A cross-party parliamentary group – the first to tackle such a politically divisive issue – says net immigration must be reduced to zero, with the numbers arriving balanced by those leaving.
The group hopes this will stabilise the swelling UK population and reduce pressure on public services at a time when immigrants are entering at the highest rate in recorded history.
"We strongly believe we must ease the pressures that immigration is placing on our public services, environment and, indeed, on the cohesion of our society," it says in a report, Balanced Migration.
Oh how I laughed when I read this. Laughed out of disbelief really, as not so many years ago, I was running for a party with this exact same policy. Well almost the same, but with one key difference, that I shall get to in a minute.
As people who read this or my previous blogs should know, I was a member of UKIP. UKIP had an immigration policy of "Net Zero" immigration up until fairly recently. They have hardened that line a bit (too hard in my book) to being a moratorium on immigration for 5 years. I certainly understand this, because people are getting very annoyed with the situation, but I don't believe in throwing the baby out with the bath water.
I remember the utter abuse UKIP and myself had to endure for putting this policy out. The fact is, UKIP warned what unlimited immigration would do and they have been proven right. What makes this even funnier though, is that UKIP were slagged off as being racist for their policy. Racist, even though UKIP actually didn't try and give a mainly white, EU members are allowed rule, while stamping hard on a mainly non white rest of the world.
Immigration is a tough subject, because the EU puppets in charge have made it tough. If Britain had stuck to a mix of limited, skills based immigration, combined with a fair amount of refugees, then we would not be in the mess we are today. Immigrants would have integrated much better and the existing population would not be feeling under siege as now.
I am pretty pragmatic when it comes to immigration. In an ideal world, all countries would have a free, libertarian government. Therefore, all countries would all be roughly equal in prosperity etc and if immigration did happen, it would be because society REALLY did need it. There would be no overloading the "good" parts of the world, with exoduses from the "bad".
We don't live in an ideal world though. We have a world where huge chunks of it have been gripped by the cancer of socialism. Even in the good parts, such as Britain, the idea that stealing is right has taken hold, meaning any immigrants will be seen as a drain, rather than a benefit, as it should be.
For that reason I am glad at the Libertarian Party's minarchist approach, of getting this country sorted first, before hopefully becoming a beacon to the rest of the world. Simply throwing open the doors in Britain is and has been damaging this country, while not improving any other areas of the planet. It is lose lose for everyone.
That means having a fair points based immigration system again, that doesn't discriminate depending on your colour, or region of the planet you come from. Instead it will reward individuals who work hard, want to be British and will provide benefits to this country. Maybe one day, when the playing ground is more equal, this could be loosened up a bit. I think we have a long way to go before that day becomes realistic.
1 comment:
You're a pragmatist Matt, I like that. I'm still hoping to get a reply to my question I put to you in our Facebook discussion.
Greg
Post a Comment