mj.scuba Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Prior to the General Election in 2010, the Labour government commissioned and received three reports on immigration. Those reports cost £100,000+ of tax payers money to produce, but were not released to the public. Until now. Why was that, why would they keep it out of the public eye, away from the press and public scrutiny? Of course, we know the answer, because they didn't like what the reports said, and it showed how wrong they'd got it on immigration. Migrant cover-up: Reports kept secret by Labour show mass immigration cut wages, raised tensions and that too many stayed too long Labour accused of covering up warnings about immigration Just yesterday, by sheer coincidence ahead of this coming to light today, Ed Miliband admits immigration DID lower wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linus Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 No surprise there then. I have no problem with immigration, or asylum seekers, however I do have a problem with this lazy attitude to mass immigration Britain has. We don't have the money, industry or housing to support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Interestingly they had yet another objective, a sociopolitical one. Back in October Andrew Neather, a former Labour party speechwriter, let the cat out the bag when he said that the Government had encouraged immigration “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity”. But while Neather quickly backtracked, documents now released under the Freedom of Information Act suggest that he was telling the truth. Rather than being the result only of incompetence or a short-term economic measure to reduce inflation, Labour’s policy of runaway immigration was a deliberate and cynical attempt to change the face of British society. The document released yesterday suggested that Labour originally pursued a different direction. It was published under the title “Migration: an economic and social analysis” but the removal of significant extracts suggested that officials or ministers were nervous over references to “social objectives”. LINK When I voted Labour in 1997 I don't remember seeing that as one of their manifesto pledges. Still, it was nearly 14 years ago and the old memory isn't what it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 No surprise there then. I have no problem with immigration, or asylum seekers, however I do have a problem with this lazy attitude to mass immigration Britain has. We don't have the money, industry or housing to support it. I have news for you, mass immigration is here to stay whether people like it or not and whether it is done legally through the correct immigration channels or illegally in the back of lorries, cars, trains, boats, airbeds and aeroplanes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 When I voted Labour in 1997 I don't remember seeing that as one of their manifesto pledges. Still, it was nearly 14 years ago and the old memory isn't what it was. Well if you cast your mind back less than a year you will remember nothing in the Tory or Libdem manifestos about privatising the NHS and many other public services but this is obviously now their intention. You can't trust any of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linus Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I have news for you, mass immigration is here to stay whether people like it or not and whether it is done legally through the correct immigration channels or illegally in the back of lorries, cars, trains, boats, airbeds and aeroplanes. Aren't you a beacon of hope. If the goverment was to actually stand up and not back down on this issue, we could control it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share Posted March 1, 2011 I have news for you, mass immigration is here to stay whether people like it or not and whether it is done legally through the correct immigration channels or illegally in the back of lorries, cars, trains, boats, airbeds and aeroplanes. It's not a foregone conclusion. If a government were determined enough, they could cut it down to pre 1997 levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fareast Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Well, Labour certainly achieved its aim------changed the face of Britain ! If someone who 'd died, say in about 1970, could, by some miracle, return to Britain----say, the centre of London, Birmingham, Sheffield......et al....I wonder if they 'd be able to say where they were ? Of course, not only Labour are responsible for the massive change------but they do seem the worst culprits. Only some kind of twisted genius could transform what was once a decent, law-abiding, tolerant, relatively crime-free country into the hell-hole it is today, in such a historically short time. Will Cameron rescue the stuation ? To borrow from Damon Runyan, it 's about 7 -3 against ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alternageek Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 No surprise there then. I have no problem with immigration, or asylum seekers, however I do have a problem with this lazy attitude to mass immigration Britain has. We don't have the money, industry or housing to support it. I know were part of the EU, but they should put the same restrictions on benefits that new citizens entering the country have. I came to the UK under my UK passport, but never lived here (right to remain obtained through birthright) and as such had to be a UK resident for three years before I could qualify for housing, jobseekers, lower tuition fees (international students pay a really insane amount) and more. I was only allowed to access the NHS. If they put, say, a 6 months to 1 year cap for those coming from the EU, to claiming anything other than the NHS benefits would this calm peoples perceptions to immigration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Well, Labour certainly achieved its aim------changed the face of Britain ! If someone who 'd died, say in about 1970, could, by some miracle, return to Britain----say, the centre of London, Birmingham, Sheffield......et al....I wonder if they 'd be able to say where they were ? Of course, not only Labour are responsible for the massive change------but they do seem the worst culprits. Only some kind of twisted genius could transform what was once a decent, law-abiding, tolerant, relatively crime-free country into the hell-hole it is today, in such a historically short time. Will Cameron rescue the stuation ? To borrow from Damon Runyan, it 's about 7 -3 against ! What you drinking out there? Since 1970 the Cons have been in for most of this time. Didn't they do most to change the face of Britain by closing down it's regional industries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.