Ed Miliband: 'We got it wrong on immigration'

So what would his party do about it? Stop people coming in from Europe? Can't see how he would get that one past the EU

Nick,

if the transcript is verbatim , them he didn't change the subject. He carried on waffling about immigration until you offered a get out of jail free question.

"What is Labour saying to them if it's not saying we'll stop the immigration?"

So he launches into answering the what is Labour saying response because you missed the key qualifier - what is Labour saying to them about immigration if it's not .....

Labour certainly lost touch on immigration, but both labour and the BBC got it wrong on pushing multiculturalism. It does not work, it creates elites within cultures and is disruptive. Someday we will find ways of promoting an integrated multi racial society. But such an ideal must not be imposed top down by a leftist (labour!) elite who basically distrust the people they claim to represent. What labour never realised was that the people of this country - apart from a minority of misfits - are not racist, and did not have to be misled by false figures on immigration. But what the people of this country do not want - and this needs to be grasped within the BBC - is an enforced programme of college relativism which treats intolerant cultures alongside the tolerant culture shared by British people. When labour come to terms with this they will be able to restore their base with ordinary working people. But somehow this seems a long way off.

Both Labour and this coalition have, and continue to, con the public on this.

Here is an example, David Cameron last week said 'What's more, we have exempted what are called 'intra-company transfers' from the limit.....So I completely reject the idea that our new immigration rules will damage our economy'. He obviously didn’t think much of the advice from the Migration Advisory Committee on this aspect of immigration policy.

If you google 'backthemac' you can look at a worked example of lost revenue through so called 'intra-company transfers' and some freedom of information requests which really show what is going on. Why hire a resident when you can get tax breaks to bring in a migrant instead?

Nick isn't it about time some of you journalist pinned the Government and Labour down on this, or is it that you just haven't noticed what has been going on?

They are mugging the public.

Are there any policies from the last 13 years of Labour that they haven't yet admitted were wrong?

Iraq; wrong.

Banking regulation; wrong.

Immigration; wrong.

Why should anyone vote for these jokers?

There won't be any coherent immigration policies until politicians make a concerted effort to understand what the issue actually is. Even in Nicks's piece above there is apples and oranges - mention of Polish immigrants, members of the EU, alongside the Cameron pledge to reduce non-EU immigration.

In 2009, net immigration was around 200,000 (ie people in less people out). This was dominated by those in the 'Formal Study' reason - almost 190,000 net immigration. Job reasons (got a job or looking for work) actually saw a net outflow of nearly 20,000. Looks to me as if the student route into the UK should be at least subject to a bit more rigorous analysis.

We seem however to learn little over the years on this issue and dive to the lowest common denominator, pulled along by the growling red top newspapers.

'I think what happened was that we thought there would be a certain number of people coming into the country from Poland - it turned out to be much larger - it did have an affect'

Not only did Labour spend 13 years lying about immigration while in governemnt, they still haven't stopped. As the above quote demonstrates their latest wheeze is to pretend the problem relates mainly to immigration from EU countries whereas in fact the majority of immigrants have come from outside the EU. Labour will always favour mass immigration from 3rd world countries because the majority of such immigrants vote Labour. A vote for Labour always has been, and always will be, a vote for mass immigration. Period.

Nick Robinson - were you frustrated with your interview and 'responses' from Ed Miliband?

My personal view is that Ed Miliband answers questions that could have been asked by Nick Robinson, or any political journalist. A robotic politician, like Ed Miliband appears subject to. and under severe training and potential 'brainwashing'?

Never mind Nick, no political journalist, however, experienced could have attained even a tad of reality from Ed Miliband? You did the best you could - the answers your received says more about Ed Miliband's inability to communicate than your journalistic abilities?

However, Nick Robinson, you are not so bloody perfect either!

glassfet

'Are there any policies from the last 13 years of Labour that they haven't yet admitted were wrong?'

Yes.

They're still in complete denial about how their reckless spending helped create the largest deficit in the G20, never mind the fact that nearly all the money spent was p****d away.

Ed says; we got it wrong on immigration, in a number of respects!!

You certainly did! - Let’s list a few of them.

>Letting unskilled, ‘non-EU’ workers into the country that the UK didn't need.
>Using this type of immigration to sustain welfare dependency, instead of tackling it.
>Failing (spectacularly) to understand, that not enforcing the cap on ‘new EU member state’ migration (when virtually everyone else did) meant that ' virtually all' migrants from those states would come to the UK.
>Labelling anyone who questioned their immigration policies, racists.
>Failing to promote integration, in favour of multiculturalism.
>Adopting absurd PC policies, like not flying the Union Jack on council buildings in case it offended immigrants…

And the result of these ludicrous policies? – Their own CORE voters elected the BNP to the European parliament! You couldn’t make it up!

5. At 17:47pm 19th Apr 2011, glassfet wrote:
Are there any policies from the last 13 years of Labour that they haven't yet admitted were wrong?

Iraq; wrong.

Banking regulation; wrong.

Immigration; wrong.

Why should anyone vote for these jokers?

///////////////////////////////

To get rid of the Torys

7. At 17:56pm 19th Apr 2011, jobsagoodin wrote:
'I think what happened was that we thought there would be a certain number of people coming into the country from Poland - it turned out to be much larger - it did have an affect'

Not only did Labour spend 13 years lying about immigration while in governemnt, they still haven't stopped. As the above quote demonstrates their latest wheeze is to pretend the problem relates mainly to immigration from EU countries whereas in fact the majority of immigrants have come from outside the EU. Labour will always favour mass immigration from 3rd world countries because the majority of such immigrants vote Labour. A vote for Labour always has been, and always will be, a vote for mass immigration. Period.

///////////////////////////////////////

How about a few facts to suport this rubish?

Rather too much of this 'we got it wrong' stuff going on for my taste - Labour with Iraq and with City regulation and (now it would appear) with immigration; the Coalition with forests, tuition fees, health, Libya, free schools, cuts and economic and fiscal policy generally - since I'd much rather that politicians in office got things right. And did Labour get it spectacularly wrong on immigration? Not for me they didn't, no. Sure, some problems with implementation of policy - sub optimal to have little clue what's going on at our borders - but the 'Come Hither' inward migration policy itself was a good one. The debate, though, is welcome. No taboos as far as I'm concerned (not as regards politics anyway). Two things are key in such a debate - (1) that people are free to speak their minds without automatically being called bigots by screeching liberal-lefties, and (2) that where people (when speaking their minds) come out with racist or bigoted sentiments, they get jumped on and given an extremely hard time.

Both David Cameron and Ed Milliband talking about immigration in the same week!
Anyone would think that there were local elections looming.

For pitys sake Nick, there are no more working class people.

Ed Milliband and Labour would have more credibility if they stopped ignoring the mess they left with everything and actually came up with some policies to get us out of the mess. I'd like to hear a genuine sorry for the financial chaos they left as well as immigration issues, the Iraq war, the list is endless.
Its all very well Milliband saying he's starting with a 'blank sheet', unfortunately thats all we have got, its easy for him in opposition to carp and criticise the coalition but he and Labour haven't come up with any alternatives. His sorry doesn't come across as sincere frankly for anything Labour did over 13yrs. For me, he comes across as weak and I don't hold out any hope of him staying leader much after the next election, they won't get into power on current form and under his leadership.

TheGingerF @6

Ginger, you are missing some points here.

2009 was the year of the recession; that's why the economic migration went into reverse. In order to get a true picture you need to view the decade as a whole.
And, I can testify to you, that at times during that decade, there were more immigrants working in my company than ‘locals’.

Also, the reference to the Red Tops is a little disingenuous. The Red Tops don’t create public opinion ‘out of thin air’, they reflect it. - They pander to public opinion.

Labour created this sentiment by the way they handled the whole issue. In the end, they are just too disconnected from working class people (the people they claim to represent) to realise how their policies were affecting them.

jobs @ 7

Oh no, not that 'Tories act in the National Interest whereas Labour are driven by narrow party political advantage' shtick again. Too silly by half, thus cannot be debated. What can be debated is the net impact on Britain over the years of sizeable numbers of people coming from overseas to settle here: it takes quite an eccentric mindset (IMO) to assess this as being negative.

What drivel! What cant! Labour kept the door open to immigrants for one reason only: immigrants, because they are typically "workers", generally vote for socialist parties - and Labour expected they'd vote for them. Therefore the more "Labour" voters you can create - by any means - fair or foul - the greater the likelihood Labour would keep power. Power is all that counts. After being “in the wilderness of opposition” for 18 years – the party bosses such as Mandelson were determined to keep hold of power at all costs. Hence the Devolution Bill, because if they lost Westminster, Labour leaders (who were mostly Scottish!) hoped to gain cushy jobs in Scotland & Wales. Remember John Prescott’s barking attempt to create a Northern Assembly? That was all about staying in Power. Lowering the Voting age to 16? Children are easily swayed by Socialist clap trap, they too would boost the Labour vote. What’s really amazing about their immigration policy is this: They almost succeeded! I am still amazed at the number of seats they retained! I have no empirical evidence – but my own MP, the censured Alan Keen, has retained his seat in large part because a vast number of his constituents are ethnically Asian – and they traditionally vote for any party that will keep the immigration door open. His wife, the equally censured Anne Keen, in the constituency next door, only narrowly missed being re-elected. I call it buying votes. (If the BNP had an open door immigration policy, they could expect a huge leap in support from “foreigners”! LOL) Ed Miliband’s “innocent expression” was an acting master class and should fool no one – he knew exactly what the plan was.

Milliband assured NC that he was "a Leader " shortly after being told he wasn't by someone his minders didn't screen out. A lot of things he may be but a leader he is not ; he resembles and acts more and more like his lookalike the old comedian Bernie Winters every day, if only he had a St Bernard to rescue him his cup would be running over.

'arealist' @ 19

Children and immigrants are particularly susceptible to 'claptrap', are they? You are quite a realist, I'm guessing!

13. At 18:59pm 19th Apr 2011, sagamix wrote:

Rather too much of this 'we got it wrong' stuff going on for my taste - Labour with Iraq and with City regulation and (now it would appear) with immigration; the Coalition with forests, tuition fees, health, Libya, free schools, cuts and economic and fiscal policy generally - since I'd much rather that politicians in office got things right. And did Labour get it spectacularly wrong on immigration? Not for me they didn't, no. Sure, some problems with implementation of policy - sub optimal to have little clue what's going on at our borders - but the 'Come Hither' inward migration policy itself was a good one. The debate, though, is welcome. No taboos as far as I'm concerned (not as regards politics anyway). Two things are key in such a debate - (1) that people are free to speak their minds without automatically being called bigots by screeching liberal-lefties, and (2) that where people (when speaking their minds) come out with racist or bigoted sentiments, they get jumped on and given an extremely hard time.

-> Sagamix. You are a articulate man and i agree with the second half of what you are saying. It's important people have this debate. But on the first few main points you are wrong and seem to believe in Labour Party ideals way past their sell by date. NR is right to probe LAbour as to why their vote had spectacularly crashed in southern england. Labour will find it very hard to get a majority govt again unless it understands why it lost millions of voters between 1997-2010 many of them in england. The reasons are longer than Iraq & City regulation. It sounds like Labour's new strategy is to make a few apologies as to what happened, and hope they can get back into power due to a government making unpopular decisions. History though might not be on their side .

Ed Milliband says Labour got it wrong on Immigration, lets face it Labour got it wrong on just about everything, it does not matter whether they are New Labour, Old Labour or Labour, it is the same old spin, and facade covering their policies.

Labour got it extremely wrong on major issues like Budget Deficit, Debt, Banking Selling Gold, Immigration, Education, Transport, Trying to spend out of a crisis since 2004 when tax receipts started to go lower than spending when IMF warned Gordon Brown, but all this was covered up.

How can Milliband sit there are say they are now electible - the point is how can we trust them?? when all along they were telling us one thing, and doing another behind our backs, Labour spin had you beleiving all was well in this country when we were going down the pan fast, and much further into debt like £1 Trillion in Debt, and with £165 Billion Budget Deficit

Lets face it after 13 years of Labour we need change, and certainly not yet another labour government who made a mess of everything.

I thought Labour wanted to deliberately "rub the rights noses in multiculturalism"? That would indicate a deliberate open-door immigration policy. Ergo, Red Ed lied.

sagamix @18

Your speculation about mindset is rather adventurous isn’t it saga? People’s opinions on this subject tend to be based (at least in part) on how it is has affected them... I would be so bold as to suggest that you do not move in the same circles as those who were disaffected by mass immigration? And, let’s face it, calculating the benefits one way or the other is rather complex and open to subjectivity isn’t it?

IMO there is nothing wrong with immigration at all, so long as those immigrants are of economic benefit and that their 'volume' is sustainable. Unfortunately, I think that Labour's ‘take’ on economic ‘benefit’ and volume, was somewhat expedient to say the least!

Angus Prune @ 11 & 12: I dislike rants whichever side of the political spectrum they come from. I also believe that rants that include spelling errors are easy to dismiss.
You may care to note that the plural of "Tory" is "Tories", support has a double "p" and rubbish a double "b". You might also care to note that it is only since Labour found itself not occupying Downing Street that it has been prepared to recognise the folly of some / all of its policies in government. Would you have been happier for Labour to continue in office given that it is (at last) willing to admit that in several important policy areas it was simply wrong. How do you justify a party remaining in office when it is clear that the policies it would have continued to pursue were misjudged?

brilliant labour got it wrong on immigration...brilliant brown got the economy screwed up...how can anybody ever vote for this crowd again...were all paying the price(except hestor and diamond of course). what a shambles.....im getting out of this hopeless country forthwith.

Immigration was certainly an issue at the last election in Dover. Immigrants were seen to be pouring into Dover by the bus load, were given priority housing and were next seen at the local Post Office queing for benefits. Of course the out of town landlords didn't mind who stays at the property as long as they get paid by the government. The buy to let market increased ten fold.

It's a shame Nick didn't ask whether or not Labour got it wrong on enforced multi-culturism, which is the actual reason for their immigration policies.

Immigration was a vote loser for Labour precisely for the reasons Mr.Milliband indicated.Studies show that tensions over immigants coming into working class areas arises over practical issues like competition for jobs,housing,schools,medical and other services.

Uncontrolled immigration can lead to status degradation if wages are lowered,housing less affordable,services reduced.There is also a cultural cost when the indigenous character of neighbourhoods is diluted.

Employers however benefit from immigation.They reduce wages and social costs,immigrants are non-unionized and will tolerate worst conditions than native workers,they may work harder,or offer skills in short supply.

Mass immigation poses a conflict of interest between employers.workers and local communities.In a period of full employment,this conflict can be accomodated within existing structures,at a time of mass unemployment and hardship,latent tensions come to to the fore.

There is both a need for immigation,and for social controls so that the social costs are not met by local communities least able to bear them..It is unwise for Mr.Cameron to raise this as a vote getting exercise during local elections.Like the Libyan debacle it requires a quietly measured response,his tone can only exarcerbate conflict.

richard @ catch

Thank you for compliment re comms, most kind. Yes, Labour lost votes from what is sometimes termed their 'core' - the white working class - due to the perception they cared more for elites (the likes of bankers and big business and hedge fund managers) and for minorities (e.g. foreign looking/sounding immigrants). Not just a perception either, as regards the first - the elites. But the second, immigrants? No, bum rap. Scapegoating - to be vigorously discouraged. Labour aren't a narrow class-based party these days, nevertheless they ought to be trying to reconnect to this 'core': if they woo them back by developing policies which disadvantage elites in favour of the poor huddled masses (white or black or asian or whatever) then great ... but if they were to attempt the trick by pandering to prejudice, that would be tacky.

sagamix 18

OK Saga how about this. Labour care about the people in this country, they really do. So much so that they are determined to ensure that we all the enjoy the benefits of mass immigration. A vote for Labour is therefore a vote for mass immigration. Always has been, always will be. Period.

The issue was not so much immigration as policy failure in the labour market where flexibility was just a posh word for marginality. No access to work particularly for the young, the poor availability of decent work, the neglect of manufacturing, the poor quality of remuneration, high marginal taxes on the lowest paid, the failure to organise worthwhile relocation packages for those in inaccessible places without work, feeble training in marketable skills, and a level of benefits that was a disincentive for work to many.

We should all feel sorry for Ed Milliband as he at least is waking up to the dreadful realities and after effects of the huge Labour bender of 2001 to 2008 which was great for those on the inside - huge salaries, massive pensions, grotesque expenses and immense fun – but for those on the outside it just got tougher, rougher and more abusive as each year passed. Under Blair honest folk weren’t respected, under Brown honest folk could not make a proper living.

I am both glad and relieved that Ed is doing some thinking but I fear that Labour have a long hard road to travel before they become electable again.

The sordid opportunism by which the cuts in the public deficit have been greeted by Labour has been nothing but a travesty of real politics. Labour just looks like a drunk that refuses to go home after the pub has shut, lingering noisily in the street until he slumps into the gutter.

There is room in this country for a centre-left party that believes in equality, individual freedom, without exploitation and manipulation; that holds the view that to have a society based on solidarity there has to be an economy that can sustain it, in which there is full employment and decent housing for all. This economy has to be built on value added activity in manufacturing, design, technological development with some softer edges in the arts and film. It could be a good society if there is a proper management of priorities driven by a wide, inclusive democratic agenda.

This is my free offer to Ed. I have never been a Labour voter as to my mind Labour has always been the barrier to the better society most people aspire to in this country.

My challenge to Ed is for him and his party to go back to their political roots in the work-places of Britain and start speaking to the commonality rather than the creepy management. They will be both shocked and surprised. I also suggest that in doing so they take real jobs, punch that clock, do the overtime, struggle to meet the targets and see how far the money goes.

Personally, I don’t think they have it in them but perhaps they can surprise me.

The European Commission forecast that no more than 60,000 migrants from Eastern & Central Europe would want to move temporarily into ALL the other EU States. So Tony Blair believed that estimate and saw no problem in allowing free access to a few of those under normal EU agreements. He was deceived!
Once that free access had been agreed there was no way back. Hundreds of thousands of new EU citizens moved here. Most of them said that they only expected to be here for less than four years. And, whilst most of them appear to have returned, we have no way of knowing whether they have. Moreover, local authorities - whose grants depend on what they claim is their new population - have not reported migrants who've gone home. Partly because there's no way of knowing whether or not someone has left for good or not. Which is one of the many reasons why electronic ID Cards were wanted.
Maybe many more have gone back home? We don't know. Even the census will not reveal the numbers because hardly anyone believes it these days.
So, it was the European Commission what done it! And nobody could ever know whether the migrants have gone back, nor how many British citizens have gone to Australia either.

J. Bull @ 25

Fair enough comment that living in London I see the positive side to immigration but it is mainly positive, isn't it? For the country as a whole, I mean. If we have a problem with insufficient quality housing for those who can't afford to buy or pay market rent (and we do) then let's address it. If we have a problem (which we do) with poor wages and conditions, or with no job at all, for those at the poop end of our skewed-up economy, let's address it. Focusing on immigration and immigrants is a red one. Mad, bad, dangerous thing to do. Anti-immigrant feeling is driven mainly by ignorance; I mean this quite literally - such feelings run strongest in places where there aren't many immigrants.

leftie, are you serious? You are blaming the EU for getting the numbers wrong? I presume the logical extension of this is to blame Mrs Thatcher for campaigning to join the EEC?

Sagamix at 21.

My post was about the tactics used by the Labour leaders to retain power, and the deception Ed Milliband is deploying regarding Labours actions and motives.

I did not write that "immigrants are particularly susceptible to 'claptrap'". You have chosen to twist and misrepresent my comment. Are you a Labour Spin Doctor?

I did write "Children are easily swayed by Socialist clap trap". That is what I meant - because they are. That is why a Tory government would not lower the voting age - they would not benefit.

Its election time so our beloved Labour leader has apologised for selling the UK out over immigration. he will not admit to lieing - thats too far.

Now, can we have a similar apology from BBC? Over the 10 years of Labour the BBC threw the "racist" card at anyone who dare raise the issue.Discussion was made impossible by an underlying accusation of racist motive.

Its all too late now -the country is overcrowded with services and infrastructure stretched to the limit. But at least the cause of multi-culturism entrenched.

Is this view still racist? Of course in the eyes of our left wing friends

Isn't it funny that the media only pay attention to working people when they can be associated with a right-wing tabloid populist issue like immigration? The irony is that I'm precisely the sort of person who should vote Labour but doesn't- New Labour contrived to annoy both the socialist and the small c conservative sides to my nature simulataneously- but instead of addressing the countless ways in which New Labour let us all down we keep digging this issue up. It isn't immigrants who deface this country with anti-social behaviour and criminality but but dysfunctional young white men. A proper centre-left party should address the material issues facing the working class while at the same time being bold enough to tell people who scapegoat minorities that they're wrong.

The problem was that the immigration was poorly managed, the infrastructure struggled to cope with the sudden influx of immigrants.

Properly managed immigration is a good thing, the problem is that we tend to blame our own inadequacies on immigration. At a time of high employment the migrant workers were prepared to do jobs the British were too good to do, whilst it was considered acceptable for fit British people to turn down such jobs.

I am sure that some of the immigrants took advantage of the system - it is human nature but overall immigration enriches our society. That however is not an argument against managing it - it is the mis-management of this that is at the root of a lot of the discontent.

I do find it wearisome that all parties choose the play the immigration card at election time, then promptly drop the issue when the polls close.

Yep, he changed the subject alright.

And, less than 12 months ago, he was part of a front bench team urging us to vote for five more years of this. He now tries a mea culpa to think it will head off haemorraging any more potential votes to the BNP in the north and the cities and UKIP in the tory shires, but in the end Nick, you're quite right, he ducked the question and couldnt answer and went back to his favourite dogwhistle.

What with Brown admitting at Breton Woods that he screwed up as well on regulation of the financial sector (although making sure he tars everyone else with the same tarbrush he's self flaggelating with)... and with Ball's example of the US leading the way out of danger by printing money and not cutting so far and so fast (with the ratings agencies circling like vultures) how the hell the left can say that what we had was worth sticking with, when less than 12 months down the line they're disowning policies that they wanted us to vote for....

Muppets, Nick. Absolute muppets. Not fit to run a bath let alone a country.

There appears to be a similar effort to 'de-toxify' as what the Tories did, and given the current climate it's probably not a bad idea to look the more honest party (despite the fact they're as meeja- and spin-obsessed as the others). Airing the dirty laundry now limits the number of soft targets for the coalition to hit come next election.

I do think the 'job pressure' is something of a red herring, the migrants took the jobs others didn't *want* in a lot of cases. So if we reduce immigration who'll take the low level jobs? Cutting benefits or otherwise to make lower waged employment attractive will be leapt on by the left as some kind of pogrom of the poor, and even the Tories haven't the cojones to try that no matter what they say.

The primary issue I see people having with the levels of immigration is the rapidity of change in areas, people get spooked and discomforted when the areas they grew up in are suddenly alien to them. Waking to foreign neighbours is one thing, waking to a suddenly foreign neighbourhood quite another and will stretch tolerance to beyond breaking point.

I welcome immigrants who come here to work, but we need to ensure there is a measure of integration rather than locales turning into enclaves, that way all sides benefit.

"they (Labour) are determined to ensure that we all the enjoy the benefits of mass immigration" - jobs @ 32

This reads oddly. You're going for sarcasm - patently - but it works only if the thing you're talking about as being 'good' (mass immigration) is very obviously bad. Whereas it's actually and in reality good (as post 18 makes clear). Hence odd. It's like I come round to visit and you bring out some genuinely delicious fig rolls (with the coffee) and you say as you proffer, "here try one of these delicious fig rolls" ... with a strange kind of amused look on your face. Odd, Jobs.

There is so much discussion about immigrants coming into working class areas, taking working class jobs. There has been many immigrants entering the middleclass professions, the universities and so on, where eminent local professionals have been ignored or by-passed for promotion. In a meritocracy there should be no complaints - the best for the job. But this is not a meritocracy and immigrants with wealthy contacts back in the home country have - to all extents and purposes - bought their way into the higher levels of their profession and once established practice discrimination in favour of members of their own country and culture. Thats another side of multiculturalism. Funny how this never gets studied - its always Polish plumbers who allegedly take all the jobs.

So leftie thinks Tony Bliar was "deceived?

Not as much as the UK population my leftie friend - the list is endless.

11#

Very helpful Angus.

Prunes are a laxative, arent they?

"Rather too much of this 'we got it wrong' stuff going on for my taste - Labour with Iraq and with City regulation and (now it would appear) with immigration"

Not good is it Saga, watching your castle in the sand being consumed by sea water?

30 bryhers

Employers however benefit from immigation.They reduce wages and social costs,immigrants are non-unionized and will tolerate worst conditions than native workers,they may work harder,or offer skills in short supply.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Unskilled labour provided by immigrants is often required because the least skilled natives in the UK are unwilling to do such work. They would prefer to live on benefits and governments of all colours have allowed them to make this lifestyle choice. The current government is talking tough but I won't be holding my breath.

Why are there immigrants coming to Britain?

Cheap labour, who also discipline & cheapen British-born labour.

Who wants cheap labour?

The bosses & shareholders, i.e. those who are already rich.

So who should we be having a go at, the immigrants or the bosses?

All out on strike on the 30th June for a start!
Already it's looking like we could have half a million coming out on strike.

So far Ed Miliband (why don't people call him Edward? too upper class?) has admitted that Labour got it wrong on immigration, the economy, the build up to the credit crunch and the war in Iraq.... Only the small issues about the money in everyone's pockets, employment prospects for today's youth and the lives of 100,000 civilians in Iraq.

So are we to vote for Labour because they got everything wrong, but at least they admit it - after the matter and in the lead up to an election?

Wouldn't it be better to vote for a party that gets some of it right but never admits mistakes?

"Are you a Labour Spin Doctor?" - arealist @ 37

No, just a Doctor. For these purposes anyway. And what I diagnose is that you look down on immigrants - along with other softheads like children and 'workers' - because they are (in your view) prone to falling for 'Socialist claptrap'. Reason I conclude this is you saying so.

#41 Fubar

It saddens me to say that I have to agree with you, Fubar. Ed's merry men are scuttling around like cockroaches when the light has been turned on and it is not an edifying sight. It would be nice to hear something positive from them even if they feel that the hairshirt fits better at the moment.

My one disagreement with you is over the value of the credit rating agencies. Although I know that their word still seems to be gospel it would be nice if, in the post-Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns world in which we find ourselves, organisations such as Standard & Poors reflected on what a crummy job they did in giving triple-A ratings to these particular organisations. Why we should listen to them now is beyond me bearing in mind that they seem to do little more than lick their collective fingers to see which way the wind is blowing. Money for old rope.

I feel that just too many people like to blame Polish/European immegrants for all the problems in the UK. I am a British citizen who married a Polish Citizen who works hard and pays taxes!!

I think Ed Miliband's using the same approach David Cameron did. He talks but doesn't say much, doesn't seem to be for very much but it's clear what he's against, and he's keeping his head down and waiting for the incumbent government's incipient unpopularity to win him a general election through sheer lack of credible alternatives.

I should think it will work.

fubar @ 47

Not really. When Ed Miliband says Labour 'got it wrong' on immigration what he means is he knows it cost them votes and he wants those votes back. It's an electoral ploy. What he actually thinks is what I think - they got it pretty much right on immigration policy and such policy (encouraging a steady and substantial influx of newcomers) will continue to be the right one going forward.

In the post mortem following their defeat last year, it was commented on by a number of Labour supporting activists and academics that Labour's loose immigration policy was not aimed at improving the economy, (although of course many in the CBI etc said the economy was benefitting). Instead they say the view of the labour goverment from 1997 onwards was that immigration and the growing multiculturalism that would result was a good thing in itself, regardless of any economic benefits that may or may not accrue.

why would the labour government hold such a view?

At best the labour goverment was engaged in social engineering at its highest level i.e. tampering with the actual make up of the nation just for the sake of it without any economic benefit in view.

at worst we are faced with the electoral manipulation argument that many posters refer to: i.e that labour favours loose immigration policies in order to boost its vote.

Has anyone seen any analyisis from 2010 election of the voting breakdown of recent immigrants? its probably quite a hard thing to look at. However at the time of the results and in the weeks after it did seem to me that a lot of the target conservative seats which didn't fall, where labour held on, were seats with large immigrant populations.

Maybe Nick you could look into this as a follow up?

Where a party would seem to benefit from changes in the electorate, and that party when in government implements polcies which result in such a change, the public have a right to be suspicious of that party's motives. That suspicion may not always prove to be correct, but they are right to have it. It is up to Milliband to prove them wrong. he is going to have to talk about immigration a lot more in order to do so.

So Milibands sorry is he? Going so far as to admit that Labour got it wrong on
immigration.Er....so whats he going to do to rectify the situation? Or does he expect
us to say,never mind Ed,there there,anyone can make a mistake?

Maybe he can apologise to all those that were branded racists if they as much as
dared to raise the subject.Perhaps he could explain why so many Britons despite
being fit were allowed,nay encouraged to adopt a life style of claiming benefits when
there were jobs to be had.

Miliband can apologise as much as he likes but there is no sincerity behind his words
so I suggest he goes away with his blank piece of paper as it illustrates him so well.
If he had a sensible idea in his head it would be in solitary confinement.

I listened to Ed Miliband spouting forth on tuition fees and it was as if he just forgot it was Labour who introduced them in the first place, then increased them even though they said they wouldn't and then ignored the fact that Darling admitted he should have increased them to £5000 rather than £3000. Their hands are not clean on this issue. Same with bankers bonuses. He talks about introducing a bankers tax even though Darling himself said it would not work for any more than a year and when they had the best chance of doing something when the bankers were on their knees, they let Northern Rock and RBS get away scott free with golden handshakes, no future promises on bonuses and did a stitched up deal between Lloyds and HBOS.

Immigration is just one more disastrous labour policy on top of the others......, failing education standards, too much beaurocracy, failure to keep a sensible limit on health and safety legislation, political correctness, diversity and equality legislation. They ruined private pensions by removing the dividend tax relief while continuing with generous public sector pensions. They increased salaries of town hall fat cats, put a lot of very expensive beaurocrats in the health service and wasted money on not a lot. Salaries at the very top of the public sector soared while those at the bottom stagnated and they introduced 100s of stealth taxes. Hospitals and Schools built on the "never, never" PFI deals which made private companies very rich and will cripple us financially over the decades to come. Sold our gold at rock bottom prices, paid out extortionate welfare payments without restriction in some cases to people who know how to milk the system and creating a whole generation of people who receive so much in benefits in terms of housing benefit etc that it will never be worth their while to take a job. This joker will never lead this country if there is justice in this world. As a previous poster said though, immigrants tend to vote Labour so I am sure this is one reason for the open door policy.

Why has Ed Milliband rounded on Polish people? As a son of a polish Jewish Marxist you might question his statement on Polish people and ask yourself why he's singled them out. He's taken the easy option and picked a soft target for his immigration revelations. He's too scared to talk about immigration from outside the EU. labour need a real leader who's not too scared to have a real discussion on this issue.

# 54
I should think it will work.

Perish the thought ! More expenses fraudsters ? Another speaker voted in for amusement rather than ability ? Peers guilty of fraud who believe they are beyond reach ? We cant afford another set of weak,self interested politicians taking advantage of our democratic system to play buggins game,surely ?

I would also like to agree with a number of posters here and say that all the polish immigrants I have come across have been hard working decent people. A good number of those I have spoken to at any length made it clear they intended to work here for a period of time in order to save up to buy property/ start a business back in Poland, and improve their skills at the same time. So they ultimately will not add to the population/ resources/housing problems in the long term. Most of them didn't have children either.

Milliband's attempt to claim that labour's huge mistakes on immigration boil down to underestimating how many Poles would arrive is transparently nonsense. But he says it because there is no danger of upsetting his friends in the multiculturalism business. If he were to say Labour was far too lax in allowing sham marriages bringing in people from the sub-continent that would be a much more hot potato, but its much nearer the truth than blaming the poles.

OK JohnB @ 17, I'll use more verifiable stats (ONS, Long Term International Migration Tables), instead of your emotive assertions at 10 above.

Net inflows, averages per annum for Tory/Labour periods:

Job related immigrants - average 91-97, -15k, average 98-09, 13k
Family members - 91-97 7k, 98-09 32k
Students - 91-97 46k, 98-09 115k
Other/no reason - 91-97 8k, 98-09 4k

So John, what do you think as a national policy we should concentrate on based on these stats? I've no doubt that at certain local levels these stats hide issues, but at a national level they tell a massively different story than we get fed by politicians and the red tops (who create opinion by stoking embers of frustration and anger).

People (not you specifically John) make idiotic assertions about Labour bringing in immigrants for extra votes. What? How does that work? Does anyone out there have any reliable stats on how many people have come into the UK, got citizenship and went on to vote Labour?

So John, I'm not missing any points that are worth taking any notice on with this particular issue.

bass @ 52

"It saddens me to say that I have to agree with you, Fubar."

I know what you mean but 'frightens' would be nearer the mark if it were me feeling this way.

Your point re the Ratings Agencies: too right - severely discredited. Having said that, it's heartening to see S & P going officially 'negative' on the US. Probably only politics which stops them doing the full monty with a downgrade.

I see we have an airing for the feverish labourphobic notion that immigration policy 1997 through 2010 was driven by electoral calculation. This is nuts. I mean, few people are as anti-tory as I am but would I go around believing/alleging that because there's a probable correlation between home/share ownership and voting Conservative, because of that then Maggie Thatcher's privatisation and right-to-buy policies of the 80s were pursued not because she felt they were right for the country but because she was hellbent on creating a ton of clowns? No of course I wouldn't. I'm rational, see.

I'm from Planet X,
You invited me into your home. I brought all my friends, who then brought all their friends, we decided to have a party. We ate all the food and emptied the fridge, we broke the ornaments and complained because your house and the way you lived was nothing like Planet X. We got soo drunk that the neighbours called the police. We tagged the photo album on our equivalent to Facebook. We called it Labour, because it was soo easy too ruin your home. On Planet X we know how to party!

Would you invite me again?

TheGingerF @62

Nothing emotive @10 Ginger, surprised by that? - Nor anything idiotic, (as inferred) also surprising. - Which points do you want to challenge?

Perhaps we have a different perspective? I have (actually) employed immigrants, and I’ve no axe grind (they generally out-perform the locals). And, I’m also exposed to ‘core’ Labour voters (unavoidable) on a daily basis. What I have written reflects their view, I can assure you of that. And, the proof is incontrovertible – BNP in European parliament!

And, regardless of the stats you present (fly in the face of the facts to me), as I already inferred, over the last decade, the majority of manual Labourer's that I have employed were non-British (that certainly wasn’t the case in the previous decade). Perhaps the official documentation wasn't consistent with the actual intention??

Ginger, I think that you’re approaching this from the angle of; ‘Labour must be right, how can I defend them'??

The only way you can get out of this Labour controlled detention centre is to get a job or sign off or die. Why not do all of them; I said to my mandatory stage 4 advisor?

Well I think that Ed has got quite a way to go to decontaminate Labour from their failures but at least he's taking steps along that path. Good to see that the party have kept discipline as well - I think they have little chance of getting in next time but maybe after that they'll be back. I think a lot of it depends on how the coalition gets on with the economy, if it goes well then why would we want to hand the keys of the Ferrari to the teenager who wrecked it last time?

Whilst it's good that labour are starting to admit they made mistakes, it won't do them much good because the people responsible for those mistakes are still at the top of the labour party.
Labour is tainted in the same way that the tories were tainted in 1997.
With the tories it took an almost 100% "staff turnover" to get back into power again, ie they knew that the MPs who had been tainted had to leave the [shadow] cabinet and be replaced by new people that weren't responsible for what people didn't like about their party.
It's all very well saying "the party made mistakes", but when the people at the top of the party are still the very same people who made those mistakes and who spent years with their fingers in their ears going "la la la, I can't hear you" when people pointed out those mistakes to them in the past, then the "apology" is pointless.
The 2 Eds were, for example, at the heart of the economic policy that almost bankrupted the country, but they still don't think that they should bear any responsibility for it. The 2 Eds also still seem to think that the policy of increasing spending exponentially every year wasn't a bad one and they still think that our £1trillion to £5trillion (depending on which figures you use for accounting purposes) debt isn't a problem.
I don't think his problem in the south is one purely of immigration, I think it's a more general problem that Ed Miliband and everyone in his cabinet spent 13 years refusing to ever listen to anyone other than the unions or minority interest groups, and they spent 13 years refusing to ever listen to rational argument.
Labour will never see power again unless they have a similar "staff turnover" as the tories did after 1997.
Only when the people responsible for the current mess are sacked and replaced with new people who say "our predecessors made massive mistakes, and never listened to reason; we're different." will they get to see power again (this is what Tony Blair did when he was elected labour leader, and that's how he got labour elected 3 times in a row; Brown/Balls/Miliband then spent 13 years destroying what Blair had tried to achieve and labour are now suffering for that).
Would you vote for Pol Pot if he said "oops, sorry, I made some mistakes last time; let me try again" ?
Labour are tainted, and they will not be un-tainted until they completely replace their shadow cabinet with people that weren't responsible for this mess, where those new people then apologise and say that their predecessors were just plain wrong on most points and that rational argument, logic, common sense, and facts will, finally, become something that they'll actually consider using for once.

49#

Yeah, that would be really bright thing to do wouldnt it....? {facepalm}

No Edward (65), I almost certainly wouldn't invite you again. There, question answered - now one for you. What on earth (or on Planet X) does your post have to do with the blog topic? At first I thought you were saying our country has been 'trashed' by immigrants but that would be too stupid for words and so it must be some other more subtle point. Care to enlighten?

64#

But you do think it though, dont you? And the behaviour of the electorate in subsequent elections would possibly reflect that and maybe provide you with anecdotal proof if nothing else, the visible intended consequences of such a policy?

Now, given that you would already buy that (you must have done, otherwise you wouldnt have floated such a statement in the first place), how difficult can it possibly be for you to make the leap in the other direction to what has happened now being an intended consequence of political policy on behalf of New Labour? And, considering the paper trail I showed you, plus statements in the press from a member of the PDU at the time, which you absolutely, utterly refused to even discuss? A fingers in the ears exercise worthy of a holocaust denier?

In the space of some days, Ed Miliband and Lord Digby Jones have highlighted their disagreement over mass immigration from the A2/A8 States of the EU with Mr Miliband specifying Poland, saying "we got it wrong". Tell me about it! An estimate of 15k a year from the A8 and how many was it Ed ? Nearer 200k!
However, to air their concerns now is closing the stable door - under EU law, currently, there is a 7 years transition period (inadequate, terribly so) and in the case of the A8, that expires on 30 April, and similarly 31/12/13 for the
citizens of A2. In a nutshell, Ed Miliband is as powerful at curtailing EU migration as King Canute. Incidentally Cameron is in the same canoe.
I am not a "fan" of Mr Miliband's but to his critics on this issue, I guess he only highlighted Polish migration, as they came in the consistently highest numbers, I believe in recent months,overtaken by the Baltic States.
These high numbers can only be changed if a future UK Govt. were to engage with the EU Commission to discuss bringing to an end open borders, increasing the short 7 years transition period, and the Europhiles will kill that one stone dead, UNLESS.....Far Right Parties do unexpectedly well in Elections in France, Italy and Germany and scare the established elite in to moving Right in internal migration policy. Last year I would have said, impossible, but now, after the Finnish votes, & a drift Right in France, concerned about losing their jobs to other Europeans from countries with much lower GDP's than theirs (and ours), Barroso and Van Rompuy might well be forced into an unthinkable(previously) backtracking on this "mad open borders policy" to quote Digby Jones.
Bear in mind, Croatia, and FYR of Macedonia, even Albania & Serbia are eager to accede, with yet further thousands moving Westwards, into shrinking Western economies, fewer jobs, and spending cuts.
Yes, Mr Miliband you got it wrong but as a previous poster said, you knew at the time exactly what you were doing and the reasons for it.
I guess we are making progress - a few months ago they had their heads buried deep in the sand and now the politicians are talking about it, like the good oil & gas men they are. Pity is, it's all gas, no oil!

52#

Yep, fair points BG, I fully accept what you're saying re the credit ratings agencies. The only problem is though, its not us making the decisions based on their data; Its all well and good for us to say "you're crying wolf, your reputation is tainted, why should we listen to you?", but it is a whole bunch of other people who will use that data. A whole bunch of others who will use that data to make borrowing more expensive, launch speculative currency trading putting particular nations and currencies under pressure... given how delicately balanced some of the worlds economies are and how much western debt is held by the likes of China & the Middle East, anything to devalue thier holdings of such foreign currency is likely to have an impact on them as much as it would say, the US. Are we potentially looking at the USD being replaced as a global reserve currency and this being the start of the move away from it? Maybe. I dont know enough to be able to say categorically, but I've seen it blogged on many occasions that this may happen...

55. At 22:39pm 19th Apr 2011, sagamix wrote:

fubar @ 47

Not really. When Ed Miliband says Labour 'got it wrong' on immigration what he means is he knows it cost them votes and he wants those votes back. It's an electoral ploy. What he actually thinks is what I think - they got it pretty much right on immigration policy and such policy (encouraging a steady and substantial influx of newcomers) will continue to be the right one going forward.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then if he does continue to back such an open door plan, then it proves that he has learned absolutely nothing. And if the mug punters believe such an "electoral ploy" - a euphamism for a lie, if ever I heard it - then the stupid fools deserve everything they get.

It means his admittance of getting it wrong is completely hollow.

It proves that he is continuing to abandon the traditional Labour core vote - I mean, lets not beat around the bush, Labour always hated them anyway, they were merely a means to an electoral end, as you've admitted (you see nothing wrong with them being subjected to lies/electoral ploys, to con them out of their votes, do you? You've already said you agree with it) - to the likes of the BNP.

Like you, Ed isnt going to see much of the effects of immigration from his place on Primrose Hill. The dinner party socialists dont tend to live in areas that are more.... cosmopolitan, shall we say. You're not going to see it in Hampstead and you're probably not going to see it much in Swindon either, particularly from the M4 or from a train carriage.

Cameron hasnt got the cojones to deal with it either. Vince's contribution is about as much help as flatulence in a spacesuit.

Look. No-one is saying that immigration per se is a bad thing.

What is bad is unregulated, uncontrolled, poorly administered immigration that is not co-ordinated across government departments who provide infrastructure and services to cope with the influx. We are not the UAE, like Dubai where 80% of the population are ex-pats and most of the local citizenry are wealthy enough already and are happy to buy in expertise from all over the world to do virtually everything for us, because we dont have the local expertise, educated workforce, etc to be able to deliver.

I came out here to Belgium in response to a vacancy that could not be filled by anyone else. They'd looked for months, locally and internally and not found a candidate. I didnt take the job of a Belgian or undercut anyone or anything like that. I cannot access any kind of state benefits over here until I have paid into the system for three years. If I lose the job, or decide to give it up or change, I have to find another, or return to the UK. British policy over the last 20 years has not been as rigid as this and over the last thirteen years has become a free for all.

#63 Saga
I do have my disagreements with Fubar but there are times when we find common ground and he certainly doesn't frighten me in the way that some of the correspondents on these blogs do. I'm saddened by Miliband's timidity and almost masochistic delight in kebabing the party.

#74 Fubar
Points well made on the global markets. Unfortunately, we seem not to have advanced from Nigel Lawson's 'teenage scribblers' of the 1980s and thus the world is in thrall to the workings of a self-appointed financial oligarchy who strive only for their own benefit and give less than two hoots for the rest of us. There is, however, certainly a question to be raised over the Dollar if only because of the systemic collision between the White House and Congress over economic policy. I am not sure if any currency is yet ready to usurp the greenback; the Euro is up to its neck in problems and the Chinese refuse to float on the open market. It may be that the Dollar retains its status by default, at least for the time being.

'I don't think we lied but I do think we got it wrong in a number of respects.'

I'd have wished this statement was pursued a bit more.

For instance, Mr. Miliband 'doesn't think' Labour lied.

While his friend and former speechwriter seems rather more clear that they did.

Yes, this was pursued, but reading through I am left merely wondering what else Mr. Miliband 'doesn't think' about, yet gets to 'lead' on such a basis.

Ok ED, but what are you going to do about EU imigration, you cant control that can you?

Perhaps we can have another lie about a referendum, thats always a good way to get more votes.

You know what, same question to Mr Cameron.

Ed Miliband: 'We got it wrong on immigration'

But has the Labour party mass immigration conspiracy and lies about their ethinic restructuring of Britain ended?

Perhaps Millibland thinks that mass immigration is not an issue in the North of England and the Midlands? Perhaps he had better visit ... and be careful ... as he might run into you know who!

Politicians in all political parties know that mass immigration is damaging and very expensive to British people and lowers the standard of living of real British people by our absorbing all of the massive indirect hidden costs and disbenefits. UK mass immigration carries with it a massive net cost to British people ... not only the taxpayer ... but all British people as the those British people now lying in a cot and sucking a dummy have had their life chances significantly reduced by Millibland and his bent Labour colleagues and their grotesque attack on ... being English, particularly.

Has the Liberal end ethnic cleansing of the British working class and non-working 'under-class' now ended? I DON'T THINK SO ... MIllibland's measly mouth words as he tries to garner political support for Local elections are ... blood boiling and sickening

Millibland needs to be told and understand that the ethnic cleansing of British people for the purpose of changing the ethnic structure of British society and election fraud with illegal immigrant votes and their attack on English cultural strongholds are totally unacceptable and a full public enquiry is needed to bottom out the conspiracy of the Labour and Liberal and other political parties with this illegal behaviour.

Begin again 56

What you are describing is gerrymandering,ie.altering boundaries or electoral composition for partisan advantage.

The primary reason why Labour held its vote in areas of high immigration is because immigrants move into working class areas where housing is cheaper.

Not social engineering but location,location,location.

76. At 08:28am 20th Apr 2011, Bass_God wrote:
#63 Saga
I do have my disagreements with Fubar but there are times when we find common ground and he certainly doesn't frighten me in the way that some of the correspondents on these blogs do. I'm saddened by Miliband's timidity and almost masochistic delight in kebabing the party.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would echo all of that but especially the last sentence.

If Miliband is a leader and he and his cohort have some cohesiveness as well as the responsibility and authority to develop and direct policy within the party {gasp, pause for breath} - should they not be doing so?

Or are they waiting to get May out of the way?

Or are they waiting for the run in to the Party conference?

Or are they waiting for the event itself?

Or are they waiting for the Coalition cuts to take effect in about a year's time?

Or are they waiting for the start of the next General Election?

At least Cameron has opened the debate on immigration. This was not possible under the 13 years of Labour, where anyone who did so, was classed as a racist or bigot.

However, it is all very well to get Labour to admit their mistakes, economically or on immigration, but this will not reverse the damage done by them. Nor will it bring about the reduction in immigration levels of unskilled workers which is now needed. Skilled immigrant workers are still necessary, of course, because of the poor education standards in Britain. Again a legacy of Labour incompetence. Overall the future looks very bleak for British born workers. The private sector may create jobs, but who will these jobs go to? The Government may well bring in policies to encourage those on benefits to go to work, but are they employable, is another question.

During the Labour years immigration increased to high levels, this, should there be a downturn in the economy, would almost certainly cause problems as the taxation pool began to shrink Those already on benefits at the start of Labours time in office remained on benefits and added to, whilst immigrants took the jobs available. Services and housing, even in the boom times was starting to come under pressure, now in this financial crisis, it is virtually impossible to keep up with the expanding populations needs. Immigrants who settle will themselves have families and so the population will continue to rise.

The only possible solution to this is the UKIP policy to withdrawn from the EU, which is costing the UK 20 billion a year, which will give Britain the ability to decide its own policies on immigration. Furthermore, only allow the skilled workers in that the economy actually needs from outside the EU. As there does not seem to be a will by Government to do this, I think the tensions within an overpopulated Country will grow. The BNP may well gain from this. UKIP certainly will.

Immigration of the right sort can be a positive thing for a Country, if it brings with it the skills that are lacking in its own workforce. However, when it occurs merely to fill the unskilled gap that those on benefits should fill, or for political reasons, to increase a voting base for a party, it is not. It then just increases the burden on state resources.

It seems to me that none of the main political parties are actually in tune with what the electorate actually requires of Government at this time. I would venture a guess, that should a great of the public read a manifesto, by say UKIP, they would find t

re #10
You also have to remember that it obviously didn't dawn on N.Labour when carrying out their migration policy that a substantial number of those coming to the UK from Europe would be somewhat inclined to the extreme right. They assumed all migrants would be voting Labour out of sheer gratitude.

FS wrote

"It proves that he is continuing to abandon the traditional Labour core vote - I mean, lets not beat around the bush, Labour always hated them anyway, they were merely a means to an electoral end, as you've admitted (you see nothing wrong with them being subjected to lies/electoral ploys, to con them out of their votes, do you? You've already said you agree with it) - to the likes of the BNP."

Always hated them? I know that you overstate for rhetorical effect,this is really over the top.

Skilled manual workers were one of the three pillars of the Labour Representation Committee which preceded the PLP.The composition of the PLP as late as the Wilson governments had a substantial trade union element.The change to a managerial socialism accelerated in the eighties as TU membership declined,especially in the private sector.

Labour has lost support among the underclass coincident with the decline in semi and unskilled work.Bewilderment rather than hatred is the predominant emotion about what to do about it? Even with a rebalanced economy,modern manufacturing doesn`t increase demand for unskilled labour.It`s mostly skilled and professional, for the party to survive it has to draw support from these new forward looking elements.The equivalent of the skilled working class of a century earlier.

The graduate and professional core of the PLP is not dissimilar to the other parties.Fewer businessmen and aristocratic scions than the Tories,fewer jellied eel millionaires and Essex waste paper tycoons as well.As for the Lib-Dems enough said.

Strange, some of the post went missing. I seem to be having trouble posting today.

At least Cameron has opened the debate on immigration. This was not possible under the 13 years of Labour, where anyone who did so, was classed as a racist or bigot.

However, it is all very well to get Labour to admit their mistakes, economically or on immigration, but this will not reverse the damage done by them. Nor will it bring about the reduction in immigration levels of unskilled workers which is now needed. Skilled immigrant workers are still necessary, of course, because of the poor education standards in Britain. Again a legacy of Labour incompetence. Overall the future looks very bleak for British born workers. The private sector may create jobs, but who will these jobs go to? The Government may well bring in policies to encourage those on benefits to go to work, but are they employable, is another question.

During the Labour years immigration increased to high levels, this, should there be a downturn in the economy, would almost certainly cause problems as the taxation pool began to shrink Those already on benefits at the start of Labours time in office remained on benefits and added to, whilst immigrants took the jobs available. Services and housing, even in the boom times was starting to come under pressure, now in this financial crisis, it is virtually impossible to keep up with the expanding populations needs. Immigrants who settle will themselves have families and so the population will continue to rise.

The only possible solution to this is the UKIP policy to withdrawn from the EU, which is costing the UK 20 billion a year, which will give Britain the ability to decide its own policies on immigration. Furthermore, only allow the skilled workers in that the economy actually needs from outside the EU. As there does not seem to be a will by Government to do this, I think the tensions within an overpopulated Country will grow. The BNP may well gain from this. UKIP certainly will.

Immigration of the right sort can be a positive thing for a Country, if it brings with it the skills that are lacking in its own workforce. However, when it occurs merely to fill the unskilled gap that those on benefits should fill, or for political reasons, to increase a voting base for a party, it is not. It then just increases the burden on state resources.

It seems to me that none of the main political parties are actually in tune with what the electorate actually requires of Government at this time. I would venture a%2

#30 Bryhers wrote:
"Uncontrolled immigration can lead to status degradation if wages are lowered,housing less affordable,services reduced.There is also a cultural cost when the indigenous character of neighbourhoods is diluted."

Miliband is addressing the economic aspects, but the "cultural costs" of uncontrolled immigration are rarely discussed by mainstream politicians. It's usually career-terminating.

According to a YouGov poll for Channel 4:

25% of British-born respondents thought that "immigration into Britain over the years
has led to the development of a rich and varied culture"

58% of respondents thought that "immigration into Britain over the years has led to culture in Britain being damaged and diluted".

War in Iraq and the ethnic cleansing by the 'out-breeding' of the British 'under-class' - SEND THEM TO 'THE HAGUE'!

FS

As a postscript,Labour is gaining support in the military after the spending review cut the terms and conditions of a military career,treating the front line as if they were civil servants.They are sayng never again,feeling betrayed by a government they thought were on their side.

Not yet a prelude to revolution.

Well, it didn't take them long to get into a mess on this one did it?

It's true, as labourbankruptedusall has pointed out, the current leadership of the labour party is tainted with the mistakes of its past. Until the labour brand has been through the decontamination chamber it will never get back into government. Either this or a swing back to 'Blue labour'.

Every time an election comes along the tories will simply trot out the immigration issue or the deficit and the labour party hasn't the faintest idea what to do about either at best, at worst they appear not to believe either is a problem.

Read sagamix and now he is not only a Brown and a deficit denier but an immigration denier. What's next? Education standards went up under newlabour?

It's so refreshing to see that the real labour party can't resist its comfort zone of pretending that they had created the perfect society and economy when the evidence is so patently to the contrary...

Clearing up labour's mess....

Oh, I give up, I cannot seem to get a complete post through.

The British under-class need help and compassion and jobs and not ethnic cleansing and immigrant 'out-breeding' at the hands of Milliband, Trade Unions and those Liberal Democrat nasties ... Clegg, Cable et al

Vince Cable ... why is he so nasty towards the British 'under class' ... did he develop those views while he was the Chief Economist at Shell?

sagamix...

In response to your prior post about your friends 'Jeremy and Cornelia' ...

I am happy to stand up anywhere and defend a point of view that a combination of the views of Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill and John Maynard Keynes have led the left to some of the daftest, dangerous, socially divisive and most illogical economic and social policies of our lives. Not to mention the concomittant mass destruction of wealth.

90. At 09:58am 20th Apr 2011, Susan-Croft wrote:
Oh, I give up, I cannot seem to get a complete post through.

=====================

I can't get much more than a line through anymore - site seems to be showing signs of upgrade which doesn't work

88#

If you want to believe that, you carry on. I've been too close for too long to the armed forces to be fooled by that. Sorry, with the exception of them feeling let down by the coalition and SDSR (which any idiot could fathom out), I dont buy a word of it.

You plainly have no comprehension of the level of dejection that they have with their own senior commanders compared to what they feel for the coalition. And if you think that is going to translate into votes for your party after what they did... you carry on. The Guardian would swallow it. I wont.

JH@86

I always find these polls strange, we are a mongrel race in general - our civilisation is the result of Roman, Saxon .....etc invasions - apart from the more remote areas of Britain I doubt there are many true native Britons. The very name of England is derived from the Angles one of the Germanic tribes that settled in Great Britain - our whole heritage is based on immigration, moreover we are not averse to a bit of colonisation ourselves or economic emigration for that matter.