My intervention during the debate on the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill, 19 October 2020

Sir John Redwood MP (Wokingham) (Con): Does the Minister accept that paying people from the local labour force better, and paying for their training, is a much cheaper solution than building lots of houses to invite migrants in, and a much more popular one?

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr Kevin Foster): My right hon. Friend points out that in a time when we have large numbers of people affected by the current economic situation, we need to focus on our own UK-based workforce when it comes to filling needs.

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


  1. a-tracy
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:33 am | Permalink

    We read about free school meals and the unemployed that were on Universal Credit before lockdown got an extra £1000 even though their costs remained the same as before lockdown, then they got extra top up for food because they couldn’t feed their children we were told by Marcus Rashford – This scheme was further extended to include a second grant covering June, July and August … This could involve claiming Universal Credit from the DWP and Council Tax … The basic amount of WTC was increased by £20 a week from 6 April 2020. Has there been a third increase from September?

    If so why do the government feel it is fair for low waged workers to be asked to survive on just 80% of their normal pay if it falls below Universal Credit is it topped up? What about women that have lost jobs and income but they’ve been told they don’t get UC because their husband works, they are taxed as an individual, not a couple so why aren’t they entitled to these same UC top-ups if they’re ineligible for a furlough for any reason – they may have children, the same bills, as usual, to payout based on their double earning households? Is it just the middle classes that will have to take the hit? We can find the money for thousands of asylum seekers, I see the charities saying in one breath they aren’t jumping queues yet in the next breath they want better housing and benefits for them – what is that if not jumping queues?

  2. Lynn Atkinson
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    I rather wish you were giving the answers! Great questions though. Thank you.

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

      The classic vicious circle has to be the exception to the immigration laws made made for bricklayers due to the shortage of them to come in and build their own houses.

  3. Lifelogic
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:45 am | Permalink

    Indeed. Get people back to work and incentivise companies with tax breaks to take them on and train them. Cut the red tape, go for easly hire and fire (for at least the first 50 years of employment), cut and simplify taxes and go for cheap energy. It is really very simple get rid of the deterrents to employment, Also get rid of the deterring to letting and building homes so as to increase the supply.

    Cull soft loans for duff degrees (75% or so & anyone with less than ABB at A level), HS2 and fire about 50% of civil servants who do little of value to pay for it all.

    All simple, obvious and would clearly work.

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:02 pm | Permalink

      Yes, we’re obsessive about not throwing taxpayer money away on business loans, when student loans are the real money going south.

    • Ed M
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 10:42 pm | Permalink

      This is a HUGE problem. And influences our society and economy far more than some people might realise. And is something we should be debating far more – in the universities, in education in general, in the arts, media, and so on.

      Again, EQUAL opportunities to women. They should be free to do what they want. But that they are also need to be aware of the harsh reality for so many women (and how this affects men, children and society in general) of going to university, going into a career, whilst also want to fall in love, get married, have babies and bring up a family with a father (and extended family).

  4. glen cullen
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:56 am | Permalink

    …and yet the boat people keep crossing the channel, in increasing numbers

    • NickC
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

      That’s because they want to hear the natives singing pop tunes at them (as well as the topped up credit cards, and free housing, schooling, nhs, etc).

    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

      They will continue to come in larger and larger numbers (and many will die in the process) until it is made very clear that they will never be allowed to stay. There is however no political will for this. Anyway the courts and supreme court would doubtless prevent this anyway.

      • beresford
        Posted October 20, 2020 at 10:51 pm | Permalink

        Little evidence that many are dieing in the process. Meanwhile the so-called Channel Commander Dan O’Mahoney recently said that he believed the majority of the dinghy people had a justifiable claim to asylum. Not even the UN has such an extreme view as this. They are being allowed in because our ‘elite’ want them, and at some time in the future when he thinks he can get away with it BoZo will propose they be given amnesty.

        • Michelle
          Posted October 21, 2020 at 11:52 pm | Permalink

          I wonder if we could trouble the MP’s to ever think about our justifiable claims to our homeland. I have a feeling not only the channel commander has the view of their justifiable cause. Probably why he has the job, very much in line with the political thought process going on.

  5. The Prangwizard
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    A dodge by Foster, not an answer at all. Why do we have to put up with that?

    • Mark B
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 2:06 am | Permalink

      He just made a statement of the obvious and clearly, as you point out, did not answer the question.

      But it shows that the government is clearly embarrassed by this and continued pressure needs to be applied.

  6. Alan Jutson
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    The simple questions are always the best.

    Shame the answer was not up to it.

    It has nothing to do with ” the current economic situation” it would be a sensible policy full stop, no matter what the situation is at any one time.

    • Fedupsoutherner
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 6:02 pm | Permalink


    • michelle
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 11:57 pm | Permalink

      Absolutely. Sadly though the question was only asked on the money element. Would it have been asked in times of less economic uncertainty?

  7. Ian Ross
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    Well said Sir.

  8. zorro
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 11:15 am | Permalink

    So what are Mr Foster’s plans?


    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

      Obfuscation I assume and hot air and no action.

  9. Ian Wragg
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 11:21 am | Permalink

    Then why are companies allowed to advertise abroad before advertising in this country.

    • michelle
      Posted October 22, 2020 at 12:01 am | Permalink

      Removal of the Resident Labour Market Test or First Chance Rule.
      Has it been removed already?
      Migration Watch say it’s in the shiny new points system. Can you believe it not even Labour pulled that stroke on us!!

      Conservatives for 10 yrs and still thousands turned away from studying medicine at Universities.

  10. DavidJ
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    Should be obvious but government has its collective eyes closed to the damage done by effectively inviting many whose values are wholly incompatible with our own and their intent is to overwhelm our country.

    We action to repatriate those alien to our British values and culture, not allow more of them in.

  11. beresford
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    A very subtle question, along the lines of ‘Have you stopped beating your wife?’. The Government representative didn’t dispute that their policy is to build houses for migrants.

  12. Martin in Cardiff
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

    John’s question presupposes that the locals are in all cases a) willing and b) qualified to do the work that immigrants currently do.

    In the case of, say agricultural labour, a) generally does not apply.

    As for engineering, medicine, science and other spheres, b) often does not.

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

      As a father of two I can take home £36K per year on universal credit (as can any European immigrant at present).

      I am qualified and able to perform agricultural work at that rate. I just can’t leave my current job to get on Universal Credit at the high rates it pays as that would disqualify me.

      There is no reason for anyone with a family who can get Universal Credit not to be working in a full time minimum wage job.

    • NickC
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

      Martin, And how do you “know” this? Been listening to Vince Cable or the BBC have you?

      • Roy Grainger
        Posted October 20, 2020 at 5:45 pm | Permalink

        Martin knows about many things – including how we should be basing our Covid policy on what Senegal does.

    • forthurst
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

      Agriculture began in 1973? Before then we were hunter-gatherers presumably?

    • Original Richard
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 7:18 pm | Permalink

      The corporates and many businesses, and even governments in the case of the NHS, have used immigrants for cheap labour and to avoid the expense of training young UK people.

      These cheap jobs have been subsidised by the UK taxpayer as the true costs of such immigration – such as the costs of building additional housing, schooling, healthcare/hospitals, and infrastructure (roads, water, sewage, energy etc.) are never paid by the employer and the average tax paid by the immigrants never covers these costs.

      • beresford
        Posted October 20, 2020 at 10:44 pm | Permalink

        Not to mention those whose salary has to be topped up with benefits, so British people are paying to be undercut.

      • michelle
        Posted October 22, 2020 at 12:12 am | Permalink

        Well said.

    • michelle
      Posted October 22, 2020 at 12:08 am | Permalink

      Farmers like many others have used the excuse of people not wanting to work in order to bring in immigrant labour force. We always did the jobs before. They’ve spun that as well regarding the call for people to help on farms in lock down. Thousands of people it seems were never even contacted after applying.

      As for not being qualified for work, well lots of strands to that too. For one successive governments Labour and Conservatives have destroyed education/training particularly in health sector turning students away.
      With the ability of companies to bring in cheaper labour and even more so under the new points system, lower salary/qualification this excuse of lazy British workers or too thick to do the jobs will be dusted down and used again.

  13. Gail Anne Cawthorne
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

    WHY oh why was Sir John Redwood never made Prime Minister. Probably he wouldn’t tow the globalists diktat line.

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

      Never mind. He has a university building named after him here.

      • Fred H
        Posted October 20, 2020 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

        The trees are no pushover either!

        • matthu
          Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:56 pm | Permalink

          + +

          (I presume you mean they couldn’t easily be taken down by Woke protestors!)

  14. Caterpillar
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

    The answer needs an

    … and so …

  15. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 12:58 pm | Permalink


    We should welcome those who wish to come to our shores and contribute but if they need subsidising in any way then they shouldn’t be here.

    Subsidising immigrants puts up taxes and the cost of living for those already here.

    • forthurst
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 4:50 pm | Permalink


      • Original Richard
        Posted October 20, 2020 at 7:10 pm | Permalink

        Because the extra costs of building additional housing, schooling, healthcare/hospitals, and infrastructure (roads, water, sewage, energy etc.) is never taken into account – all expensive costs in a country that is already one of the most densely populated in Europe/the World.

        This is before taking into account items such as working credit and the loss of wealth in the country by immigrants sending money back home.

        And we’re supposed to be on a path to reducing our CO2 output.

        It’s time GDP/capita was published and not just GDP.

        • hefner
          Posted October 22, 2020 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

          There are multiple sources giving GDP, GDP per capita, GDP per capita ppp (at purchasing power parity): you can start your search looking at:

          I particularly like ‘GDP – per capita (PPP)’ that presents in decreasing order the results of the so-called CIA Factbook (available in tabular form in an alphabetical list of countries at )

          Try to locate the UK in the table, one might be surprised. And next time someone tells that life in the UK is so sweet, ask why the country is so low in those tables. And that is for the average (median) UK person. One would have, next, to consider the actual repartition of wealth/income within the UK.

          Then finally consider whether some politicians are not, at the very least, taking you for ‘un veau’ (according to the famous Charles de Gaulle’s quote – but that was directed to the French).

      • Caterpillar
        Posted October 20, 2020 at 7:17 pm | Permalink

        If the marginal GDP due to a new immigrant is less than the existing GDP per capita, then this decreases GDP per capita.

        • matthu
          Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:51 pm | Permalink

          As long as you ignore all of the capital costs cited above by Original Richard (would that be Richard I?)

        • Sea_Warrior
          Posted October 21, 2020 at 5:50 am | Permalink

          Oh, if only there was some brave MP willing to put the Chancellor on the spot about ‘GDP/capita’ at Departmental Questions. Does one exist, I wonder?

    • Sharon
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:45 pm | Permalink

      My daughter lives in Australia on a spousal visa. Her husband has to support her if she should not be in work (she is) as a condition of her visa. We should do that here.

      And a friend of theirs nearly had to return home when he lost his job, but managed to secure another during the month he was given to leave by. If people arrive knowing the condition of their visa… what’s the problem?

      Here, any old person turning up on our shores is given 4* treatment, and ahead of our own people. No logic here at all!

    • Mark B
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 2:08 am | Permalink


    • Sea_Warrior
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 5:48 am | Permalink

      None of them are coming here to ‘contribute’. They come to advance their own personal wealth and/or general situation. I would favour an economic test being applied to all LEGAL immigrants: are they, after two years, a net contributor to the public purse. That calculation to include the cost of educating their children. If the answer is ‘no’, then they would be ordered to leave.

      • michelle
        Posted October 22, 2020 at 12:24 am | Permalink

        How refreshing to see someone else tired of the ‘come her to contribute’ what utter nonsense.
        I would favour a system used in many other countries which is work permit that is reviewed and renewed in line with their contract.
        We seem to hand out permanent residence and British nationality like sweets.

  16. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    My wife’s settlement visa had “no recourse to public funds” stamped on it.

    We had to pay our own way and rightly so.

  17. Everhopeful
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

    That would be a great idea.
    Let’s hope.
    I have my doubts..but….pigs might fly I guess.
    There are usually huge caveats with these schemes.
    I mean like that idea of training people to become plumbers etc. The big snag …no one with “A” levels or above can participate.
    What about those with totally useless degrees?

  18. Diane
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

    Unless there is going to be a cap on work permits to ensure UK workers & those who are already here are given a fair chance particularly during and after this crisis then things are not going to improve. So far we have 4 million applications from EU citizens to the UK’s Settlement Scheme, many having been granted settled status. We have many, many thousands of non EU citizens arriving legally and constantly and so presumably & hopefully, many are here to work. We have many thousands of illegally arrived persons & presumably most will stay & eventually will have the status to work. My understanding is that the government rule / requirement will be that jobs are advertised abroad rather than advertising here first in the UK. We are told that many trades & professions are to be open to global recruitment & scores of occupations will face greater competition from overseas. Doesn’t seem to be much in the way of levelling up. We need to get Back to Basics in this and so much more.

  19. Bryan Harris
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 3:49 pm | Permalink

    Excellent point

    Will it be acted upon?

  20. Iain Gill
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 5:37 pm | Permalink


    forget it, just give up.

    after years of Cameron/May lazy government we now have the current government actively destroying the country.

    this cannot go on. sure Labour are the worst opposition in history, but that does not mean the country deserves such poor politicians in power.

    just put your feet up and retire and watch as the country catches fire around you.

    nobody I know supports any government policies at all. its that bad.

    forget it.

    • Fred H
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:01 pm | Permalink

      I too know lots of friends/ex-colleagues, and family members who said they voted in the GE to stop Labour. Now that their ex-elected leader appears a busted flush, you might expect to see a surge back to Labour. Not a bit of it – everybody is claiming ‘Tory Party – never again’.

    • Mark B
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 2:14 am | Permalink

      Alas we have got what we deserved. The EU took most of the powers and responsibility for governing the nation and we are left with utter dross. This dross, like May, can easily get away with it until the spotlight, like a GE 😉 gets shined upon them, and then we realise how truly bad some of them are. Leaving the EU and making them do their job will help sort the wheat from the chaff. But it will take time.

    • michelle
      Posted October 22, 2020 at 12:29 am | Permalink

      Well in there lies hope in a strange sort of way. Only once a significant number of people begin to see they’ve been lied to yet again will there ever be any change.

  21. Roy Grainger
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 5:47 pm | Permalink

    Let’s have some evidence-based policy making. Ask the illegals crossing the channel what exactly it is they hate about the EU in general and France in particular that makes them risk their lives to come to UK. Then implement those policies to make UK equally unattractive. I’m sure Andy would approve of us closely aligning with the EU in this way.

    • matthu
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

      What! We’d all have to speak French – and drink cheap red wine – and eat crusty white bread that goes stale after 2 hours?

      • Barry
        Posted October 21, 2020 at 7:46 am | Permalink

        At least it’s worth eating for two hours.

        • Fred H
          Posted October 21, 2020 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

          really? – easily pleased aren’t you? Not exactly a foodie!

  22. Lifelogic
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

    Because he tells the truth and get things consistently right. In politics (unlike business and betting) endless lying and going along with fashionable, moronic. group think lunacy seems to be the best way to progress to high office.

  23. Simeon
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 6:36 pm | Permalink

    Sir John,

    It has been reported that Burnham and his Manchester contingent – Tories amongst them – having informed Jenrick that they could accept £65m in aid as a bare minimum, were offered £60m. If this is accurate, and I think we can assume so, can you defend the government’s decision to haggle over £5m – in the context a piffling amount?

    This is of course a rhetorical question. You couldn’t possibly defend it. No one could. Having conceded the principle that extra aid should be delivered, and the necessary implications this precedent sets, from a certain perspective the damage is already done to the Exchequer. Why not come to terms with the Manchester repesentatives and bring them with you. To do so would not be a concession borne of weakness, but the result of a process to arrive at the correct figure. It would be far less damaging, both apparently and in reality.

    Regardless of one’s position on the virus, the governments handling of this latest matter is, surprise, surprise, grossly incompetent. At least the government is consistent in its unerring idiocy. I honestly cannot understand how it is possible to retain one’s self-respect whilst associating with these dunces.

    The price of bread in the new year is of course a matter of real importance to ordinary people in this country. However, idle speculation about tomato production in the event of an imagined ‘No deal’ Brexit is hardly the point. Perhaps we might hear your views on how the ordinary people of Manchester will be able to afford tomatoes of any kind when their ability to earn a living is removed by the government. I should hardly need to point out that the people of Manchester are only the first. What about the rest of the country as we follow them into Tier 3? This is what is topical. How about some incisive comment on it?


    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

      This Burnham guy just shot himself in the foot then for the sake of £5m. Theresa May would have struggled to do worse.
      I think we can sense who the better negotiator was here.

      Nest question:
      Who’s going to pay for the people who are locked down when the whole country is locked down.?
      A: the whole country i.e. those people who are locked down.

      This stuff is basic logic and negotiation.

    • matthu
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:48 pm | Permalink

      I put three sources side by side:
      PHE (as quoted in The Independent)
      The Telegraph
      ONS and Oxford CEBM

      It becomes very clear which organ is provoking fear, overblowing the alarm, twisting the statistics instead of comparing them to previous year or a 5-year average.

      Then ask yourself, which organ is the government listening to? And why (that’s a harder one)?

      Clearly it was more important to shut down Manchester and risk damaging people’s physical and mental health than it was to be frank and transparent with the electorate.

      Let’s hope this is because they want to stifle the “off-balance sheet” economy (can I say “grey market”?) and then replace it with better training, better job opportunities, better jobs (and not just volunteering to take part in a challenge-based pharmaceutical trial for £4000!).

      Even then, this is hardly ethical.

    • Mark B
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 2:18 am | Permalink

      They may not know it, but I think they have just lit a slow burning fuse.

      The government should not be giving any money away. Burnham should be making cuts to the Public Sector and raising taxes to help, but he won’t. Much easier to stick a begging bowl under the Tories noses and ask them for more.

      • Simeon
        Posted October 21, 2020 at 8:34 am | Permalink

        Come on now. How much power does Burnham have to cut spending? It is Westminster that has put a rocket under spending. Burnham expressed a preference for remaining in a lower tier rather than going into Tier 3, having recognised the damage done by going into Tier 3, not just economically but socially. I am no fan of Burnham or his politics, but in this instance, his request to have the freedom to travel in the direction of freedom and normality I support completely.

        Of course the spraying around of public funds to address the virus was, and is, stupidity we cannot afford. The correct path is for government to get out of the way and stop wasting yours and my hard-earned money. Burnham was, in an albeit modest way, was advocating exactly this. The begging bowl came out only when ordinary people’s ability to earn money was removed – by the government.

  24. Fred H
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 7:26 pm | Permalink

    Mr Foster needed it to be pointed out?

  25. glen cullen
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 8:18 pm | Permalink

    Its been over six months and our NHS can’t hold back the virus, even with the latest technology and medicine – they did better in 1918 when they treated the condition as a flu

    Maybe its about time we stop all lockdowns and interventions

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 20, 2020 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

      Because they mix up patients with any and every condition in the same place instead of segregating those at risk or with the virus.

    • Mark B
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 2:20 am | Permalink

      This is it. The Spanish Flu was far, far more deadlier and effected only those that were young and in good health. ie The economically active. But people were of a different class back then. Today we are ruled by 24 news and Snowflakes.

      • glen cullen
        Posted October 21, 2020 at 7:49 am | Permalink


  26. Mike Wilson
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 10:40 pm | Permalink

    It is an admittedly small sample, but I have many casual conversations with other dog owners, members of the book club, locals in the pub and I have yet to find anyone (recently) who supports ‘lockdowns’. Everyone agrees the cost is too high and people must have jobs and an income. Let the virus rip is the sentiment amongst most people (most of whom, like me, are either elderly or old). I think the government is pissing in the wind now. No-one is going to take much notice apart from the easy targets like pubs forced to close.

    There seems to be little or no evidence that hospitality venues are spreading the virus – indeed, the precautions taken mean a visit to the pub is now a sterile and dour experience. Yet, despite this, our government thinks it is right to deprive millions of people of their income. This will end in tears.

    • Fred H
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 7:01 am | Permalink

      I think the tears are already flowing from the disadvantaged masses. Which MPs, Civil Servants, Media personalities, sports stars etc have any understanding of the horror of the past months and the outlook for the future?
      Talk of understanding is cheap, but an hour later forgotten it seems to me.

  27. Mike Wilson
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 10:42 pm | Permalink

    Why is the public sector feeling no pain at all? The private sector provides the money for the public sector – yet people in the private sector are furloughed or redundant or simply unable to work – and the public sector carries on merrily taking the full shilling.

    MPs should set an example and immediately move to 66% of their salary and suspend their outrageous pension contributions too.

    • Sea_Warrior
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 11:53 am | Permalink

      Wrapping up someone’s affairs, I’m currently engaging with multiple government and private entities. It is becoming apparent to me that service provision by the state sector is WORSE than that by the private sector. I wonder what percentage of civil servants and local government employees are at their desks today?

  28. BW
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 10:46 pm | Permalink

    Is there any point in discussing immigration. After years of Tory government. With this and previous governments winning on a ticket of reducing immigration. Which I voted for. Perhaps Sir John you can tell us, with the Border Force, the Royal Navy, the Coastguard and an 80 seat majority that Priti Patel appears powerless to stop or return illegals landing at Dover. It has been going on for some time now and I believe people are getting a little frustrated at the lack of positive action.
    We need to get something concrete in force quickly before the French start really shipping them over in even larger numbers as a further punishment for Brexit.

  29. Original Chris
    Posted October 20, 2020 at 10:53 pm | Permalink

    The anger tonight targeted at Johnson for his reported Brexit sellout is huge. If he has sold us out, then he is a disgrace. However, the writing was on the wall when he would not ditch the WA, and he got all Tory MPs to sign up to that. It is not only Johnson that is a disgrace.

  30. Ian
    Posted October 21, 2020 at 5:09 am | Permalink

    Well said everybody
    As for the illegal migrants, just were is the logic in doing this, and because of this betrayal of his own Manifesto We have to build more houses , we have to ignore those people who have lost there jobs there, business, yes and they were tax payers, in favour of people who will require many many millions to settle over the coming years.
    Oh and H S 2
    The madness that is this PM, sorry but we could be looking at years of hardship before we get back to normal.
    Indeed can this PM be asked to justify this Open all doors to one and all
    Just why is he doing the opposite to his Manifesto, without any discussion in the House.
    Oh and has he really got rid of the Chinese re G 5 and all the other stuff they are doing, while our business goes to the wall ?

  31. Sea_Warrior
    Posted October 21, 2020 at 5:44 am | Permalink

    The government needs to tighten the immigration screw further, doesn’t it? Or is Patel just going to leave the new immigration system unchanged when millions more are destined for unemployment. The minimum salary qualification needs raising, probably to about £40K.

    • Will in Hampshire
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

      Yes, I agree.

    • anon
      Posted October 21, 2020 at 10:40 pm | Permalink

      £40k far too low. It needs to be £80k-£100k.

      Training grants should be made available for shortage skills. This is not about the economy.

      This is implementing Policies such as mass immigration where no democratic mandate could ever be gained.

      It is what it is. as is the EU .

      Votes don’t seem to matter that much, who manages & pulls the strings does.

      In as surveillance society, where do people talk freely on topics that just cant be discussed without the “thought police”.

      Why any Police officer would follow these laws and guidance is a worry all by itself. Why are all these indoctrination course being mandated.

      All sounds like a marxist cultural global plan in action. Or maybe just part of the “simulation” as we wait for the singularity and the next level of the game.

  32. Diane
    Posted October 21, 2020 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    The Court of Appeal has quashed the Home Office policy of removing migrants from the UK within a short time frame & without access to justice / lawyers as being unlawful. We’ve all read of the problems encountered over I don’t know how long now. It’s a lost cause with far too much agency from so many bodies against achieving anything meaningful, sensible and fair, not to mention fairness for the law abiding, tax paying, culture respecting citizens of this country. These myriad bodies don’t even see or accept that allowing in the many illegal arrivals hampers the progress and outcomes of those arriving legally. They simply have one goal, one job as they see it, coupled with all their demands & criticism of the sanctuary on offer, then the associated problems which are left are heaped on the government, local authorities, tax payers, communities & individuals at which point, we are at square one because we all then rely on and expect our government to solve those problems. But how can they ? I admire Priti Patel’s determination, she has my respect & she gets a lot of bad press but fear she has and is not able or permitted to have any meaningful solution.

  33. anon
    Posted October 22, 2020 at 7:57 pm | Permalink
    Please support the defunding of the BBC, by not buying the product, and enduring the “stress-granout-letters”. Especially those who are more able to do this and can handle the stress caused.

    BBC seems to be reporting some facts.

    Why do the “establishment” really need mass immigration? answers on a postcard to the puppeteers

  • 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