Total Visits

Thursday 28 April 2022

Nick Timothy, Theresa May’s Chief of Staff, exposes Boris’ real policy of increasing mass immigration!


 

Nick Timothy, Theresa May’s Chief of Staff, exposes Boris’ real policy of increasing mass immigration!

 

In the article below in the Telegraph, which is explosive, Nick Timothy explains just what Boris and his Government have been up to in trying to dramatically increase the amount of immigration into the country.

 

It seems that without any democratic mandate to do so and without any publicity or any honesty, Boris and his circle have been working on trying to undermine the real Will of the People, of not only of England, but also of the United Kingdom, to restrict mass immigration. 

 

Read the article.  Here is the link to the article >>> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2022/04/24/brexit-supposed-take-back-control-immigration-hasnt/

 

And here is the full text (as it is behind a paywall):-

 

Brexit was supposed to take back control of immigration. It hasn’t


Britain's new points-based system is designed to keep numbers high. When the public realise, there will be trouble

From the application of human rights laws to the analysis of statistics, immigration can be a complex subject, and the public debate about it can be deeply dishonest. But most of us ought to be able to agree some common-sense principles.

From bringing skills and enterprise to adding to the cultural capital of the country, immigration can bring great benefits, but in large numbers can also bring great challenges – so the flows must be controlled. This control needs clear laws, strong enforcement and tough but intelligent border security. Decisions ought to be made not in the interests of foreign nationals, immigration lawyers or supranational organisations, but the British people. And the decision-makers themselves must be politicians, directly accountable to those who elect them.

There is of course huge scope for disagreement in the practical implementation of these principles. We can differ over the extent of the need for foreign workers, for example, when there is a dire lack of technical and vocational education and training for people already living here. We can argue about the desirability of allowing colleges and universities the right to sell long-term immigration, not just education, to hundreds of thousands of foreign students.

Regardless of such differences, it is difficult to deny that our immigration system is failing, despite Brexit and the end of free-movement rules.

We are yet to see meaningful post-Brexit immigration statistics. In 2020, thanks to the pandemic, net migration fell by 88 per cent to just 34,000. In 2019, net migration was 271,000 – high, but not unusual for the past couple of decades, when the number has been known to exceed 300,000. We can already see from the number of visas issued that immigration is about to soar again, probably to record highs.

Comparing 2021 to 2019, work visas (239,987) are up 25 per cent, family visas (280,776) are up 49 per cent, and student visas (432,279) are up 52 per cent. More than a quarter of foreign students are Chinese, but the number of Nigerian students is up 415 per cent, Pakistani up 256 per cent and Indian up 164 per cent.

This enormous increase in immigration is not happening by chance. Even as the Government ended European free-movement rules after Brexit – a decision driven, pollsters agree, by concerns about sovereignty, democratic control and immigration – Boris Johnson demanded a more liberal policy.

Work permits were unlimited, and the definition of “skilled work” was watered down. The shortage-occupation list was extended to allow the recruitment of foreign workers in yet more trades. Employers were no longer compelled to seek workers from the resident population before recruiting from overseas. A salary threshold, supposedly set to ensure only high-skilled immigration, was set at £25,600 and for some workers only £20,400. Foreign students – whatever their qualification – were given the right to stay and work in Britain at the end of their courses.

And a new framework was established. The points-based system, the Government likes to point out, is inspired by the Australian model, which focus groups tell them is widely believed to be tough. But while Australia is uncompromising on illegal immigration, its policy on legal migrants has been liberal for decades, with its per capita immigration higher even than ours. Just as Australia’s points-based system was created to increase immigration, so is the British one. Our numbers will keep going up.

A points-based system surrenders the very principle of control. When migrants want to come to Britain, if they have the requisite number of points they simply win the right to come. And the principle of control – the very promise of Brexit, remember – will be further eroded by trade deals the Prime Minister is negotiating. In India last week, Johnson signalled his agreement with further liberalisation for Indian workers and claimed, despite probable record immigration this year, “we’re short to the tune of hundreds of thousands [of workers] in our economy”.

This is not true. But then, of course, the debate about immigration has never been honest. Advocates of mass immigration pretend we have always been “a country of immigrants” and engage in countless forms of evasion and sophistry. Some say the numbers are irrelevant and all that matters is control. Others insist that the public simply want the system to work, even as they oppose every reform to make it work. Most common, however, is those who pay lip service to the notion of overall control, while opposing control in every visa route going. In practice, they claim that each application is of vital national interest.

It is easy to make it sound reassuring. Who could reasonably oppose skilled workers coming here to contribute? But under the points-based system, skilled workers are not only astrophysicists: they might also be bricklayers. Who could oppose the brightest and the best coming to use their talents here? But the majority of foreign students attend institutions outside the Russell Group of top universities. Three quarters of the increase in student visas from 2019 comes from applicants to lower quality universities. All have the right to work here afterwards, whatever their qualification and whatever their job.

Supporters of mass immigration might not care. Every day that these policies continue, they get what they want and conclude that they will win in the end. But nobody has ever made the argument for such rapid population change and won an election. And this includes the Prime Minister, who has no mandate for the policies he is pursuing. His manifesto promised “overall numbers will come down … we will ensure that the British people are always in control”.

The British people have good reasons for wishing to remain in control. They know, from bitter experience, the costs of mass immigration. They know the problems caused by rapid social change, stark cultural divides, pressure on infrastructure and public services, housing shortages and high rents, job displacement and the suppression of wages.

When they realise, having voted to take back control, that the PM has given it away, the Tories will find there will be hell to pay.

 

 

 

Friday 22 April 2022

A guest post for Saint George's Day!


HERITAGE is a big thing. Pam Moorhouse, founder of Pam’s County Petition, the official petition of the British Counties Campaign (BCC), feels its loss keenly, having lived through a key part of its destruction.

 

“Do people in general know that in 1974 Edward Heath's Government FORCIBLY removed and changed all our traditional counties, inherited from our ancestors, and until then known and used by everyone for everything, and replaced them with government-created names instead?” Pam asks.

 

Accountability is a big thing. Pam adds: “No one in the whole country wanted this change, so by countrywide 'agents' they forced us to have the new county names, by ignoring all objections, only using the new names, and from then on, never mentioning any previous names, so people wouldn't want them back.”

 

Persistence is also a big thing. As Pam carries on: “This still carries on today, aided by the media, so losing identity, culture, history, how early people shaped and named the land, the ancient names and their meaning lost forever. Why?”

 

Answers on an email. To please the EU that we are no longer part of? Admin only? Admin. Most people love history, so buildings are preserved by law, yet counties, just as interesting, with their long history, are not, Pam says.

 

Our rights were enshrined in the bill of rights, 1689, so they say, rights in relation to all of our civil liberties and freedoms. “So why are the changes fair, going against public will when we are a democracy, 'ruled by the people, for the people?'” Pam asks. “What happened was terrible.”

 

So, we at the BCC say please support our campaign before we lose our precious county identity and information forever. Sign our petition so parliament HAS to debate the subject - www.pampetition.com; see our 10-minute video at www.britishcounties.org/video, where various supporters explain why the traditional counties are important.

 

Email campaign@britishcounties.org with any comments or questions.

 

We have about 30 MP supporters and more than 2,500 petition signatories to date. Lords are another target.

 

We also seek support from and connections with organisations similar to the English Democrats – which does a great job preserving and protecting our heritage, important for all – in Scotland and Wales. In Northern Ireland, county identity has not been mucked around with, so to speak, unlike elsewhere in the UK.

 

We at the BCC wish readers all the very best for St George’s day, and the year beyond.

 

Tuesday 19 April 2022

AN UNDISCUSSED LONG TERM CONSEQUENCE OF THE RUSSIA/UKRAINE WAR

AN UNDISCUSSED LONG TERM CONSEQUENCE OF THE RUSSIA/UKRAINE WAR?

 

One of the glaring delusions of liberalism is not only the counter-factual, but the weird idea that all human-beings are fundamentally the same.  Their differences are said to be merely a consequence of social and economic environment.  In this respect liberalism is as delusive as Marxism, which also imagines that human-beings are a product of socio-economic environment. 

 

Of course we are not only genetically different, but also culturally and morally very different.  It is a delusion just to think that because we think in a particular way that people in other parts of the world will do so too.

 

This delusion has had serious consequences for American led “Western” foreign policy. 

 

An interesting quirk being the arming with modern weapons and the training of the Taliban and the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan to fight the Soviet invasion. 

 

The CIA and other American force projection entities thought they had done very well in arming and funding the Mujahedeen to drive out the Soviets.  They soon found that the same skills could be used around the world against the USA, not only around the world, but also in Afghanistan itself!

 

This brings me on to a parallel development in Ukraine where the West’s Liberal Internationalist Leaders have all piled in on supporting the Ukraine and without giving serious consideration to anything Russia had to say about it or to Russia’s legitimate interests without any mainstream media even discussing Russia’s point of view. A “balanced” and fair media, should at least discuss the pros and cons of both sides point of view.

 

I don’t however want to get into the relative merits or into questions of atrocities or anything else relating to the conduct of the war apart from the Western funding and supply and training of militias. 

 

Those that have been paying attention to sources other than the mono-maniacal propagandist mainstream media will realise that there are allegations that the Ukrainian militia are at the very least allegedly “Far Right” and specifically there are some allegations of being “Neo Nazis”.  For an interesting discussion about this see this article in Unherd >>> https://unherd.com/2022/03/the-truth-about-ukraines-nazi-militias/?=refinnar

 

The consequence of arming and training the Taliban/Mujahedeen in Afghanistan was that there was a very serious upgrade in the military capability of the Taliban and of Islamist fighters such as Al Qaida. 

 

The arming of “Far Right/Neo Nazi” militias in Ukraine may produce an “interesting” similar situation which is likely to impact, not only on the future politics of the Ukraine, but of almost certainly all of Eastern Europe.  This may well spread into Western Europe, if the Ukrainian militias are genuinely Neo Nazi. 

 

In which case they may want to mimic the old Nazi slogan of “Heute Deutschland, Morgan die welt” updated into “Today Ukraine, tomorrow the world”!