UK

Rain (AM and PM) 12° London Hi 12°C / Lo 7°C

Johnson: we need a debate on migration

Labour's failure to engage with issue 'has boosted BNP' admits Home Secretary

By Andrew Grice, Political Editor

AlanJohnson

PA

Johnson: people think Labour have shied away from the issue

In a candid interview with The Independent, Mr Johnson admitted that Labour's failure to debate immigration had "probably" boosted the BNP's appeal.

"People think we have shied away from a debate on it. They may well be right," he said. "My post bag is bigger on immigration than any other issue. It is a major public concern. The public deserves a rational debate on this, rather than what they sometimes get, which is at the extreme end of the scale."

His call for a "real debate" about immigration marks a big shift in Labour's thinking. A week ago, Mr Johnson admitted that successive governments, including the present one, had been "maladroit" in handling the issue.

In his interview he made clear that his comments were not a one-off but part of a concerted attempt to regain the initiative and try to convince the public that Labour has learnt from its mistakes and "completely transformed" the immigration and asylum systems.

Mr Johnson, who two weeks ago prompted a major row with British scientists by sacking the Government's chief drugs adviser Professor David Nutt, conceded that the Government did not spend money on the asylum system quickly enough to cope with a sudden influx of claims seven years ago. In contrast with one of his predecessors John Reid, he insisted that the Home Office is now "fit for purpose".

But he conceded that the absence of a proper debate had played into the BNP's hands. "Part of its attraction is that it is raising things that other political parties don't raise," he said. "It would take the absence of a national debate as the green light to distort the debate. It has absolutely no inhibition about lying about these issues."

Until the BNP won its first seats in a nationwide contest at the European Parliament elections in June, Labour's strategy was to deprive the far-right party of publicity and fight it on the doorsteps. A Labour rethink was brought to a head by the BBC's controversial decision to invite the BNP leader Nick Griffin on to its flagship Question Time programme. Mr Johnson was on the losing side of what he called a "friendly" cabinet debate over whether Labour should take part.

"My issue was about Question Time, not other forums. I think the BNP should be on Newsnight, the Today programme and in newspapers. But Question Time is different."

He fears that Mr Griffin's appearance did more good than harm to the BNP's prospects. "I think that the publicity gave the BNP exactly what it wanted," he said. He understood why the Justice Secretary, Jack Straw, and other panellists wanted to take part. "I hope that people saw how inept Nick Griffin is as a politician. I hope they [the panellists] were right. But I fear they were wrong," he said.

The Home Secretary pledged to debate immigration "at any time" – yet he would still not appear alongside Mr Griffin. "My view is still that I won't share a platform with a fascist. That has been my view for 59 years and I don't intend to change it. I don't have to sit and debate with these people. It does not call the debate to a halt."

Mr Johnson's message is that "immigration has been a good thing for this country – culturally, socially and certainly economically". He believes passionately that places like London, Birmingham and Liverpool have been "enriched" by it. But he denied recent allegations that Labour pursued an "open-door" policy to create a multicultural society. "We don't have an open-door policy. It is misleading to say we have got one or that we have ever had one. We manage immigration."

Mr Johnson believes public fears are shaped by an out-of-date picture and that Labour's reluctance to debate immigration has deprived it of the opportunity to show that the system has changed out of all recognition. He cites the Australian-style points system for non-EU entrants and introduction of electronic border controls which have led to 4,000 arrests, and will track individuals as well as numbers coming in and out so that "illegals" can be removed.

Official net migration fell by 44 per cent from 209,000 in 2007 to 118,000 in 2008 – proof, he said, that migrants come to Britain for short periods, work, contribute to the economy and then return home.

The backlog of asylum applications has dropped from 69,000 to 6,000 since 1995. The average length of time for claims peaked at 35 months, but now 60 per cent of cases are being decided within six months.

David Cameron has played down immigration as an issue, believing that it contributed to the Tories' image as a "nasty party" at the 2005 election. But now Mr Johnson wants to test the Tory policy of an unspecified "cap" on non-EU migrants. He believes the public might mistake it for a moratorium on further immigration, which it is not. He insists that Labour's points system is more effective and flexible.

The Home Secretary dismissed last week's call by Kim Howells, the former Foreign Office minister, for British troops to be withdrawn from Afghanistan and anti-terrorism measures to be stepped up here. "I have a huge amount of respect for Kim but I think he is wrong on this. We spend what needs to be spent on counter-terrorism," he said. "If we pulled out of Afghanistan, we would need to spend more money in this country because there would be far more attacks in this country as a result."

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>
Labour's suggestion for a debate is 13 years to late.
[info]dave1234567890 wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 12:24 am (UTC)
There must be an election coming. The Tories tried to raise this at the last 3 elections and were accused by Labour of racism, now Johnson knows they are going to lose the next election,he suddenly wants a debate, well he is too late, Labour are heading for a massive defeat.
Re: Labour's suggestion for a debate is 13 years to late.
[info]jimfred wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 12:32 am (UTC)
Spot On.This is just cynical,last-ditch electioneering.
Re: Labour's suggestion for a debate is 13 years to late. - [info]msmint - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 10:33 am (UTC) Expand
Labour's failure to debate immigration - [info]mike4626 - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:42 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Labour's suggestion for a debate is 13 years to late. - [info]geiseric - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 09:48 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Labour's suggestion for a debate is 13 years to late. - [info]zugzwang42 - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 02:58 pm (UTC) Expand
Immigration good for Britain
[info]thinkforself wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 12:32 am (UTC)
Perhaps when Mr Johnson has finished (and failed in) his campaign, he might find a few seconds to ask what the electorate, the people he's supposed to be representing, think about it.

I live in Bradford. I don't believe any of the major parties has the guts to seriously debate issues of immigration, racism (anti-white), ethnic cleansing (of white people).

Make it easier to bring up kids (tax breaks, whatever), encourage people to have kids, and you won't need immigrants.

When did the British people ever give politicians the green light to hand our country over to racist and sexist foreigners?

I'm a BNP voter.
Re: Immigration good for Britain
[info]canukgal wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:26 am (UTC)
<<
[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<johnson [...] 'talk'>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

<<<Johnson wont 'talk' to you SIR >>> he is now so 'elevated' from his previous life as a postie
he has a more than 'elevated' opinion of himself his party his competence his future!!!

The talking he'll do is irrelevant now and rather pathetic even laughable if it weren't
such a diabolical situation>>>>>>
Re: Immigration good for Britain - [info]jimg78 - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 02:48 pm (UTC) Expand
Yo, J
[info]ron_broxted wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 12:45 am (UTC)
Johnson - the Full Up sign should have been placed at Dover & Heathrow long ago. The BNP are exploitative scum but at least they are honest about it - unlike Labour allowing 2 million Poles in then feigning surprise when the Pshishi "miraculously" needed alongside the poorest Brits hospitals, schools, housing & welfare. How much goes on translation alone? Asylum seekers, Britain is a magnet for every Economic refugee on earth. I am sorry that folks have poverty in their lives but very few asylum seekers are doing anything other than fleeing poorer nations, not life threatening conflicts. I suspect I am not the only left winger fed up with your mendacity. Ever consider a career in the police, Alan? To eradicate the neo-nazi one trick pony introduce Zero Immigration.
Re: Yo, J
[info]canukgal wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:20 am (UTC)
<<<SIR we the BNP may be 'scum' in your opinion which in a democratic society you are legally entitled to but your language is questionable in my opinion, which I am still entitled to or does being a BNP member exclude me from that position?
Re: Yo, J - [info]dogsolitude_v2 - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 10:17 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Yo, J - [info]ron_broxted - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 11:24 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Yo, J - [info]ron_broxted - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 11:19 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Yo, J - [info]gobacktosleep1 - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 09:57 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Yo, J - [info]ron_broxted - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 11:25 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Yo, J - [info]msmint - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 10:58 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Yo, J - [info]ron_broxted - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 11:29 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Yo, J - [info]zugzwang42 - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:16 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Yo, J - [info]ron_broxted - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 11:20 pm (UTC) Expand
Labour lies and Unchecked Immigration
[info]repton4 wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 12:48 am (UTC)
Anyone in the last 12 years including the Cons who has asked for sensible debate on immigraton was always been slapped down with Labour and the PC mob shouting racist racist, i wonder why this iddiot wants a debate yes folks theres an election coming up,
Labour had a chance to answer the Question on immigration on question time but did Jack straw answer the question no he was to busy shouting racist racist, Gordon Brown and the labour government think anyone who dose not agree with what they say or think must be wrong, an iddiot, stupid, The british people can see through Labours lies and spin and the people of this country will put pen to paper soon and put this corupt government were they belong in the bin.
No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour
[info]margaretdavies wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 12:58 am (UTC)
Neither the Conservatives nor Labour have any intention of doing anything that would sufficiently rectify the huge damage that has been caused to this country's future by mass imigration. But the BNP offers real policy change on many issues other than immigration such as crimiminal justice, education, Europe, and the NHS. The LibLabCon are 3 heads of the same snake and Britain needs a real change.
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour
[info]uanime5 wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:53 am (UTC)
Unfortunately the BNP changes will be for the worst, which is why no other sensible party supports them.
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]saxontimes - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 09:58 am (UTC) Expand
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]adampooler - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 10:58 am (UTC) Expand
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]saxontimes - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 11:41 am (UTC) Expand
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]adampooler - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 12:09 pm (UTC) Expand
No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]msmint - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 12:58 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]adampooler - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 03:00 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]msmint - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 03:27 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]adampooler - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 03:47 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]msmint - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 04:10 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]saxontimes - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 10:18 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]adampooler - Tuesday, 10 November 2009 at 10:43 am (UTC) Expand
Re: No Real Difference Btween Tories And Labour - [info]msmint - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 11:05 am (UTC) Expand
[info]jayjay121212 wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 01:02 am (UTC)
sponsored links:
Ads by Google

Immigration to the UK
Qualify for a British Passport?Try our Free & Easy Online Search
www.WhatPassport.com

Funny link to have after an article like that....!
would anyone listen?
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 01:05 am (UTC)
it would be a first for Zanulabour if any one of them did
politicians are corrupt liars
[info]someofusknow wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 02:09 am (UTC)
Alan Johnson is clearly in the pay of the money-lenders, who need a constantly increasing population to keep their fractional reserve banking scam running. Of course, we already know that the vast majority of politicians are corrupt liars.

Britan needs more immigrations as much as a person who drowning needs lead boots.

Anyway, the population debate occured nearly 200 years ago, when Malthus worked out that populations grow faster than their food suppies -that is until they run out of food, then collapse.

Britain is over-populated by around 45 million at the moment and adding more mouths will simply increase the starvation rate when the industrial food system goes into decline -probably next year, now that the oil supply has peaked and is on its way down.
Re: politicians are corrupt liars
[info]auntyeunice wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 06:20 am (UTC)
I agree someofusknow, the arguement should be about sustainability which takes colour or creed (now that green is a religion) out of the equation.
Re: politicians are corrupt liars - [info]canukgal - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:25 am (UTC) Expand
Another one who......
[info]thisanthat wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 03:17 am (UTC)
has lost the plot?
Divine Justice!
[info]bloggsforever wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 03:26 am (UTC)
The British spent years invading various countries during their Imperial stage. They stole these country's resources and exploited their people. Now it is payback time! Absolute divine justice!
Re: Divine Justice!
[info]rudy_mental wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:09 am (UTC)
Ah yes, exploited.
No mention of health and education, business, industry, sanitation, hygeine, toilets, fresh water supplies, electricity, democracy, transport, telecommunications, world trade, media, equality of law.
One way street, I sometimes think some would have preferred to have been left eating bugs from a rotting log and chewing Khat.
In the words of Reg "What have the Romans done for us?"
Re: Divine Justice! - [info]bloggsforever - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 10:23 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Divine Justice! - [info]saxontimes - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 10:07 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Divine Justice! - [info]quapstealer - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 12:17 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Divine Justice! - [info]zugzwang42 - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 02:51 pm (UTC) Expand
RE; Divine Justice
[info]historybuff2 wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 03:43 am (UTC)
It was the ruling classes that were responsible for Britain invading other countries and the working class lads that had tio fight and die in those wars; today it is still the working classes that are paying the price for this completlely out of countrol immigration in terms of jobs, housing, public services and lost cultural heritage. Justice would demand that that the ruling class pay, not the poor British people.
Re: RE; Divine Justice
[info]thisanthat wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 04:01 am (UTC)
Well said Historybuff2.
I remember well the saying "The Sun Never Sets On The British Empire" and all the wretchedness the BE brought to the World.
Re: RE; Divine Justice
[info]saxontimes wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 10:11 am (UTC)
Like what? Which other colonial power would you like to compare us with? Why do we still have a Commonwealth today? How come we ruled with an army of 90,000 India, Pakistan; Sri Lanka, and Banglaedesh, which is less than the Asian population of Bradford today?
Re: RE; Divine Justice - [info]chouenlai - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 10:20 am (UTC) Expand
Re: RE; Divine Justice - [info]saxontimes - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 11:43 am (UTC) Expand
[info]writemaster10 wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 04:32 am (UTC)
Immigration includes people from former USSR states such as Poland, Cosovo, Romania and Latvia who due to EU law where allowed to flood in to the UK unchecked and unregulated. ALL these countries have different cultures to the UK but because these people are white the BNP ignores them.

In international law immigrants coming to the UK are classed as any one who is not a british citizen, but to the BNP and its supporters an immigrant is ANY ONE who isn't white. That is utterly wrong but the BNP don't care and comments from their supporters on many different forums proves this countless times.

According to the press in EU law people from Poland and other EU states can come here do a few months work, then go back home to their countries and claim child support and other benefits from the UK paid by UK tax payers even though they don't live here, this takes money from of all us but the BNP never mention this.

Labour should have nailed the immigration problem and stopped it a long time ago, they should have put more pressure on France to stop immigrants from there come here, they should have told the governments of former USSR states to stop allowing their people to flood in to the UK. But Labour didn't do that and now it feels like innocent British coloured citizens are being vilified by the BNP in the SAME way the Nazis vilified the jews.

How dare they do this.

Due to the BNP every time you hear the word immigration you now think of none white people, but that way of thinking is wrong.

The BNP and other british racists are whipping up fear and hatred in the UK, they are brain washing people who don't know people of colour in to thinking every coloured person is an immigrant when they are not.

They are also indirectly brain washing British coloured people in to thinking every white person they see could be a racist and vote for the BNP when 99% are not and would not vote BNP. Thats the effect the BNP are now having on the fabric of our country and society.

This should not be allowed to happen as hatred breeds hatred, fear breeds fear and we can't allow that to happen. After the war Germany made laws to ban the Nazis, Now Britain needs to do the same ban the BNP and their Muslim versions.

British citizens regardless of colour are all worried about immigration, they are all worried about British jobs being taken by immigrants, they are all worried about british jobs being sent to India and the far east. But the BNP never mention that, yet by the very name British National Party, the BNP should represent every British person including ones of colour by in their hearts they don't.

The BNP keep on denying they are racist and fascists when every one else knows and says they are.

Its pity the BNP can't for once be honest and sincere and admit they are racists and that they will never change.

Where is UKIP when you need them ?

If this is printed i will probably get BNP supporters denying every thing i've said and they will probably say its all rubbish. But they are biased and I don't care what BNP supporters say as I have as much right to free speech as those racists have.
Have you ever visited the BNP website?
[info]canukgal wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 06:52 am (UTC)
I don't know why you make so many assumptions about the BNP not addressing various issues
you have mentioned here that is simply untrue.
<<< the EU allow people to come to the UK who happen to be Polish and therefore probably 'white'
The BNP has had numerous articles about on their website about the unfair practice of
EU workers i.e. Poles {as they seem to be the most visible } and how the UK taxpayers
have to pay child support for these Polish kids who have never even resided in the UK.
This has been reported factually on the BNP website which is how I know about it.No mention
of their skin colour at all BTW. Many other examples of articles on the site that do not refer
to skin colour whatsoever.
Regarding the situation about jobs being outsourced to India this has also been reported
in detail on the BNP website along with many other articles concerning British jobs being
lost overseas especially in manufacturing. In fact I would hasten to add that so much detail
and stats are in these articles that put the main stream press to shame and are a education
in some ways but certainly NOT brainwashing. A major problem is that the media and the
press often collude with the Govt in hiding and distorting facts from the voters as they are aware
that it is dangerous to have the truth being available for the mainstream citizens in the UK.
Regards IMMIG. it is certainly not true that the BNP only wishes it to stop only for people
who are not white.... the BNP want it stopped for everyone as that is what the country requires
The website had a very interesting and factual article about the unsustainability of population growth a few days ago which would be a useful stat to learn about ....

I must say that your desire for the BNP party to be BANNED is perhaps why racism
could flourish in some areas with certain people. I dont know if you are British born
I dont know your age or any other details but I can assure you that in a democracy
there are things for all sides that may rankle but asking for a legal party that represents
a valid and legal political choice to be banned just because you fear it or dont approve of its perceived manifesto that you have never even bothered to read by the looks of your post
is a guaranteed method of inspiring some people to think they and their vote for the BNP
is yet another item being removed because it rankles some foreigner or brown or black
skinned person. So you see you contribute to the problem yourself.
Instead of allowing fear to motivate you why dont you learn more about the BNP
it sounds to me like you say you personally are worried about job losses etc
which is shared by the BNP. You have nothing to lose by checking them out do you?
Re: Have you ever visited the BNP website? - [info]zugzwang42 - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:29 pm (UTC) Expand
Whipping up hatred and fear?? - [info]canukgal - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:09 am (UTC) Expand
Where is UKIP - [info]canukgal - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:40 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Where is UKIP - [info]msmint - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 11:33 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]msmint - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 10:41 am (UTC) Expand
Johnson: we need a debate on migration
[info]derekemery wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 05:29 am (UTC)
The idea that he will be able to "sell" immigration" to the parts of the country most affected by it that now vote BNP illustrates the huge gap between Labour and what were once their constituents. He is in effect proposing to rub their noses in it to add insult to injury. A better way to turn the voter against Labour is difficult to imagine. Analysis has always shown that poor unskilled immigrants are a nett cost to the resident community and it's only the far rarer highly skilled educated immigrant that represent a nett financial gain for the UK. Huge areas of the North are loss making and rely on money generated by the South to survive. Upward mobility is severely limited in the UK which means for most if you are a poor immigrant you will become and remain a poor resident.
Re: Johnson: we need a debate on migration
[info]dixiedean99 wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 06:57 am (UTC)
Sorry Derek, did I read that correctly? "Huge areas of the North are loss making and rely on Money generated by the South".

The same South that sucks in more government money for infrastructure, Arts & Culture et al . than any other part of the country? The same South that houses the City of London that has just engineered the createst transfer of resources in the history of these islands (from poor to rich I hasten to add)?

I would suggest that this is the type of half-truth and urban myth the BNP propagates to inveigh the more gullible amongst us. People who don't work are a net cost to the resident community.

Peace & love

TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE JOHNSON:
[info]bgarvie wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 05:41 am (UTC)
Johnson is absolutely pathetic. This self-opinionated idiot with twisted views on immigration and governance must go. Labour have admitted having a deliberate 'open door' policy for years and have created social upheaval in some areas. They manipulated opinion from anyone who criticised them and branded them racist; this stifled genuine debate. Many of the electorate have become disinchanted and very unsettled with Labour's uncontrolled immigration policy and have turned to the BNP. What do they expect with unemployment rising at the fastest rate since records began??? Labour and the Fabians have only themselves to blame. Their core voters are disinchanted, leaving in droves and turning to the BNP. Labour in their last 180 days, are facing a complete 'wipe out'.
Johnson, like all pathetic Labour Ministers, is too late, shallow and unhelpful. The electorate want a General Election now.
Will you ignore the experts?
[info]kalvisjansons wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 06:08 am (UTC)
I tried to start a petition to have Johnson sacked, but the Number 10 petition team would not let it run (twice)!
Re: Will you ignore the experts?
[info]auntyeunice wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 06:33 am (UTC)
You'll have to wait until next year to see that happen through the general elections, one petition they can't ignore.
Re: Will you ignore the experts? - [info]kalvisjansons - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:13 am (UTC) Expand
Johnson >>>lining himself up for future PM??
[info]canukgal wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:12 am (UTC)
Methinks that AJ is making a run for it!!!!!

I wonder who exactly he wants to debate with???
Will it be Dumbledy at ALI BEEB or that PAIN in the As* HAIN ??
I can hardly wait for that contrived and spun 'debate' to be on the telly ...
Johnson do me a favour and shut up >>you are a 1st class prat.
Re: Johnson >>>lining himself up for future PM??
[info]msmint wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 03:55 pm (UTC)
You're forgetting High Priestess unelect Warsi and our resident Yankee British 'Historian' Bonnie.
The girls must "debate" too - they've bought new mega huge poppies especially for the occasion!
Mad
[info]over325one wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:14 am (UTC)
The only reason most immigrants come here is because their own courntries are hell for ordinary folk. Their countries are over-populated and poor. Is this what we want for the UK. Immigration is no good for any country. Even the USA now has enough people. Politicians the World over should be concentration on reducing the population. The Vatican should be shut down for propagating population terrorism.
Re: Mad
[info]pete_s wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:34 am (UTC)

Totally agree; been my sore point for over 20 years, the worlds problem is overpopulation. In the last 50 years the worlds population has more than doubled. The main areas of expansion, India, S America, and Africa have trebled and quadrupled.
The Horse has gone you Donkey!
[info]sportingmac wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:27 am (UTC)
I suppose you will sack the 'people' if you get the wrong answer from us too.
NO WE DON'T!
[info]sidsnot wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:44 am (UTC)
We just want you and your Communist pals with your Secret Thought Police to go to North Korea where I'm sure you will live happily ever after.
Debate race-replacement.
[info]peterross wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 07:54 am (UTC)
Any debate run by the mainstream parties won't discuss the knub of the issue:

>>>>> The race-replacement of the English in England <<<<<

The English have the same right to life and land as any other people. If reclamation of our land and a redemption of our people from the genocidal disaster of minority status later this century is NOT allowed into the debate, thgen it will be of no use to us, and it will not address the real situation.

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/losing_it_getting_it_back/
Re: Debate race-replacement.
[info]canukgal wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:19 am (UTC)
<<>>>>>

What the Brits need is a CONSTITUTION and asap >>>>

You cannot rely on any Govt to put your interests first unless it is stated IN LAW..
You should start a petition for this immediately before next GE
Re: Debate race-replacement. - [info]uanime5 - Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:59 am (UTC) Expand
You ain't seen nothin' yet
[info]alan_honiton wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:12 am (UTC)
I recollect some 2 years ago annoying a few people by posting the following little table:

Net immigration 1997-2007 = 1.8 million
Unemployment of 16-24 and over 55 year = 1.8 million
New jobs created 1997-2007 = 1.8 million

The figures may not be totally accurate, but you do get the drift.

Is it any wonder that over 940,000 people voted BNP at the Euro election. Don't be surprised if 1.8 million vote BNP at the coming general election, the majority of these votes coming in 'Labour strongholds' i.e. from people most affected by immigration and unemployment. Alan Johnson & Co. have only got themselves to blame.
[info]obeseshady wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:21 am (UTC)
Surely its simple: those leaving the country have money, those entering have none. It adds to the inequality that is pushing the UK into its problems!!
LEST WE FORGET
[info]pete_s wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:22 am (UTC)

Unlike the serviceman to whom we have just had a remembrance service for their sacrifice. We have the other end of the spectrum, Marxist scum 'postie Pat', who used racist stigmatisation as a means of suppressing any debate on immigration. (One definite incident was when he and Harman ganged up on Hodge when she went off message about the allocation of council accommodation to immigrants.) No we will not forget who the British Traitors are.
Still banging on
[info]barrieredfern wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 08:29 am (UTC)
His idea of debate is to beat the Labour drum on immigration still louder - till we're all as deaf as he is. No sir, it is not a debate people want but action.
Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>

Most popular in UK News



Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date