Immigration

You shouldn’t watch Dapper Laughs. But you really shouldn’t let the likes of me stop you

As you’ll know by now, I’m big on thinking the right things. Should a thought strike me that m’colleague Rod Liddle would not describe as ‘bien-pensant’, then I will of course shy away from it, in a blind panic, for fear that my pensée should be considered insufficiently bien. Right now, however, I’m having doubts about the catechism. The liberal elite may take away my badge. Presumptuous as it may be, I’m going to go out on a limb and assume that Spectator readers are not immediately familiar with the work of a comedian called Daniel O’Reilly, otherwise known as Dapper Laughs. He’s an internet phenomenon and — let’s not

There is no such thing as ‘immigrants’ – only Poles, Yanks, Somalis…

There was much glee about yesterday’s publication of a report into the economic impact of immigration, which concluded eastern Europeans had provided a net benefit of £4.4 billion to the UK economy. There was far less mention of the fact that immigrants from outside Europe in the same period cost the taxpayers £118 billion. But as Christopher Caldwell observed in Reflections on the Revolution in Europe, the immigration debate is not about economics, for ‘the social, spiritual, and political effects of immigration are huge and enduring, while the economic effects are puny and transitory. If, like certain Europeans, you are infuriated by polyglot markets and street signs written in Polish,

To make asylum work, we’ll have to talk frankly

[audioplayer src=”http://traffic.libsyn.com/spectator/TheViewFrom22_6_Nov_2014_v4.mp3″ title=”Justin Marozzi, Douglas Murray and Fraser Nelson discuss immigration” startat=53] Listen [/audioplayer]It is the easiest thing in the world to say who should come to Britain and why. But if there are people who should be coming here, then surely there are others who should not? It is through our unwillingness to address the second part of this question that our problems arise. All polls show a majority of the British public want immigration reduced. But our politicians do not know what to do about it. One answer is to be honest. The Canadian and Australian ‘points-based systems’ we often hear about these days is just cover-speak for

The shameful truth: Britain lets in far too few refugees

Pictures from Calais have returned to our television screens, showing desperate men and women trying to break into lorries bound for Britain. A Sudanese man died jumping from a bridge onto a lorry heading for Dover. Another perished after falling from the axles of a bus. The mayor of Calais has blamed Britain for being an ‘El Dorado’ offering aspirational benefits to migrants — but as she’d know, the Africans arriving in her morgues would never have qualified for welfare. They risked death due to a sense of desperation, and hope, that we can scarcely imagine. The same is true in the Mediterranean, where 2,500 have died after embarking on

What Angela Merkel really wants (it’s not good news for Dave)

Angela Merkel is misunderstood. Last winter, when Russia moved to annex Crimea after the overthrow of Ukraine’s government, American officials put it about that the German Chancellor had described Russia’s leader Vladimir Putin as ‘living in another world’ and ‘out of touch with reality’. No evidence has emerged that she ever said any such thing. Europhiles in the press and in Westminster have now pulled the same trick on David Cameron. The Prime Minister has lately been ruminating about quotas for migrants from certain European Union countries. He complained last month when an unannounced £1.7 billion upward adjustment in Britain’s EU payment turned out to be triple the levy on

James Forsyth

Ukip’s Patrick O’Flynn on the ‘genius’ Nigel Farage and why Douglas Carswell’s votes won’t set party policy

Interviews with Ukip bigwigs used to happen in pubs. But times are changing. When I meet Patrick O’Flynn — the party’s economics spokesman, and until recently chief spin doctor — it’s in a juice bar. O’Flynn, a former political editor of the Daily Express who studied economics at Cambridge, is one of those driving Ukip towards professionalism. Ukip, he says, is the only party he’s ever joined, and it is ‘not part of the Conservative family’. That is why he rates its chances in northern Labour seats: ‘We didn’t close down any coal mines or steelworks and we’re not known as the patrician Home Counties rich people’s party.’ He claims,

PMQs sketch: No poppy for Harman, Miliband on the attack, Cameron in transcendental-parrot mode

Was that a pop at Hattie? Ed Miliband began PMQs by evoking the centenary of the Great War. ‘We will all be wearing our poppies with particular pride this year,’ he said. And every eye ran along Labour’s front bench to count off the crimson blooms. Balls, poppy. Miliband poppy. Harman, poppy. No, wait. As you were. Harman, no poppy! Her chic, double-breasted grey jacket bore no tribute to the fallen. But I expect it’s a CND thing. All the same, Miliband should send her out to buy one. Tuppence ought to do it. The Labour leader needed a win today. Badly. His poll ratings have dipped to the same

Lame duck unleashed – Bulgarian in London asks ‘what next’ on US immigration

London Careening through the city in a minicab last night, en route to a pub in Bloomsbury that had promised to screen US election results, the mustachioed driver confirmed my accent and inquired: ‘So, what will happen after the elections?’ I issued the run-down: left-ish Democrats lose control of the Senate to right-ish Republicans, who also expand their House majority. The Republican gains won’t be enough to have too much fun (for instance, re-reforming health care) without meeting the President‘s veto pen; but should prove enough to justify more executive action from the White House, bypassing Congress in areas such as immigration and border control, if Mr Obama’s pre-election promises can

‘Swamped’ much? David Blunkett 2014, meet David Blunkett 2002

[audioplayer src=”http://traffic.libsyn.com/spectator/TheViewFrom22_23_Oct_2014_v4.mp3″ title=”Mats Persson and Matthew Elliott join James Forsyth to discuss Europe and migration.”] Listen [/audioplayer] Last week saw an example of the cynicism, not to mention circularity, of our immigration debate that is too important to miss. The former home secretary, David Blunkett, took to the pages of the Daily Mail to support the current defence secretary, Michael Fallon. Mr Fallon, readers will recall, had just been caught in an interview using the ‘swamped’ word to refer to the historically unprecedented levels of immigration that have affected much of Britain in recent years. Like many politicians from across the party divide Mr Blunkett has lately become very keen

Steerpike

Carry on waffling about Europe, Dave – but do the EastEnders approve?

Having perused the replies for my call to caption Ed Miliband and Mary Creagh, Mr S is sorry to say that there is no ‘winner’, nor even a ‘favourite.’ There is merely a non-honourable mention for the response that caused your correspondent to chortle so lustily that I spilled my tea and soaked my smoking jacket. So, for reader ‘Samson’, no prizes or accolades, but rather a stern gaze for his amusing submission, reposted below. Samson ‘These earthlings are ever-displeased with me. Xinipemnan ijsdiih dhhjejndb ghty am I doing wrongly?’ Meanwhile, Mr S can’t help but pass along the chatter I overheard, whilst admiring the assembled regalia, at a recent photo-call when David

Is David Cameron about to make another migration promise he can’t fulfil – and distract from meaningful EU reform?

It is easy to understand David Cameron’s desire to make a ‘game changing’ speech on EU immigration. Voters are telling pollsters it is the issue that most concerns them, Ukip are breathing down his neck and it could be the swing issue in any future EU referendum. However, he needs to play his cards carefully. By making a ‘big pledge’ on reducing numbers, the risk is that Mr Cameron needlessly raises expectations that are undeliverable and draws attention away from negotiable reforms to EU migrants’ access to the British welfare system that would concretely address the inconsistencies and perverse incentives undermining public confidence in free movement. These reforms would be

James Forsyth

The bluffing game between Cameron and Merkel begins…

We should all get used to reading stories about how Angela Merkel has warned David Cameron that if he persists with X, Y or Z she’ll no longer be able to support Britain staying in the EU. It is the nature of a negotiation that those involved in it will, at points, suggest that they will walk away if the other party continues to demand something. The skill is, obviously, to know whether the other person is bluffing or not. Now as Mats Persson points out, Merkel’s comments are not as definitive as they are being portrayed as in some places. But there is no getting round the fact that

What Tory MPs remember from their away day

Two things have stuck in Tory MPs’ minds from their away. The first, that painting of George Osborne. The second, Jim Messina’s presentation and his confidence that the Tories would win.   Messina managed Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election effort and last year, the Tories announced that they had signed him up to advise them. At the time, most people—including several senior Cabinet ministers—regarded it as a press release hire, a good way of tweaking Labour but not much more. But Messina has, perhaps prompted by his great rival from the Obama campaign David Axelrod joining up with Ed Miliband, got more involved in recent months. He was over for Tory

If David Cameron doesn’t take immigration seriously, he’ll lose the election

Coffee House readers may remember a classic John Cleese comedy film almost thirty years ago called Clockwise. It’s the story of middle class angst, frustration, desperation and ultimate triumph at the last possible moment. It’s most memorable quote is that of Cleese to his young companion: ‘It’s not the despair Laura, it’s the hope I cant stand.’ Such is the attitude of many Conservative backbenchers as they wait for the Prime Minister’s keynote speech on his renegotiation with the European Union due before Christmas, a speech that will inevitably be seen through the prism of concern at the level of European Union citizens immigration to the UK, the growing voter

Isabel Hardman

Tories on away day put away hopes of winning Rochester

Tory MPs are in Oxfordshire today for an ‘away day’. It’s supposed to focus on the autumn statement, but Tory MPs also want to make a few points about the Prime Minister’s immigration policies (read Fraser’s Telegraph column on the problems with aping Ukip) and others want to complain about the Coalition continuing when the Lib Dems have blocked the EU referendum bill and are complaining about the Tory stance on drugs (this will be in vain, but a good number of backbenchers have told me they want to bring it up anyway). But the funny thing about this away day is that many Tory backbenchers were rather surprised to

How to fight Ukip

In the 2005 general election this magazine supported the Conservatives, with one exception — we urged voters in Medway not to vote for a deeply unimpressive Tory candidate by the name of Mark Reckless. Our then political editor, Peter Oborne, went so far as to write a pamphlet in support of the Labour rival, Bob Marshall Andrews, who had a commendable record of sticking it to Tony Blair. Reckless, by contrast, had nothing to commend him. He lost by just 213 votes — suggesting that The Spectator’s intervention had been decisive. But nothing, it seems, will prevent Reckless from being elected as Ukip’s second MP in two weeks’ time. The Ukip momentum

PMQs: Immigration arguments mean Ukip won the session without asking a question

Ed Miliband chose one of his medleys of things that have gone wrong for today’s Prime Minister’s Questions. There were plenty of those to choose from, and the Labour leader started with the almighty row in the Tory party over the European Arrest Warrant. He accused David Cameron of delaying the vote because of the Rochester and Strood by-election, and offered the Prime Minister next week’s Opposition Day debate to hold it, where he said Labour would support him to get the measure through. Cameron was having none of that, though, and pledged that the vote would be held before Rochester. He claimed Miliband’s questions had collapsed. listen to ‘PMQs:

Fraser Nelson

How Maggie’s ‘swamped’ comment crushed the National Front

The brilliant Matthew Parris writes in his Times column today about Margaret Thatcher using the word ‘swamped’ in relation to immigration in 1978. We had been averaging 500-700 letters a week when, discussing immigration in a TV interview, Mrs Thatcher used the word “swamped”. In the following week she received about 5,000 letters, almost all in support, almost all reacting to that interview. I had to read them. We were swamped indeed: swamped by racist bilge. It’s the things people confide in you when they think you’re one of them that can be so revealing. But there is another part of this story that Matthew leaves out. On election night

Border controls are a basic human right – is it un-Christian to oppose mass immigration?

[audioplayer src=”http://traffic.libsyn.com/spectator/TheViewFrom22_21_August_2014_v4.mp3″ title=”Damian Thompson joins Fraser Nelson to discuss the Pope v the Vatican.” startat=928] Listen [/audioplayer] Is it sinful to be not so keen on the whole immigration thing? I suppose Justin Welby thinks so, according to his recent comments. ‘We have to be careful and you can’t over-burden the community, you have to be realistic about that but also we must never – part of the Christian, at the heart of Christian teaching about the human being is all human beings are of absolutely equal and infinite value and the language we use must reflect the value of the human being, and not treat immigration as just a