Morning:
14°c
Amid the sound and fury over Nick Griffin, there's a sad but unnoticed fact: it has taken this fiasco to make politicians talk about the impact of immigration.
Yesterday MPs Frank Field and Nicholas Soames called for a 75 per cent cut in immigration and accused the Government of "clamping down" on any debate.
What's missing is not only a sense of the benefits of immigration but also of where it came from.
It didn't just happen: the deliberate policy of ministers from late 2000 until at least February last year, when the Government introduced a points-based system, was to open up the UK to mass migration.
Even now, most graduates with good English and a salary of £40,000 or the local equivalent abroad are more or less guaranteed enough points to settle here.
The results in London, and especially for middle-class Londoners, have been highly positive. It's not simply a question of foreign nannies, cleaners and gardeners - although frankly it's hard to see how the capital could function without them.
Their place certainly wouldn't be taken by unemployed BNP voters from Barking or Burnley - fascist au pair, anyone? Immigrants are everywhere and in all sorts of jobs, many of them skilled.
My family's east European former nannies, for example, are model migrants, going on to be a social worker and an accountant. They have integrated into London society.
But this wave of immigration has enriched us much more than that. A large part of London's attraction is its cosmopolitan nature.
It is so much more international now than, say, 15 years ago, and so much more heterogeneous than most of the provinces, that it's pretty much unimaginable for us to go back either to the past or the sticks.
Field and Soames complain about schools where English is not the first language for many pupils.
But in my children's south London primary school, the international influence is primarily the large numbers of (mostly middle-class) bilingual children, usually with one parent married to a Brit.
My children have half- or wholly Spanish, Italian, Swiss, Austrian, Croatian, Bulgarian, Congolese, Chinese and Turkish classmates.
London's role as a magnet for immigration busted wide open the stale 1990s clichés about multiculturalism: it's a question of genuine diversity now, not just tacking a few Afro-Caribbean and Bengali events on to a white British mainstream. It's one of the reasons Paris now tends to look parochial to us.
So why is it that ministers have been so very bad at communicating this? I wonder because I wrote the landmark speech given by then immigration minister Barbara Roche in September 2000, calling for a loosening of controls. It marked a major shift from the policy of previous governments: from 1971 onwards, only foreigners joining relatives already in the UK had been permitted to settle here.
That speech was based largely on a report by the Performance and Innovation Unit, Tony Blair's Cabinet Office think-tank.
The PIU's reports were legendarily tedious within Whitehall but their big immigration report was surrounded by an unusual air of both anticipation and secrecy.
Drafts were handed out in summer 2000 only with extreme reluctance: there was a paranoia about it reaching the media.
Eventually published in January 2001, the innocuously labelled "RDS Occasional Paper no. 67", "Migration: an economic and social analysis" focused heavily on the labour market case.
But the earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural.
I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended - even if this wasn't its main purpose - to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date. That seemed to me to be a manoeuvre too far.
Ministers were very nervous about the whole thing. For despite Roche's keenness to make her big speech and to be upfront, there was a reluctance elsewhere in government to discuss what increased immigration would mean, above all for Labour's core white working-class vote.
This shone through even in the published report: the "social outcomes" it talks about are solely those for immigrants.
And this first-term immigration policy got no mention among the platitudes on the subject in Labour's 1997 manifesto, headed Faster, Firmer, Fairer.
The results were dramatic. In 1995, 55,000 foreigners were granted the right to settle in the UK. By 2005 that had risen to 179,000; last year, with immigration falling thanks to the recession, it was 148,000.
In addition, hundreds of thousands of migrants have come from the new EU member states since 2004, most requiring neither visas nor permission to work or settle. The UK welcomed an estimated net 1.5 million immigrants in the decade to 2008.
Part by accident, part by design, the Government had created its longed-for immigration boom.
But ministers wouldn't talk about it. In part they probably realised the conservatism of their core voters: while ministers might have been passionately in favour of a more diverse society, it wasn't necessarily a debate they wanted to have in working men's clubs in Sheffield or Sunderland.
In part, too, it would have been just too metropolitan an argument to make in such places: London was the real model. Roche was unusual in that she was a London MP, herself of east European Jewish stock.
But Labour ministers elsewhere tend studiously to avoid ever mentioning London. Meanwhile, the capital's capacity to absorb new immigrants depends in large part on its economic vitality and variety. There's not a lot of that in, say, south Yorkshire. And so ministers lost their nerve.
I hope it's not too late now, post-Question Time, for London to make the case for migration.
Of course we're too small a country to afford an open door - but, by the same token, if the immigrants dry up, this city and this country will become a much poorer and less interesting place. Why is it so hard for Gordon Brown to say that?
Reader views (35)
Let's accept there is a major problem here and debate it openly.
Just as the World population is growing, so is ours in the UK. Of course everyone aspires to a better quality of life, which unfortunately today seems only to equate to money ! So immigrants will come to England to better themselves financially. Obviously this government has very underhandedly and uncontrollably encouraged this and it is possible that a conservative government would do the same.
The main issue here is that our population density is too high and will become unsustainable. It will affect everyone’s quality of life. We must address this by reducing the number of people allowed into this country to a more realistic level. Our schools, our hospitals, our housing and our countryside cannot take the strain. We need a debate and a vote from the people and we need it now… not in 20 years time when it will be too late.
- Malc, Hever
<<It is a fact that by 2070 the immigrant population will be ahead of the indigenous peoples of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland>>
Of course it isn't a fact, Stephen. It may be someone's prediction on the basis of certain selected criteria or simply speculation but fact it is not. If you cannot get your head around what is fact and what is not then what hope for the rest of your spurious argument?
- Teresa, london
The gent above - Olelekan - tells me that mass immigration into the UK is our come-uppance: we moved into foreign countries and now the situation is reversed.
Two points:
Point 1: Apart from the early colonisations of
North Africa and Australia/New Zealand, the British
eventually withdrew and went home. I'd like Mr.Olelekan
to take a lesson from us.
Point 2: I don't care to take my come-uppance. I don't
like being colonised any more than your people did.
- J.Weaver, Lancaster, Lancs
Basically the United Kingdom is "supposed" to be a democracy, so if the majority of British people feel that they do not want mass immigration into their country, then it shouldn't happen. What the Labour government did is implement an immigration policy and KEPT IT A SECRET, because they knew if they told the British public about it, i.e. the people that voted them into power, that they would get voted out just as quick. Multi-culturism and immigration has both good and bad sides, but DECEPTION is usually always wrong !!! At the end of the day, the only people who look like fascists to me are the people that have effectively forced mass immigration on a country that most likely did not want it in the first place.
- Miles, Gateshead, UK
W/o a doubt, immigration can benefit a nation. W/o a doubt, America is a nation comprised of immigrants. At issue for those who oppose liberal immigration policies, whether in Britain or America or any other nation for that matter, is that the displacement & the uproar, rarely leads to the benefits all seem to want us to buy into.
What most want, is simply to have an immigration policy that does not cause the uproars that have resulted from immigration policies w/ almost no controls or limitations.
It is NOT a matter of racism or xenophobia as many want to suggest. And as has been mentioned previously, most citizens of Britain or America, cannot afford the nannies many seem to think all immigrants want to be.
What disturbs me is the injustices done to immigrants, & especially illegal aliens in America, by greedy corporate profiteers. Immigrants tend to labor intensive jobs, & are willing to take significantly less pay. What happens is locals end up taking lower pay just to have a job, since otherwise they would be fired or not considered for a position. That is exploitation of all involved, not racism.
One thing we must do is insist our governments get out there & work to improve conditions in many nations where their citizens stand at the ready to leave because their governments have failed them.
Unless we push for developement in the third world, we will see millions upon millions trying to escape the gwats their countries have become.
- Rubicon, Southcentral PA, USA
I wish to report to you a case of the most serious crime in the world.
This is a case of Ethnocide and it is happening here and now in the United Kingdom.
Labours plan of uncontrolled immigration policy has come to light and this can be proven in the statistics.
Wikipedia lists and explains exactly the Crime of Ethnocide.
Attacks On Culture and Displacement.
Put simply it is the cleansing or minoritising of an indigenous population by methods other than mass extermination.
It is a fact that by 2070 the immigrant population will be ahead of the indigenous peoples of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
This is a Crime against humanity according to the Geneva Convention it is an equivalent crime to Genocide and is a form of ethnic Cleansing.
I am reporting this crime to every agency in the UK to expose this crime to the British People.
Take action Now! Reveal this Labour Plot because the hunt is on for the conspiracy that exists between labour and conservative politicians who have plotted this treason.
Regards
I have emailed this matter to hundreds of important people, If they ignore it and take no action then surely they by default become an accomplice to the crime.
Organisations, QC’s, Barristers, Solicitors, Members Of Parliament, The Hague, The United Nations.
As an Englishman, along with thousands of others we have been displaced and made to feel inferior in our own land we will have a website shortly so that the who
- Stephen Harrison, Bridgnorth Great Britain
Earlier this year I visited India and Nepal where many people are living in appalling poverty. Both of these countries had agencies advertising help to migrate to Australia, Japan, UK and USA.
I felt that it is quite wrong for well-educated and highly skilled young people to be leaving their home countries, where they are vitally needed, only to settle in an already overcrowded country such as the UK which is quite capable of training its own workers.
- Pamela, Barnet UK
The Neath Article is slightly misleading I think, this is not a Labour policy ( in my opinion anyway ) this is going on throughtout Europe, it is an EU / NWO policy though Neath may not be aware of this and just assumes it was Labour Inspired.
You must remember though that the EUphiles will have always known that we would never willingly surrender Sovereignty.
Let's not forget there are other aspects of this too, Primorolo suggesting that British Schoolgirls should be Sterilised and the fact that all of our towns now have Extermination centres in them decpetively called Pregnancy advice centres, since 1970 7.2 Million British Babies have been aborted.
- Adrian Peirson, hull britain
If these immigrants are so wonderful and hardworking and have so much to contribute to society in general, why do they need to come to Britain rather than contribute to the societies and countries from which they come? Surely their countries could benefit from such wonderful productive citizens.
- Sg, Texas, USA
And it’s so much easier to get home help. Londoners now employ more “Domestics” than the Edwardians.
- James J, London
The constant inflow of so-called "highly skilled" immigrants is what forces highly skilled, British educated, natives such as me to leave the country for work. I really wanted to work in my own country, but there's such a glut of unemployed I always have to leave to make a living. Thanks, Labour.
- Kevin, London
Of course London will always need a certain amount of immigration, but this is crazy. As for falling birth-rates, Japan has one of the fastest falling birthrates in the world look into how they are dealing with it, not by bringing over millions of unskilled, illiterate foreigners that's for sure.
- Adrian, London
You really don't get it do you ?
- Nimble, Slough
The whole topic is not really about race/xenophobia at all. Its lab rat syndrome...crowd too many in an enclosed space and the outcomes are agression, hate, protectionism and violence. Simple fact we cannot get away from, is this little island which is barely even the 1/4 size of France has over 60mil people. Take a trip round the M25 or any road for that matter on a tuesday morning at 9am to see the result. There are too many people here. Until either we can spread out more (which can only be achieved in my view by mass fibre roll out to allow more people to work from home/different centres competitvely) or we stop migration period, things will continue to get worse.
Its no coincidence the countries that have the supposed best quality of life also have the lowest population densities.
- Alistair, Brentwood, UK
It is interesting to read that mass immigration policy was designed by Tony&Cherie Blair's gang to "rub the Right's nose in diversity". I do not believe that ministers and their advisors ever had any "vision" other than to destroy the famous "forces of conservatism" that the intellectual "passive aggressive" elite hates so much. Never, do I believe, were the genuine interests of the working class taken into consideration. A decent skills education for young Britons would have negated the need for the mass "crowding out" they are having to endure at present. Interesting also to read the comments on this site by some immigrants stating "what goes around, comes around" and that Britain deserves this fate due to some weird interpretation of history on their part. I ask them to remember that hard working Britons are emigrating in record numbers and taking their cheque books with them to indeed sunnier climes. These immigrants full of venom for their host country may soon have to look themselves in the mirror!
- Henry, London, UK
What a load of tosh. There are without doubt immigrants that integrate and contribute positively but there are an awful lot of immigrants who would not dream of marrying out of their race let alone their culture, who will never properly integrate into British society. My Mum was an economic migrant, she did but I don't see many Asian or Muslim people marrying white or black British citizens. Why do we need Sharia Courts in Britian? We 'need' economic migrants simply because our elected governments have not encouraged education or decent apprenticeships but prefer to pander to the fat cats desire for cheap labour from abroad to better their own profit margins.
- Anne, Sutton
Don't listen to the idiots - Britain does not need mass immigration.
Britain thrived for 1,000 years without mass immigration and yet suddenly now we need to destroy our own culture to survive. And it's all to be done without asking the British people and by trying to frighten anybody who would speak out against it.
This article shows that a small group of people imposed mass immigration on the UK with a quite deliberate political objective. Yet again it shows the degree to which Tony Blair betrayed this country.
- Charles, Bath, UK
I agree with your defense of immigration but you are wrong to say that the new points system constitutes an "open door" immigration policy. It's immensely difficult to qualify. What immigrant "earns £40,000 or the equivalent abroad"? Fact is, to earn the necessary points to get in, you need to have advanced degrees, be young, speak excellent English and earn lots of money at the time you apply. It will attract highly skilled people but will not result in "mass migration".
- Carla, London
What a load of rubbish. You only have to visit Europe to see Britain is extremely overcrowded, especially the south east, and if you look at the faces, it isn't difficult to see that immigration is to blame. The UK is a small, comparatively wealthy country and the world is a big place with literally billions of very poor people. Controlling immigration here should therefore be a no brainer - but of course, Labour politicians don't have brains.
- Matt, London UK
In order to accommodate all these incomers, other people have to move out. That means concreting over the rest of the country, on good agricultural land, flood plains etc. Eventually there'll be no countryside left.
- Gadfly, Norwich, England
Official ONS figures show that in some areas of London like Newham 75% plus of births in 2008 are to mothers born outside the UK (and over 20% for England as a whole). The problem is that in bringing in immigrants we are throwing ever more British people onto the scrap heap and leaving them festering on benefits as well as adding to overpopulation in an already crowded country. Within a couple of generations, we will have diluted ourselves out of existence. This much can be seen from the figures, yet people who point this out are howled down as racists.
- Robert C, London UK
Migration provides benefits overall, but more needs to be done to help those who are directly affected. Those who lose jobs to migrants need better support and training. We will obviously need to be building more homes. But these are small costs compared to the benefits of migration described in the article.
Additionally, as the country grows towards 70 million people, our population will get older. We'll either have to have more young migrants working and paying taxes, or we'll have to work longer and retire later.
- Ed, London
Tower Hamlets is planning for a 42% population increase within 15 years. It's on their website under "core strategy". We can't cope with that.
- Alan In Bow, London
Nolan,
Below is an extract from a Bank of Scotland report on population. Similar figures can be found elsewhere. On the basis that London's pop. is about 7.5m that works out to near 1:3.
"London's population has risen by a net 370,000 over the last decade, despite net migration to the suburbs and elsewhere (see below). This was because the capital has seen by far the biggest level of net international migration with 1.8 million more people moving to London from abroad than have moved from the capital to live outside the UK."
When I say indigenous I people born here, it is you that continues to bring colour into every article in relation to immigration. Just for the record I have relations who West Indian and Maori, living in the UK. Colour has never been an issue for me but uncontrolled open door immigration has. Making a stand against it doesn't make me racist.
- Mark, South-East London
Mark - "London's population go from 1 in 15 people born outside the UK to 1 in 3 within the last fifteen years". This is simply NOT TRUE. Just because you keep repeating this rubbish it will not make it true either.
Why waste all that time saying "indigenous" when you actually just mean "white"?
- Nolan, Londonist
I am sure your Primary school is lovely, however some teachers in London are struggling because so many children can`t speak English, affecting everyone. CONTROLLED immigration has many benefits, what we have had under Labour has been an utter disaster for this country. Now that their working class supporters are turning to the BNP they are trying to change their tune but remain as ineffective as ever.
- Nickspurs, London
As a highly skilled migrant having graduated from the LSE I find some of the comments here both highly misleading and downright disgraceful. I am probably better intergrated than some of the 'working people' you refer to and I pay top rate tax. We are vital to London, we work hard, we pay our taxes and we contribute to this city- how dare you imply we're all here for a free ride! I was brought up by Chinese parents in Malaysia and sent to British schools overseas, taught nothing but the utmost respect for British culture and it pains me that people like Mark seem to see me as nothing but scum to be thrown out. I agree we need control on migration but it shouldn't be at the cost of shutting out people like myself and thousands of others like me who are highly qualified hard workers with a love for this country and city.
- Edwin, London
Alex,
I am of an age that has seen a lot of the people effectively loose their jobs, because they have been outsourced to firms who have cheaper labour. Not more efficient but cheaper. As somebody who in the past has work on the dustbins (the old metal ones not the wheelie bin things, done a milk round, cleaned offices and the like I find comments like yours about the British worker offensive. Sure there's some lazy so and so's out there helped by the poor benefits system but most British workers are honest and hard working; they are just not prepared to be taken for a ride. Minimum wage to me would have been a luxury when I was cleaning up Wembley after a footy match.
- Mark, South-East London
"by the same token, if the immigrants dry up, this city and this country will become a much poorer and less interesting place. Why is it so hard for Gordon Brown to say that"?
Because those of us who try to live normal lives in London (those of us who can’t afford nannies whether they be BNP members or Nigerians) wouldn't agree...
The mass influx of immigrants to London hasn’t made the city more interesting. Indeed as noted by previous commentators it has made the City more dangerous, less attractive, and annexed. There simply is no integration within London communities (a snap shot of the national picture) ,it is more about displacement. The great multi-cultural experiment is probably seen as a failure by most normal working people of this country.... It unfortunate that the vast majority commentators who have an opportunity to write on the subject ,‘like you,’ keep going on about the’ economic benefits’ of immigration, most indigenous people neither see nor care about any economic benefit (if in fact there are any at all). We as a nation need a change of direction to ensure future polices, including immigration, are measured against ‘Social benefits’ not ‘commercial profit’ which only benefits the rich minority (including columnists) and no one else....
- Ade, London
I agree with a good deal of what your article states and yes the UK economy has benefited greatly by immigration. However, you do not go into the question of what form of immigration policy we should have. Currently, the perception is that we have an open door. Even when illegal immigrants are found, we appear incapable of deporting them, even when they have committed serious crimes – murder, rape etc.. Secondly, again there is a real; perception that immigrants’ rights are put before “the indigenous population”. How times has this paper run stories of PC made councils banning posters promoting Church festivals, banning the word Christmas, etc, etc,. Thirdly, immigrant groups should do more to integrate. Yes bring your culture, but do more to mix with British culture, do not expect the council to translate everything but learn to speak English, etc. Lastly, we have to decide just how many people can live on this island. The last population forecast is for 70m in 25 years that will require us to increase our housing stock by around 18% - where will these houses be built?? How will the infrastructure to support these houses (hospitals, roads and such) be financed? What will the effect be on the environment?
We need immigration, but we need to have a sensible, reasoned and honest debate about immigration - without the Left throwing ill considered accusations of racism around every time the subject is mentioned. We need to explain to the population how we will bene
- Very Very Angry At Paying Tax For Mp'S Expeses, Home Counties
What is all this debate about immigration? why is immigration always the issue every now and again?
There was a time when U.K ruled almost the whole world during the British Empire,now the tide has turned and all people from all over the place wants to be here.
have you forgotten that what goes round comes around.
many of the so called immigrants are here to live and work unlike when their land were looted to make what Britain is today.
Sorry Great Britain there is nothing you can do about immigration irrespective of any party in power.
it really amazes me that many immigrants too are part of the campaign to stop immigration.
- Olalekan, Walthamstow London
"as long as you've got somebody to serve you a fancy cup of coffee that's all that matters"
The thing is, Mark, these jobs serving "fancy" cups of coffee pay minimum wage and they are open to British citizens just as they are to migrants. It's just that most Brits refuse to take these jobs due to poor hours and poor pay. The alternative, especially in the capital, would be for many of these food service establishments and other service/retail outlets to close due to lack of staff or indeed poorly motivated staff. As long as British born workers whine about having to get up at 4am (as quoted on this website the other day in relation to the postal strike), I can see why employers would want to hire those who don't mind getting up at 4am, whatever their nationality, because they are people who want to work rather than go out on strike or sit at home claiming benefits. Certainly most EU migrants have come here with the express intention of working for a few years, then returning home. They put more into this economy than they take out, and London service industries would quite simply collapse without them.
- Alex, London
Great article! It is the case that our economy needs immigration. That facts are clear, immigration pays more tax than it recieves by 37%. Reform the welfare system, get the local unemployed into work is also good, but lets not stop highly skilled, hard working coming into the UK.
- Sam Drury, London
Watching London's population go from 1 in 15 people born outside the UK to 1 in 3 within the last fifteen years has not made London more interesting, it has made it more divisive, far more dangerous, large swathes of it are virtually unrecognisble and there are less opportunities for the indigenous population and their offspring. Still as long as you've got somebody to serve you a fancy cup of coffee that's all that matters.
- Mark, South-East London
I don't see anything in this piece that explains to me why we need yet more unqualified immigrants and their extended families dropping themselves on our doorstep to claim free benefits.
- Thomas, London
