The Great Debate on Immigration, Race and Religion in the UK

  • Should widespread immigration be curbed? 9

    1. Yes - all immigration numbers must come down. (7) 78%
    2. No - allow however many immigrants want to come. (0) 0%
    3. Yes, partially. We should only have those who we need to fill skill's shortages. (4) 44%
    4. No, it'll be pointless now. The stable door has been open for too long. (0) 0%
    5. Don't know (0) 0%
    6. Don't care (0) 0%

    Is it now time to curb widespread immigration?


    Update 22 June 2017


    Biggest rise in population in 70 years


    According to ONS figures, our population has risen by more than half a million in just a year. Over the last 11 years, the population has risen by five million. Today the official UK population stands at 65,648,000 people. The official figures do not count the "undocumented" aka the illegal immigrants. I believe the UK population is already at or near 70 million today.


    Supposedly with Brexit we can "take back control." Seeing is believing. There won't an indigenous British population left at this rate to take the control back.


    White British people are already a minority in London, our capital city, how much longer will it be before the British people become the minority in our own country?

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • The big problem we have is that uncontrolled immigration is putting a huge burden on our NHS, schools, housing, social care and other public services, and we simply do not have the resources to cope.


    We need to control immigration so that anyone wishing to reside here should prove that they have a job offer and will not require State benefits. Those not intending to reside should be required to provide proof that they have health insurance and this should be recorded on a database so that hospitals can ascertain quickly that an individual has the necessary cover before treatment, as happens in other countries. Those two things alone would have a big impact on our ability to sustain our public services, and hopefully the powers that be in Government are already working on practical ways of not only regulating the flow of immigration, but also how to avoid knock on costs which disadvantage taxpayers.


    However, I think that trying to put a figure on the numbers let in is probably the wrong approach. Provided the right criteria is used on who comes in, the numbers should largely regulate themselves.

  • I agree old boy, you can't put a arbitrary figure on it.


    As you say, our services are crumbling. But the elites just don't seem to understand that or care.


    A top doctor said that before people come to this country and as part of the their visa application process, they must have health insurance or a means to pay.


    I don't know if you saw the first episode of that BBC programme "Hospital" which has caused all the outrage over the past few weeks and that Nigerian woman.... It's on player, if you haven't.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I just posted this over at The Times which I'm copying here. They've been getting all my best posts these last few days!:


    I reckon we need a wholesale change of our immigration policy which many will consider hard line.


    Citizenship should only be given in exceptional circumstances and never immediate.


    In many countries around the world, you can never be a citizen of that country and even if your children are born in that country, they are not entitled to it either. That's what needs to happen here.


    So, any newcomers we allow in, become Residents but not citizens, the same applies if their children are born here.


    If these Residents obey our laws, adhere to our customs and traditions, then there should be pathway to citizenship for them. But, "all" should not be treated equally.


    There would be different tiers, ie Tier 1 would be those coming from Aus,NZ,Canada & America. Tier 2: Western Europe. Tier 3: Eastern Europe etc.


    So, Tier 1 Residents would have a far easier pathway to citizenship than the lowest tier.


    Do this and it will stop many of the problems.


    We can not deport "foreigners" with ISIS links, as an example, if they're born here. And if they're origins are from here, they should be treated as traitors and dealt with by whatever the law deems correct.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • The way people complain about 'mass' immigration, you'd think they hadn't ever looked into the facts of the case, in that - outside the European Economic Area - all entry is decided according to UK Immigration Rules, decided by Parliament and enforced by the Home Office and FCO. The rules vary according to the potential entrant's nationality, purpose and duration of stay, among other things. The tabloid BS about any 'open door' immigration policy has been one of the most dishonest, most dangerous and most poisonous elements of recent political discourse.

  • The open door policy was not a invention of the tabloids, but of Tony's Blair's policy unit. When I find the link, I'll post it here. What is shocking is that same policy has been carried on with by the then coalition and now conservative governments.


    If we do not have a open door policy to non-EU immigration, why do we have so many people from African and Asian countries on benefits and have no job?


    A certain fire in a certain tower block illustrated this perfectly. And before I get blasted by some people, the loss of life was terrible and disgusting, it should not have happened to anyone. Specifically it should not have happened to those residents of that tower block, because many of them should not have been here to begin with.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Is It Now Time To Curb Widespread Immigration? No. The time to curb it was in 1997 when Blair opened the doors and invited the world to come here.


    Now is the time to stop immigration entirely for at least 5 years except for immigrants with skills we can't do without and a few genuine refugees and humanitarian cases. Meanwhile we need to begin deportation of illegals, over stayers, failed asylum seekers and others who have no right to be here.

  • Is It Now Time To Curb Widespread Immigration? No. The time to curb it was in 1997 when Blair opened the doors and invited the world to come here.


    Now is the time to stop immigration entirely for at least 5 years except for immigrants with skills we can't do without and a few genuine refugees and humanitarian cases. Meanwhile we need to begin deportation of illegals, over stayers, failed asylum seekers and others who have no right to be here.

    It's such a simple thing Morgan, yet that is considered by many to be extreme even though most countries do this.


    If there are overstayers, ie lots of students, people who can't or won't find work, failed asylum seekers etc, why the hell are they here?


    Obviously from 97 onwards, was the open door policy, but I would have gone back decades earlier and been far stricter and choosier about who we let in.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • And just in time to illustrate the stupidity of it all today we have this.


    Housing crisis threatens a million families with eviction by 2020


    Report shows combination of low wages, freezes to benefits and rising costs of renting could cause more than 1 million households to become homeless


    https://www.theguardian.com/so…rty-homeless-shelter-rent


    On present figures, between now and the time the millionth family gets evicted, about another 1 million people will have been added to our population by mass immigration. Absolute lunacy.

  • I thought I had a poll to this topic before, but as all polls were lost when we got the new software, let's try again.


    Please go back to the first post and cast your vote!

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I'll extend my answer to include skills and labour shortage - I have no problem shipping in immigrant workers for low skilled jobs if required, all that is needed is control. You see this all over the world in places we have no problem doing business with and buying huge quantities of products from e.g. Taiwan and S Korea, so why we feel we can't do it here is beyond strange.

  • I'll extend my answer to include skills and labour shortage - I have no problem shipping in immigrant workers for low skilled jobs if required, all that is needed is control. You see this all over the world in places we have no problem doing business with and buying huge quantities of products from e.g. Taiwan and S Korea, so why we feel we can't do it here is beyond strange.

    I am in general agreement with what you say Hockler - other than I prefer that immigrants are allowed in to fulfill our skilled shortage needs.....when it comes to none, or lowed skilled immigrants, I believe we should do a bit more to encourage the many British low skilled residents currently unemployed before filling those vacancies with immigrants.....even though evidence suggests that immigrant workers are more diligent.

  • I see no reason at all to import low skilled workers from abroad. We should train who we have here. Although, as you say, foreign workers are more diligent, the term Polish Plumber has become the norm here in London now. Try getting a English plumber and for a reasonable price...

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • In my view the only way to promote tolerance is to be accepting of each other. By and large white British people are are already tolerant and as such do not need to learn from other cultures, especially from one where intolerance is rife in their home countries.

    I am sure Anna Soubry meant no offence and what she implies is well intentioned, but what she fails to recognise is that Indigenous people, whether we like it or not, will feel aggrieved when things that are both culturally and environmentally, have been changed, through force from the establishment, and as such comments like the ones Soubry made are unhelpful.

    I think it's common amongst MP's though. They seem to be trying to speak out for ethnics and minorities as if deliberately trying to alienate the majority. This in part is what caused the Brexit vote, because for too long communities of white, working class people seemed to feel excluded at the expense of migrants. Whether this was actually true is another issue, but Nigel Farage, like him or loathe him, seemed to be able to grasp the way people were feeling and what he said resonated with them. Of course some of his actions were highly inappropriate and the infamous poster released the morning of Jo Cox's death was one such action. But on the whole, Farage "got" people. He understood them. That's why UKIP soared, that's why Brexit won.

    Our MP's are trying too hard to be something for everyone and they are losing the battle with the voter. On the one hand you have Sarah Champion, brave enough to acknowledge that there's a problem with SOME Muslim men as they target white British girls to groom and rape. On the other hand you have Anna Soubry saying we (white people) should learn from Muslims - which does come across as patronising and tokenistic, and then you have Corbyn saying we mustn't address issues that Muslims create as white people create issues too.

    It's interesting that Broxstowe's mayor is Muslim, which suggests the "very white" constituents are not shallow enough to consider the colour of a persons skin or the religious belief of a person when they cast their votes. Therefore, I'd say Ms. Soubry could actually learn a great deal about her very own constituents. I'd also say that by and large, outside the big cities cross the UK, most people are "very white" but I hope no apology is required for being so, because it is becoming the norm now for white people to be criticised purely for their skin colour and religious belief and the way we culturally behave.

    Tolerance is alive and well in this country and by MP's undermining the majority of the people who vote for them and sticking up for an ethnic group - when it isn't really necessary, they create intolerance and division where before people didn't spend too long thinking about such things. It's all rather bizarre really.


    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/…the-country-a-better-plac

    e-tory-mp-claims/


    I know it's from "The Sun", but I tend to make my own judgements when it comes to what is credible and what isn't, and whilst some of The Sun is trash, much of it isn't.

  • Just reading The Sun article, Wizzy, will comment in a minute. I've got to go for a bit, but I think she is saying that Muslims stick together and we could learn from that.


    Give me 20 mins and I'll be back.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I think she is just making a very general point, wizzy, that we used to be a Christian country and communities used to stick together and now we don't. Whereas the Muslin community do stick together. I'm not sure if she is advocating a return to the Christian way of doing things, I've got better things to do with my time than visit a church on Sunday, especially now the weather is getting cold. Just a general point that we all should stick together.


    MPs can be very PC, but I don't think that was her intent this time.


    Can't stand bigots like Soubry.

    She believes what she believes and stands by them. I'm not keen on as she is such a stuanch remainer, but she sticks to her guns.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Just reading The Sun article, Wizzy, will comment in a minute. I've got to go for a bit, but I think she is saying that Muslims stick together and we could learn from that.


    Give me 20 mins and I'll be back.

    I think it's tone and language that is on trial rather than the content. Anna Soubry has already caused controversy by insulting her constituents for voting leave. She publicly said that her friend's business might fail if she (her friend) was unable to employ Eastern Europeans. I do get that faith is misunderstood, but whilst suggesting Muslims stick together, she is inadvertently advocating a divided "them and us" society. Brits do stick together and we are not as divided as MP's like to pretend we are. After all, in a democracy there will always be issues that divide us. And, the dimishing of our faith may also contribute to a lack of understanding towards other cultures.


    I think MP's though, need to be careful about how they say things, because whilst they are clearly appeasing ethnic groups, they risk alienating their core white voters. The very same voters who felt aggrieved enough to vote leave to begin with.

  • Andrew Neil has made the famous point (all over youtube) that liberals have got their way for the last 60 years and now with Trump and Brexit the tide is turning and they don't like it. As he goes on to say, if you're used to getting your own way and then that changes, its hard to accept.


    I am as sick as you about being told the country is divided, I assume they are going purely by the Brexit vote figures. But if you take out London (which is now majority from foreign origins) and just use the rest of the country as a gauge, a vast majority voted leave and we're not divided, not on this issue.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Andrew Neil has made the famous point (all over youtube) that liberals have got their way for the last 60 years and now with Trump and Brexit the tide is turning and they don't like it. As he goes on to say, if you're used to getting your own way and then that changes, its hard to accept.


    I am as sick as you about being told the country is divided, I assume they are going purely by the Brexit vote figures. But if you take out London (which is now majority from foreign origins) and just use the rest of the country as a gauge, a vast majority voted leave and we're not divided, not on this issue.

    Yes, agree with every word. The consensus amongst Remain voters outside the big cities is also "Get on with it and move on". The media is London-centric and wrongly believe that the whole country share their views. English people as a whole, voted Leave. As did the Welsh. I do not know any leave voter who has changed their mind. The more the EU keep on at us, the stronger their views become.

  • I think it's tone and language that is on trial rather than the content. Anna Soubry has already caused controversy by insulting her constituents for voting leave. She publicly said that her friend's business might fail if she (her friend) was unable to employ Eastern Europeans. I do get that faith is misunderstood, but whilst suggesting Muslims stick together, she is inadvertently advocating a divided "them and us" society. Brits do stick together and we are not as divided as MP's like to pretend we are. After all, in a democracy there will always be issues that divide us. And, the dimishing of our faith may also contribute to a lack of understanding towards other cultures.


    I think MP's though, need to be careful about how they say things, because whilst they are clearly appeasing ethnic groups, they risk alienating their core white voters. The very same voters who felt aggrieved enough to vote leave to begin with.

    This was something that that some of the old Labour MPs like Frank Field and Kate Hoey were trying to get across to their colleagues. The MPs are there to represent the people, not play out some liberal agenda or wackjob hard left agenda.


    May I advise you to stay away from Vince Cable's leader's speech that he gave yesterday, you won't like it.;)

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • As a white English person I resent anyone telling me I need to learn from people, as though our own history doesn't tell us enough about the sheer brutality of throne grabbing, internecine warfare, labour abuse, and religious intolerance, as well as civilization, law, codes of conduct and solidarity.


    The Muslim icon is the latest trendy thing and so no matter how many bombs go off and no matter how many soldiers are beheaded in the street and no matter how many citizens get wiped out by being rammed with trucks or shot at in mass murders, they will continue to worship their trendy (and useful) icons.


    This can do a lot of damage, especially when politicians pander to it and the media is about as trustworthy as an adder in a backpack.

  • As a white English person I resent anyone telling me I need to learn from people, as though our own history doesn't tell us enough about the sheer brutality of throne grabbing, internecine warfare, labour abuse, and religious intolerance, as well as civilization, law, codes of conduct and solidarity.


    The Muslim icon is the latest trendy thing and so no matter how many bombs go off and no matter how many soldiers are beheaded in the street and no matter how many citizens get wiped out by being rammed with trucks or shot at in mass murders, they will continue to worship their trendy (and useful) icons.


    This can do a lot of damage, especially when politicians pander to it and the media is about as trustworthy as an adder in a backpack.

    I'm not old enough to remember Enoch Powell's "Rivers of Blood" speech he made many years ago. I wasn't born until 1968! But, I am aware of it and I have read about it and even read the speech in its entirety. At the time he was branded by the left as a racist, a bigot. Harold Wilson's Government frantically imploding in on themselves through faux outrage and disgust. But also knowing that what Enoch Powell said, was what people in the streets were saying and how they were feeling about the country at the time. "The black man will have the whip over the white man" he said, allegedly using the words of a constituent. But Powell was probably the only politician to stand up and say something that not only resonated with the public, but was directly addressing the concerns the public had. Whether his anti-immigration speech (although he wasn't actually anti-immigration, he was more of a "enough is enough" type of person) had any effect in helping Ted Heath secure a surprise majority in 1970 is another debate.


    But it seems these type of things go around in cycles. Politicians of all parties since Powell, have diverted the immigration problem. Ignoring the views of the people who voted for them. Not listening to what was being said. People not actually saying that they want immigration stopped, but just asking their elected representatives to do something about the increasingly higher numbers of migrants. Control it. Fast Forward nearly 50 years, and another politician, Nigel Farage, pops up and does an Enoch Powell. He tells people what they have been wanting a politician to say. That they are not racists, they are not bigots, they are not xenophobes. They are just patriotic individuals concerned about the rapidly changing environment of their once familiar community. No one asked them if they wanted it to change in the way it did. No one asked them if they minded that their language should be undermined by those that can't be bothered to speak it yet insist we learn about what they want and how we can be taught lessons from them.


    I too have extreme difficulty in accepting from other politicians, sermons on how I must be tolerant. On why I should learn from "Muslims" and why millions of Eastern Europeans coming here and setting up hand car wash services is better than training Brits into job roles that would entice them to stay in the same job for many years. Isn't that better for productivity rather than getting staff on the cheap that swap and change every three months because some of them know the rules and clear off back to where they came from for a further three months before coming back and resuming the role they had previously swapped places with someone else?


    Anna Soubry is speaking as if we are the most hateful, divided, intolerant and racist country on earth. If there are divisions, then I blame that largely on social media and facebook and twitter in particular. People sitting in their living rooms clicking away agreeing with like minded individuals. Wrongly believing that the whole world shares their view. When they discover that most people have their own view, and often one they don't agree with, they can't handle it. Hence why all the labels and names have been attached to so many people in recent years. And then Soubry pops up and tells us all to be good little people who should learn from a sector of the community who has no intention or desire, to learn from its host community. Will these preachy MP's ever learn? The same applies when Labour MP's stand up with signs saying "Refugees Welcome Here" attached to their breasts. Who are they speaking up for? Themselves or the people they voted for. Genuinely persecuted people should always be welcomed, but wearing signs to state something that voters might not agree with, is not "getting" it is it? It shows that actually, MP's do not listen to, or care about, what voters say or think.


    It's like all this furore and outrage over the comments Jacob Rees-Mogg said regarding his catholic views on anti-abortion and gay marriage. Now, people don't have to agree with his views, but he should not be condemned for having them, considering as they stem from a religious belief. Are we now at the point where we have to tolerate the religious views of others because they are ethnic minorities but must condemn views of our fellow countrymen? Have people forgotten what democracy is about? People have views, people vote based on views, if those with views we disagree with are not the victors of a vote, the views don't get implemented. Simple! Installing views on people because they find alternatives uncomfortable, is not democracy.


    Here is Enoch Powell's speech in full for anyone who wants to read it. It's surprisingly perceptive:


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com…vers-of-Blood-speech.html

    Edited 2 times, last by wizzywick ().

  • I have been trying to support the British (and especially the English) cause for independence and a maintenance of the civilization to which all of the descendants of Britain belong, for seventeen years on the internet. I have been called a left wing spy by the far right, a racist by the liberals and a dangerous, mad, drug addict, alcoholic deviant by the mob who rove the internet, trolling anyone who has anything to say about what has happened, what is happening and who doesn't think that the platitudes of trendy ideologies are going to fix anything. I am against the new age love-heart balloon holding, candle lighting, teddy hugging faux mourners of Islamic attacks and I detest with a passion the moral supremacy that has grown in those who have been brainwashed by the disgusting antics of the media and the sly operations of politics.


    If you do what you have just done in your post above and mention the truth about certain unwise events and decisions, both past and present, you are destined to be trolled to death and libelled, lied about and dragged through the muck.


    I'm exhausted with it, to be honest, but I am not exhausted with my heritage and I am enormously concerned that the people from whom we stem, our biological pool, our rights to exist and to protest, and our creative potential, future and dignity are being slowly but surely ground into extinction by a now large and worryingly crackpot globalised mindset of acolytes with an idea of multiculturalism and an ambition to create one world, one race and one government.


    They don't see the irony of similarity to some of the perilous dictators and imperialists of the past. They see only butterflies of joy and fluffy sentimental journeys to peace and "love" if we all only kneel before the glimmering dome of the new Church of One.


    Creepy? Yes. Possible? Already happening.

  • More importantly politicians need to learn to start listening to the people who keep them in a job, that pays them a reasonable salary.

    Young boys in the park jumpers for goalpost that's what footballs all about isn't it.

  • Politicians today are mostly hand in glove with corporate powers. They have no interest in what the people want, all they need from us is the vote so they can perpetuate the farce of democracy. They will lie and cheat and make false promises to get the vote. Once they have it, they continue their exclusive and mutually beneficial relationship with big business.


    Not all politicians are like this but those who aren't often get shafted early by those who are and the media is often at the forefront of making that happen. Because the media is an arm of corporate power.

  • It's such a pity that Soubry didn't point out that there is a great deal that 'very black ' (And not so black ) people can learn from white people too. Like not forming rival street gangs and stabbing and shooting each other perhaps.


    Respect for women and their role, respect for the forces of law and order in the execution of their duty and not expecting police officers to remove their shoes while doing it. ( "Hold my gun a minute sarge. I must take my shoes off before entering this mosque." comes to mind.)


    Or perhaps she could explain to those she thinks we can learn from why she thinks they should support same sex marriages and gay rights. Not that she'd be allowed into many mosques to preach her message of course. Many mosques ban women altogether.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment.