, immigration figures are up, not down. All the new housing promises by DC today will disappear fast with the growing numbers of immigrants and as usual the British people will be left on the scrapheap managing to live in B&B while they see those from outside being offered housing and all the other benefits to go with it.

    I am sick of the BBC and their biased ways they get around to educating the public about how good it will be to stay in the EU. When someone comes on and says we should be taking more immigrants why don’t the interviewers actually ask the question that we are all asking???? Where the hell are all these people going to live, work and how is the NHS going to cope with the extra demand when it is struggling now. Education is the same too. Where are all the school places going to come from? Too easy for the BBC to tell us the EU is good for us when they don’t point out the obvious.

    Perhaps when Mrs May takes some ACTION I might start to listen but until then I prefer to listen to Farage who tells it as it really is.

    October 7, 2015

    A multi-ethnic society and a multi-cultural society are two different things. No-one in the UK apart from the Scots have voted for either.

    Multi-ethnic societies have in some cases worked: Normans, Saxons and Vikings in the UK had their cultures diluted by natural means and became multi-ethnic in that they were ever of of a different ethnicity at all.
    Multi-cultural societies …well the Tory Party Conference, featuring Mrs. May’s speech, and now, Mr Cameron’s speech, although the latter lauded “multiculturalism ” ,spent 25% of his speech dealing with problems arising from it. Ridiculous. A doomed political philosophy. Deader than Latin.

  34. DaveM
    October 7, 2015

    I’m not saying I believe everything I read, but there is rarely smoke without fire.

    I find it very hard to credit the fact that the BBC has not even mentioned in passing that there are huge anti-immigration demos going on in Germany, as well as regular arson attacks and widespread allegations of rape and other abuses in so-called refugee asylum centres all over Europe.

    Given the fact that most people get this kind of news from social media these days, and everyone seems to know about it, surely these omissions are just further discrediting the state-owned, publicly-funded broadcaster?

  35. Peter Stroud
    October 7, 2015

    I’m afraid the Home Office has always been a pretty backward government department. Though some sections (example – counter terrorism) have maintained a pretty high level of competence. Perhaps it needs to be split up and counter terrorism and Intelligence hived off to the MoD. Then, the Home Secretary would have more time to deal with immigration, passports, the police, visas, and the like.

  36. yosarion
    October 7, 2015

    Never understood how your party could ever promote a Women who called her own Party “The Nasty Party” giving the government of the day The BBC and any other left wing Institution ammunition to shut your Politics up for over a Decade.

  37. paul
    October 7, 2015

    If you read in between the lines, what they mean is mentally ill and disabled people coming in from Syria for treatment and housing as refuges, they will be able to say we spending a lot of on money on helping the mentally ill which we promised. Home ownership at 60% lowest since the eighty, so sell local housing to bring it up.
    Everything they do is message figures for the next election in 2020 but there will be very little help for you. Six pension funds for local council which means six regions for England for the eu in or out and all pension money to be spent on infrastructure. The local council are set to lose well over 1 billion pounds a year for the next five year and cutting all services to the bone locally and nationally.
    They are selling everything that is not nail down and putting it in to the never ending black hole as the economy slowdown over the next six months. I can see migration going up next year to battle the slowdown.

    They will very lucky not to go the way that other parties have gone that’s down the pan not a electable.

  38. paul
    October 7, 2015

    As quango bosses pay rises to 1 million pound a year and not to mention their pension and quango being set up left and right, you can be assured that none of their pension money or the government employees pension money will be going into bottomless pit infrastructure.

  39. Chris
    October 7, 2015

    The electorate will make up their own minds about Theresa May’s apparent conversion on the subject of mass immigration. However, the real debate about immigration and future action and legislation takes place in another Parliament. Merkel and Hollande have been rightly condemned by Farage today about the role of male economic migrants, not refugees in the current wave of mass immigration, while Merkel and Hollande urge more Europe and more European integration. This is where the future direction of the EU can be seen and it is very serious indeed for the UK. Yet Cameron could hardly talk about the EU and he left it to May to adopt some of Nigel’s soundbites. As others have commented, the similarities with Farage’s speeches are uncanny. Is she called a racist and smeared? How do other Conservative MPs view her remarks, which are basically Farage’s, now that they are uttered by a Conservative Minister? Have they suddenly gained respectability? This apparent hypocrisy of so many Conservative MPs disgusts me.

  40. Chris
    October 7, 2015

    Further to my comment on Merkel and Hollande urging more Europe today in the European Parliament, it is worth noting Martin Schulz’s clear statements about where the EU is heading, “a common state”, and what our commitment would mean if we stayed:

    “…He admitted that it was “logical” for Britain to leave the European Union if it didn’t want to be a part of a “common” state: “We’ve been going through this for years. If we don’t want to strengthen Europe, then there’s only one road and I heard what Mr Farage said that the only road is for those who are not convinced of Europe is to leave Europe.

    “There is no other way. It’s a horrible path, but it’s a logical path. Leave Europe, leave Schengen and leave democracy. If you can because do you really want to participate in a common state, that’s the question.” Source Breitbart London

    1. The Active Citizen
      October 9, 2015

      Hi Chris, in fact Breitbart got that quote which you cited wrong. I watched Hollande and Merkel on the EU’s European Parliament TV site and it was France’s President Hollande, not EP President Schultz, who said the key part at the end.

      Highly significant!

      After H&M’s speeches there were speeches from the leaders of the various political groupings including Farage. Following these, and in his response, President Hollande visibly lost his temper and said:

      “If we don’t want to strengthen Europe, then there’s only one road and I heard what Mr Farage said that the only road is for those who are not convinced of Europe is to leave Europe.

      “There is no other way. It’s a horrible path, but it’s a logical path. Leave Europe, leave Schengen and leave democracy, if you can. Because do you really want to participate in a common state, that’s the question.”

      I would have thought that JR and all posting on here would wholeheartedly answer “NO” to M. Hollande’s final question “do you really want to participate in a common state”!

      Needless to say the BBC’s report on this important occasion – the first time in 26 years that the German and French Presidents have addressed the EU Parliament jointly – did not mention the crucial rant at the end from an irate Hollande.

  41. Anonymous
    October 7, 2015

    The rhetoric was uncharacteristically provocative. Was this to generate a media backlash and then say “See. These ideas are unpopular” or to show the issue is so toxic as to be unmanageable.

    Look. Your party has had this mandate for over five years and has it for another four years.

    Just get on and DO IT.

    Otherwise you can build as many houses as you like, create as many jobs as you can – none of it will make a blind bit of difference and all your efforts will be wasted as the Tories become forever associated with the average person’s experience of social and economic decline.

    The End could well be happening under a Tory Government.

    What are the CBI griping about ? Specialists being kept out of Britain ? If true then has the policy of tightening down on immigration been sabotaged ? (most of us would be happy with a points based system.

    1. APL
      October 11, 2015

      Anon: “CBI griping about ? Specialists being kept out of Britain ?”

      If true, this is an indictment of the British state run education system.

  42. paul
    October 7, 2015

    The con party also want to spend hundreds of millions a year on all imported problems

  43. Jon
    October 7, 2015

    I work not far from Liverpool St Station where there are mainline trains arriving from the South coast. Daily I see Africans who are clearly new arrivals.

    There used to be a day when we could could take how ever many refugees for the good of humanity, gone now because we take so many economic migrants.

    The people I see are not refugees, single youngish males and able with no luggage just a mobile phone. etc ed I don’t know what that is growing here, they all vanish but have a purpose of where they are going. They go to a supermarket opposite the Station to get the cheapest food around, after travelling a 1000 miles they know where to go and vanish till the nest day when a new lost arrives throughout the day.

    I have no problem in my taxes being used to give refuge for those persecuted. There seems to be other stuff going on here and think we will pay the price at some point.

    1. Jon
      October 7, 2015

      Why I think something is afoot with the black market is because I don’t see this type standing with a fast food plackard all day, they aren’t the ones sleeping rough. I don’t see them in all these years being employed anywhere but they come every day and disappear.

  44. A different Simon
    October 8, 2015

    It is not just about numbers .

    The better quality immigrants are going to Australia and Canada .

    The UK is getting the dregs .

    Never mind the quality , feel the width .

  45. Mitchel
    October 8, 2015

    It is very interesting to learn over the past couple of days that despite all the attention falling on Russia,it was actually Iran that went to the Russians with the initial plan to take on the various Sunni militant groups.Not so long ago people were talking of Turkey reviving the Ottoman Empire in the region (at least in terms of influence)but it is looking much more likely that Iran will be reviving the Persian Empire with Turkey hemmed in -and heavily dependent on Russian oil and gas.

  46. yosarion
    October 8, 2015

    John not happy with the NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg says he is concerned about Russia’s, use of cruise missiles as well as air strikes, and that NATO is ready to defend all allies.
    I think its time to Clarify Immediately that he means all NATO allies, and not just any group or Groupings fighting a proxy war weather it be in Syria or the Ukraine.

Comments are closed.