The Student Room Group

Home Secretary branded "racist" for her immigration plans.

Scroll to see replies

Original post by jelly1000
Oh of course there was immigration before 1997, I'm well aware of that, maybe its just my perception but it seems that prior to 2004 migration was far more controlled. Certainly the change in population in my London borough was steady before 2004 and then there was a noticeable change in mix. But Tony Blair allowed Britain to become party to open door migration. Tbh I also partly blame the EU too for coming up the the idea.


Tony Blair did not allow Britain to "become party to open door migration". It was the Conservatives who took Britain into the EU in the first place; Labour opposed it at the time.

As for EU free movement, that is a part of the EU and it was whether the UK had a conservative or Labour government; both parties supported being in the EU. As for non-EU immigration, there has never been "open door"; you have never been able to simply turn up in Britain and just live here. Some might argue immigration was too high, but as you have conceded such immigration preceded Tony Blair. Focusing on the Blair years is a very superficial analysis that allows someone to avoid having to look at the actual, systemic issues that have occurred under governments of both parties for the last 50 years
Original post by AlexanderHam
Tony Blair did not allow Britain to "become party to open door migration". It was the Conservatives who took Britain into the EU in the first place; Labour opposed it at the time.

As for EU free movement, that is a part of the EU and it was whether the UK had a conservative or Labour government; both parties supported being in the EU. As for non-EU immigration, there has never been "open door"; you have never been able to simply turn up in Britain and just live here. Some might argue immigration was too high, but as you have conceded such immigration preceded Tony Blair. Focusing on the Blair years is a very superficial analysis that allows someone to avoid having to look at the actual, systemic issues that have occurred under governments of both parties for the last 50 years


But when we entered the EU it was a totally different organisation to what we have now. I do agree though that a Conservative government would likely have opened the door to the Eastern European migrants in 2004. And I'm well aware about how it works with regards to non EU immigration, I think that side of things works pretty well by and large.
Looks like govt is doing a u-turn on naming and shaming ..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37600566
Original post by Rakas21
I see nothing wrong with such transparency, it's upto the consumers as to whether they wish to shop at immigrant filled firms or not.

In Norway i believe they even make your tax records public.


Ok then. But this isn't part of an general increase in transparency. This is a policy focused on foreign workers to placate the xenophobes in this country.


Original post by AlexanderHam
It's just ridiculous to blame the Labour government, as if there was no immigration before 1997. It has been the long-term policy of both parties to allow in significant numbers of migrants, in fact the real opening of the floodgates happened under Ted Heath, Labour used to be much more sceptical about immigration due to the downward pressure on wages that occurred.

The tendency for many people on the kipper right simply to blame everything on Tony Blair is boring, non-factual and lacking in understanding of British political history. In fact, before the Blair government almost no asylum applications were refused whereas after the Blair government came to power they refused many thousands each year.


Free movement of people is a very pro free market position to take. Which makes is strange to say so many right wingers, who otherwise tell us the wonders of the market, hate free movement so much.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Blimey1000
Looks like govt is doing a u-turn on naming and shaming ..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37600566


Rudd never meant it - it was just one of those racist-sounding things to say at the conference to make kippers believe the Tories are on their side really.

The focus groups and private polling must be repeatedly informing the government that there is a massive amount of race hate to be pandered to in the constituencies, which is depressing enough. How much more depressing is it that a supposedly social-minded PM like May feels it's correct to thrown bones to them like this.

Or - even more worrying - they did mean it. :eek4:
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Rudd never meant it - it was just one of those racist-sounding things to say at the conference to make kippers believe the Tories are on their side really.

The focus groups and private polling must be repeatedly informing the government that there is a massive amount of race hate to be pandered to in the constituencies, which is depressing enough. How much more depressing is it that a supposedly social-minded PM like May feels it's correct to thrown bones to them like this.

Or - even more worrying - they did mean it. :eek4:


I think they meant to name and shame, but the reactions and pressure they got, force them into a "managed retreat".

At least they're seeing sense, this policy would have made Britain looks and feel xenophopic.
Original post by Blimey1000
I think they meant to name and shame, but the reactions and pressure they got, force them into a "managed retreat".

At least they're seeing sense, this policy would have made Britain looks and feel xenophopic.


The current Tory Party has basically become a wing of UKIP. It's a huge win for the latter, although they will now decline as a party, since there's no longer a need for them.
I dont see anything wrong about using foreign workers. the premier league is full of it.

btw British workers often take up jobs in europe too thanks to free movement of people.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending