Posts Tagged ‘Immigration’
A mass exodus
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on June 23rd, 2008
In the Guardian today:
Howe had written that the election of Johnson might trigger a mass exodus of older African-Caribbean migrants back to the West Indies.
Wadsworth wrote on his blog that McGrath responded: “Well, let them go if they don’t like it here.”
How sensitive we have become. It is not racist to respond to a particular question in this way. Would it be considered racist if a Labour Minister had responded to questions about the net emmigration of people born in the UK to places like France and Spain “well let them go”? I imagine such a conversation has been had, and I cannot believe anyone would get upset about it.
I respect Johnson very much, but he should have stood by his man; otherwise we are all at risk for making innocuous and non-racist comments.
If people who immigrated then choose to emmigrate because of the result of a democratic election, that’s not really the business of the electee. Especially one who has made it clear he is working for all Londoners.
I believe we should always attempt to reverse all aspects of a proposition to decide whether or not it is fair. And if the colour of the people, or the direction of flow were reversed, there would be no accusation of racism. None.
EU and immigration
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on February 26th, 2008
Commenters on the BBC’s Have Your Say appear to be unanimous (I couldn’t find a negative comment) — the British want a referendum on EU membership even if only to put the question to bed (in the case of europhiles).
But an interesting number of people also commented on immigration. I have before expressed massively variant views on immigration which reflects the paradox in my thinking. I genuinely believe that a homogenous human race, where people lived and worked around the world together, freely and at peace would be great; but I also know that this is the sort of ideological thinking that got communists into such trouble. I can see that in the world as it really is, there is a need for immigration controls.
But at the same time, we mustn’t stop people coming here who would benefit our country financially and culturally. There are many hard-working, gentle and genuine people who would love the opportunity to live in a country like England where the chances of being a murder-victim are extremely low; where, no matter how poor you are, you will never be completely failed by society (the State and charities) and where, at least at the moment, there are plenty of jobs and a good standard of living (in comparison to developing countries).
The government acts at the top of a massive system which works, ostensibly, on its behalf underneath. But the government is not in a position to make any policy on immigration that will be fair and just. If restrictions are placed on immigrants or immigration in order to resolve an issue highlighted by the Daily Mail, then they will inevitably be unfair or cruel in many cases. And if the government relaxes controls, then it opens itself up to attack from the Mail and, also, leaves the door open for dangerous or undersirables.
Immigration then, unlike the EU, is not an easy choice.
Cameron gets tough?
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on August 29th, 2007
According to the right-wing press and (oddly) the BBC News Website, Cameron’s returning to logic-land and has now, in the space of two days, championed the proper Conservative ideals of lower immigration and tough action on crime.
The two years of near-silence on the subject has made one slightly cynical, but that he sees that he needs to talk about these issues is gratifying. Let’s hope, when or if he gets power on our behalf, he acts as he’s talking.
As I say to people when talking about these and other issues: It seems so obvious if you don’t allow the status quo to muddy your thinking. It is entirely moot how things are today, it is what we want them to be that matters and if the barriers to achieving that are significant, all the more worthy is the effort.
Constitution or Policies?
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on June 5th, 2007
On Friday I started a new job. I won’t say much about my work, as I didn’t before because of the trouble people seem to get into when they blog about their place of work. Saying that, though, I’ve never felt there’s been much bad to say about my employer but hey ho.
Anyway, the reason I told you that is because it now means that rather than driving 15 minutes along the A27 I need to drive for nearer 1 hour 15 minutes including a stretch of the M25 — a round trip of around 90 miles. On Friday too, I started car sharing to reduce some of that burden, petrol etc. (note no spurious mention of the environment). And today was the first journey with only one of the sharers.
I am painfully aware that I can turn on speech/lecture mode very easily and I make serious efforts not to initiate or prolong political conversations. So it was reassuring today that the conversation on the way home was about things that I think ought to concern young, male 20-somethings:
- House prices
- The tax we pay for social sponges
- The war in Iraq vs. the lack of war in Zimbabwe
- The general wetting-down of England
- The worrying increase in religious belief
If the journey had lasted longer, I would expect it to move to the state of the BBC, how Channel 4 are so much better at programming, the worrying rise in uncontrolled internal movement in the EU.
And it turns out that us right-wingers are far more compassionate than the so-called lefty do-gooders. While we believe in Grammar schools which help people achieve regardless of social backgrounds, while we believe that social housing is a gift to the lazy and relatively scant help to the hard-working, while we believe that government money would be better spent (or not raised through taxes) on services that people need rather than on yet another campaign to stop people hurting themselves with alcohol (it’s their body for Christ’s sake), while we believe in free trade with poorer countries not spurious Fair Trade, and while we believe in helping those in genuine need (like the victims of 2005′s Tsunami)… While we believe those things, the left do not.
The Left believes that Fair Trade (helping a few farmers get a non-market driven — and still low — price for their product) is the answer to global poverty. It believes that we should give aid to Darfur rather than tanks to stop the genocide; It believes that the government should look after each individual even down to the nitty-gritty of their lives; And it believes that any different lifestyle that does not result in dreadlocks or prayer (or both) is to be stamped out by the state.
So when the UK Independence Party is laughed at by the BBC (and for obvious, and understandable, reasons), let’s remember that they are the ones who are against Social Housing being FORCED on developers (building on their own private land remember), they are the ones against high taxation and they are the ones who recognise genuine fairness.
When I joined the Conservatives in 1996, it was because I could see that their ideology was based in fairness, merit and (increasingly at the time, though completely thankfully now) genuine equal rights. I still believe that is what the membership believes in and, sadly, UKIP are completely ineffectual at every level, so I remain a Conservative.
But this is a call to those who believe in ideology and fairness: stop using politics as a method of achieving power, and start using it as a tool to convince people of your ideology and stand for election on principles.
Brown skin? Off you go then
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on May 28th, 2007
What makes people English? Many people claim it is a cultural thing and many others claim it is an ethnic thing. But it is not just that. Just as every nation has its stereotypes (Roman noses for Italians, blonde hair for Germans, big stomachs for Americans) every nation has its purely civic definition of nationality.
So if you don’t have, for example, a Lancashire accent, if you’re not white, if you’re not an agnostic Christian, if you don’t think pantomime is the purest form of comedy, you are still English.
But no-one’s told the (typically useless) Home Office that. They thought that someone with a Lancashire accent, a Blackburn birth certificate and a European Union, United Kingdom passport was more than likely Pakistani. You can see why: they had a Lancashire accent and everyone knows that’s the one you learn when you join Pakistani spy school; they had a British passport, and we all know how trustworthy government databases and identity-verification documents are… So why not think that?
But then thinking that someone’s from a different country is a bit different to trying to deport them. Worse, imrprisoning them for two months while you try to find evidence that said English person is actually Pakistani.
I think the Guardian, in their low-key article a couple of months ago has done an injustice to this story. If we cannot trust our governors in this case not to abuse their powers when it comes to depriving people of their liberty, why do we entrust them with so much power?
And if this was an isolated case it would be slightly more tolerable, but the Guardian reassures us that it is not!
I have just one question: Why did the Guardian say “British Asian”? Surely the fact that he was British was key? The British Asian label is as bad as saying ‘nigger’ in my opinion. The relevance is clearly there — and could be highlighted in the story — but the fundamental point of this whole story is that the government is imprisoning its own people without justification.
The fact that his parents (or, by the “British Asian” definition that, frankly, the BNP would be pleased with, any one of his earlier ancestors) were Pakistani must not take away any of the horror or shock that any reader of that article should feel.
Frank Field on Immigration
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on May 22nd, 2007
I was distressed multiple times today when watching my recording of the Daily Politics.
I was first distressed with how much I agreed (again) with Frank Field. Could it be that Frank is more Conservative and reasonable that Mr Cameron?!
Then I was distressed by the other guest (Charlie Whelan) who turned suddenly nasty when asked to comment on Mr Field’s position. Political correctness and a naive determination that Labour voters will not mind their lower-paid jobs being made lower paid by, admittedly hard-working, immigrants from the new EU member states.
Freedom of movement is an important aspect of the European Union and I firmly believe that some of the repurcussions on the newer member states’ economies should have been considered before membership was granted. How can the urban, never mind rural, economies in Romania, Poland and Bulgaria survive with such numbers leaving?
But we cannot go over what might have been and hope to come out of it other than frustrated.
What have we learnt?
Probably, most importantly, that poor countries need to be helped by western nations before we offer them the mixed blessing that is EU membership. In fact, as EU membership is so attractive for the likes of Romania because of the assistance they are given for infrastructure improvements, why not make those donations of assistance so that the quality of life differential is not so massive by the time the barriers to movement are taken away?
The humane thing to do with the likes of Turkey and Croatia and Macedonia is to give them the assistance and representation etc. that any other EU country has without providing them with the crippling effect that is freedom of movement (it could be termed “freedom to lose your most productive citizens”).
Brown’s Eco-towns
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on May 14th, 2007
It has been suggested that a Scottish Prime Minister with no mandate from the English people should have no say in Housing policy. Unusually for me, I am going to come to his defence.
First, I know immigration is often blamed for the housing shortage, but do we really want to get to a point where Vodafone cannot employ people they need from abroad where the position cannot be filled domestically? Immigration cannot be blanket-stopped in a First World economy.
Also one should note that the first cause of the housing shortage — the one that makes most difference to house prices and the number needed — is the number of smaller households. Single people and older people are living alone more than was historically the case and the number of divorces is also having an impact.
Finally, the people deciding housing policy in England are currently the unelected Regional Assemblies. Quite honestly I would rather Her Majesty’s Government, with the mandate of all Britain (including a majority of English MPs), was the one to decide where we have the new homes we need than Regional Assemblies.
We have a stark choice between having a European-style system of home ownership where only the rich can afford to buy and the majority rent, a country full of high-rise soul-less buildings or one of a few fewer fields. I know that the answer is no single one of those, but compromise must be sought in my humble opinion.
Romania and Bulgaria from Miss Anon
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on September 27th, 2006
This post has been written by Miss Anon and posted on her behalf:
It’s all very well for people to have a heated debate about the influx of Romanian, Bulgarian and Polish workers ‘invading’ this country but for years we’ve welcomed Australian students, travellers and workers giving them two year Visas; we’ve allowed French, Italian, Spanish and Dutch people to work in this country without ever thinking that they are different. That these countries have been in the EU for a long time has meant that we never consider their movements here an issue.
Can we really tell how many French immigrants have come to this country knowing they have a home in both countries. Are we concerned, really, that some people have their cars registered in France and are effectively immune from parking tickets over here? I would say no.
Yesterday the Daily Express wrote an inflamatory article about the price of cheap flights from eastern Europe with an indignant tone… The cost of flights from Romania and Bulgaria will be £8 from when they join on the low cost operator, Wizzair. But why the uproar? We’ve had these low cost airlines from Spain, Portugal, Italy, etc for years. Why don’t we have a similar debate about Spaniards or Greek students? All these people use our NHS, for example and students don’t need to pay for healthcare.
Could it be that there is debate because we think of eastern Europeans as slavs; do we think that they are somehow more dangerous or nasty than people from southern Europe? If we’re going to have an EU where people are able to move freely around, then they should be allowed to move freely around — otherwise what’s the point?
Miss Anon
Back
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on September 8th, 2006
I’m back from sunny Somerset where life is calmer, slower and more Conservative!
I learnt, while away, about the British citizenship test which, I am sure, the vast majority of Britons would fail miserably. The test is awful and requires a knowledge of things that, frankly, have no basis in ensuring social cohesion, a better standard of life in Britain or anything else productive.
Worse, some of it definitely suffers from ‘having an agenda’.
When searching, just now, for some links about the test I found the Daily Mail’s alternative test which I passed with 9/10; and this sample test: free sample test.
The sample test should give you an idea of how pointless it all is. Do I care, for example, how many UK MPs there are, what proportion of the population is under 19 or what the Scottish Church is called? Will I understand the importance of queuing or freedom of speech by knowing how many members of the Welsh National Assembly there are or whether the Queen is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England?
Mostly I do not care about this stuff and I would be cautious about condoning any test, let alone one which talks about some of Britain’s constituent nations’ national identities while poo-pooing England’s!
Finally, and before I rest (as one has to after returning from holiday), I would like to reassure Gaz that an English Parliament could mean a reduction in Whitehall personnel… The test I mentioned before requires that you know that there are six hundred and… well, more than six hundred UK MPs. And we all know that’s too many.
Nearly 1 in 60
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on August 22nd, 2006
According to the figures available, those who immigrated to the UK since 2004 make up nearly 1 in 60 of the population.
The imminent EU accession of Romania and Bulgaria represents a new source of immigrants to the UK. There are voices, not least Frank Field, who are calling foul, but there’s really no justification for restricting immigration from these new members.
The EU is about free movement of people and free trade. Now anyone with even a small idea of the EU’s working will know that we are not getting anything similar to free trade in many, many areas. So the only tenet of the EU that Britons signed up for under Heath and that is actually functioning is free movement of people.
If we turn around now and say “Sorry Romanians, sorry Bulgarians, you cannot come to the UK because, though we want access to your markets, we don’t want your people.” then we are removing that final part of the EU that we all agreed to.
I agree that the UK is suffering a change in culture… A sort of negative zionism by multiple cultures. And I agree that the time has come for a serious look at our immigration policy… But I don’t think that should mean double-standards on the EU. Let’s leave the EU and say what we really think! Let’s join schengen, let’s sign a free trade agreement with the EU and remain a country in our own right.
At the same time, let’s let English culture redefine itself to include our newest members. Let’s prepare our schools to cope with the children of our mostly young immigrants when they are born. And let’s not confuse immigrants (those who come here) with the legislators that we think are getting the policies wrong.
According to the BBC’s The World programme on BBC Four this evening, Italy, Spain and Malta are struggling with the number of illegal immigrants coming from Africa to work here (where “here” is the EU). As Leanne said earlier on this blog, the people who manage to leave Africa are probably the very people who could reverse the problems Africa so evidently has.
Let’s work harder and more seriously at improving the economies of Africa so that there’s no reason to jump on that ship in the first place. The EU’s Common Agricultural Policy’s abolition would be a good starting place.
