2009-10-23 UK: Labour wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural

[Virkamies]

Britannian isänmaallisissa piireissä tämä paljastus onkin ollut "dynamiittia", ja siellä on viime päivinä tutkittu ahkerasti Britannian lain maanpetospykäliä sen selvittämiseksi, voidaanko New Labour -hallituksen avainhahmot tuomita ankarimpaan mahdolliseen rangaistukseen salaliitosta kruunua vastaan:

http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/2009/10/great-betrayal.html

Sanoisin, että näyttö kyseisen lain s.3 kohdassa vaadittavasta intentiosta on vähintäänkin kyseenalainen. Vaikka kenties voitaisiinkin kuvitella sellainen tilanne, että hallituksen toiminta nähtäisiin johtavan ilman mitään epäilystä Yhdistyneiden Kuningaskuntien kruunun tuhoksi, niin olisi vielä epätodennäköisempää, että voitaisiin vailla mitään epäilystä todeta hallituksen herrojen halunneen juuri sitä. Näyttö ei yksinkertaisesti riitä, ellei löydetä vaikkapa kassakaappisopimusta, jossa juuri tämä asetetaan toiminnan tavoitteeksi.

Paljon todennäköisempää on, että mikä tahansa oikeus ottaisi melko neutraalin kannan ja toteaisi kyseessä olevan poliittisen erimielisyyden siitä mihin toiminta johtaa. On rationaalista olettaa, että jotkut ihmiset aidosti uskovat toiminnallaan olevan kansakunnan tulevaisuuden kannalta positiivinen vaikutus. Tuomioistuinten tehtävä ei ole tuomita poliittisista mielipiteistä. Kansalaisten tehtävä on äänestää vaaleissa sellaisen hallituksen puolesta, joka parhaiten edustaa heidän näkemyksiään. Niin brittiläinen oikeusvaltio toimii.

Oman käsitykseni mukaan New Labour ja muunkin Euroopan sosialidemokraatit edistävät massamaahanmuuttoa aivan vilpittömältä pohjalta oman utopistisen tulevaisuusvisionsa edistämiseksi, siinä missä uskovaiset yleensäkin toimivat omien eskatologisten visioidensa pohjalta ilman valtapyrkimyksiä tai muita taka-ajatuksia.

Olen taipuvainen uskomaan tähän myös. En usko suurimittaiseen salaliittoon. Totta kai he ymmärtävät asian olevan arkaluontoinen ja siitä varmaan vaitonaisuus.

Toki ihmisillä on oikeus ärtyä asiasta vaikenemisesta myös. Demokratia toimii jos ihmiset reagoivat valtaapitävien tekemisiin ja äänestävät ne ihmiset valtaan, jotka toimivat heidän etujensa puolesta parhaiten.

[Anti-Utopisti]

Andrew Neatherin artikkeleista syntyi kaksi eri skandaalia - toinen on kumottu ja toinen on vahvistettu.

Andrew Neather sanoo tuossa "puolustuksessaan" ihan suoraan että multikulturalisoiminen ei ollut pääasia, vaan vain osa koko touhua:

Multiculturalism was not the primary point of the report or the speech. The main goal was to allow in more migrant workers at a point when - hard as it is to imagine now - the booming economy was running up against skills shortages.

But my sense from several discussions was there was also a subsidiary political purpose to it - boosting diversity and undermining the Right's opposition to multiculturalism.

Eli touhu olikin siten kuin kohutaan: hankkia Britanniaan lisää siirtolaisia, ajaa monikulttuuria ja saada ääniä Labourille. Pointtien tärkeysjärjestys vain on Neatherin mukaan eri kuin mitä "oikeisto" on paljastuksesta päätellyt.

Itse käsitin tilanteen siten, että Andrew Neather mainitsi alkuperäisessä kirjoituksessaan kolme eri motiivia New Labourin maahanmuuttopolitiikalle:

Motiivi 1) 2000-luvun alun työvoimapulan paikkaaminen ("Eventually published in January 2001, the innocuously labelled "RDS Occasional Paper no. 67", "Migration: an economic and social analysis" focused heavily on the labour market case.")

Motiivi 2) Britannian monikulttuuristaminen lisäämällä etnistä diversiteettiä maahanmuutolla ("But the earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural" ja "while ministers might have been passionately in favour of a more diverse society") sekä

Motiivi 3) Puoluepoliittiset näkökohdat eli oikeiston kyykyttäminen ("to rub the Right's nose in diversity" sekä ehkäpä myös Britannian väestörakenteen strateginen muokkaus oikeistolle hankalammaksi ("render their arguments out of date").

Neather yritti alkuperäisessä artikkelissaan sanoa, että motiivi 2 on vaiettu kuoliaaksi New Labourin johtavien poliitikkojen puheenvuoroissa, joissa motiivi 1 on mainittu lähes ainoaksi perusteluksi massamaahanmuuton sallimiselle. Neather itse kuitenkin pitää motiivia 2 lähes yhtä suotavana syynä kannattaa massamaahanmuuttoa kuin motiivi 1. Lisäksi Neather tietää Tony Blairin ja Jack Strawn entisenä sisäpiiriläisenä, että motiivi 2 oli Neatherin itsensä ohella lähes motiivin 1 veroinen monille muillekin New Labourin sisäpiiriläisille, vaikka tämä salattiin julkisuudelta. Alkuperäisessä artikkelissaan Neather kannusti New Labourin muitakin sisäpiiriläisiä häpeilemättä tunnustamaan, että motiivi 2 oli ollut keskeinen perustelu maahanmuuton lisäämiselle.

Kommentaattorit eivät osanneet tulkita tätä Neatherin alkuperäisestä artikkelia oikein, jolloinka he luulivat Neatherin kirjoituksen pointin olevan motiivi 3, vaikka Neather ei millään tavoin maininnut motiivin 3 olevan kovin oleellinen maahanmuuton lisäämisessä eikä itsekään pitänyt motiivia 3 hyväksyttävänä ("That seemed to me to be a manoeuvre too far") Itsekin veikkaan, ettei motiivi 3 ollut merkittävä syy maahanmuuton lisäämiselle.

Toryt kuitenkin perusluonteeltaan puoluepoliittisina eläiminä tietenkin tarttuivat Neatherin alkuperäisessä kirjoituksessa pääosin motiiviin 3 ja rupesivat levittämään Internetissä omia harhaanjohtavia salaliittoteorioitaan tämän motiiviin 3 perustuvan oman virheellisen tulkintansa pohjalta.

Andrew Neather halusi oikaisussaan kumota nämä salaliittoteoriat ja korostaa sitä, että oikeasti motiivit 1 ja 2 olivat merkittäviä toisin kuin motiivi 3. Itse asiassa Neather oli ilmaissut tämän saman asian - vaikkakin hieman epäselvästi - jo alkuperäisessä kirjoituksessaan ("even if this wasn't its main purpose").

Lisäksi Neather väitti oikaisussaan (samoin kuin Jack Straw omassa vastineessaan), että motiivi 1 olisi ollut tärkeämpi kuin motiivi 2, joiden keskinäistä tärkeysjärjestystä New Labourin maahanmuuttopolitiikassa ei oltu kommentoitu lainkaan Neatherin alkuperäisessä artikkelissa.

Ainoa oikea tulkinta Neatherin kirjoituksista lienee siis sellainen, että motiivi 2:n merkitys on lähes motiivin 1 veroinen, vaikka motiivi 2:ta ei ole aiemmin julkisesti mainittu New Labour -poliitikkojen puheissa. Omasta mielestäni tämä kuitenkin on tyylipuhdas skandaali, sillä motiivin 2 toteuttaminen Britanniassa siitä äänestäjille kertomatta hipoo jo itsessään maanpetosta puhumattakaan siitä, että motivin 2 onnistunut toteuttaminen on johtanut Britannian kaaoksen partaalle.

Eilinen hämmennys johtui siitä, että Neatherin alkuperäisestä artikkelista arveltiin irtoavan tämän tavallista kansaa kiinnostavan pääskandaalin ohella vielä toinenkin lähes yhtä suuri (puoluepoliittinen) skandaali, joka olisi kiinnostanut lähes yksinomaan Toryjä. Neatherin oikaisu ja Strawn vastine kuitenkin vahvistivat sen, että ainoastaan tavallisella kansalla on aihetta nostaa Neatherin kirjoitusten sisältämistä paljastuksista skandaali, kun taas Toryillä ei erillistä toista syytä ole.

Kertakaikkiaan varsin sekava kuvio. Juuri siksi olen maininnut useissa viesteissäni, että maahanmuuttokriitikot eivät luullakseni tule pärjäämään ilman koulutettuja analyytikkoja, jotka osaavat selvittää kunkin lähteen tarkan merkityksen.


[email protected]

[kohmelo]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1222977/MELANIE-PHILLIPS-The-outrageous-truth-slips-Labour-cynically-plotted-transform-entire-make-Britain-telling-us.html

The outrageous truth slips out: Labour cynically plotted to transform the entire make-up of Britain without telling us

So now the cat is well and truly out of the bag. For years, as the number of immigrants to Britain shot up apparently uncontrollably, the question was how exactly this had happened.

Was it through a fit of absent-mindedness or gross incompetence? Or was it not inadvertent at all, but deliberate?
...

[kohmelo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/10/map_of_the_week_forgotten_whit.html
Map of the Week: Forgotten white working classes

So busy were they presiding over more than a decade of record immigration and the pursuit of multiculturalism, Labour ministers are now worried they might have forgotten something.

That "something" is the constituency for which their party was founded, the people whose interests they were created to serve: Britain's traditional (white) working classes.

Let us not rehearse the wisdom of immigration policy - we can do that another time. Instead, I wanted to consider the importance of managing expectations.
...

BBC:n toimittaja väittää, että Labour on unohtanut jotain - valkoisen työväenluokan. Nyt multikulttuuraaliseen Englantiin on muodostunut alunperin  valkoisen työväenluokan alueita joiden alkuperäiset asukkaat tuntevat olevansa sorrettua vähemmistöä (kannattaa vilkaista videota).

Karttaa siitä, kuinka ihmiset tulevat toimeen keskenään:

(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/eng_troub_comm_595.gif)

[kohmelo]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1240167/MAIL-ON-SUNDAY-COMMENT-The-faced-truth-immigration.html

The two-faced truth about immigration
New Labour has two separate immigration policies. The first is the one it endlessly proclaims to the public – of supposedly tough restrictions, raids on employers of illegal workers, expulsions of those with no right to stay here.

The second is the real one, unwisely disclosed a few weeks ago by the former Blairite functionary Andrew Neather. This is that mass immigration is an important part of the cultural revolution in which Britain is being dissolved into a new and different country.

This is accompanied by a widespread belief among the new elite that immigration – which provides them with cheap childcare and a great variety of restaurants – is an unmixed blessing.
...

[kohmelo]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249797/Labour-threw-open-doors-mass-migration-secret-plot-make-multicultural-UK.html

How Labour threw open doors to mass migration in secret plot to make a multicultural UK

Labour threw open the doors to mass migration in a deliberate policy to change the social make-up of the UK, secret papers suggest.

A draft report from the Cabinet Office shows that ministers wanted to 'maximise the contribution' of migrants to their 'social objectives'.

The number of foreigners allowed in the UK increased by as much as 50 per cent in the wake of the report, written in 2000.

Labour has always justified immigration on economic grounds and denied it was using it to foster multiculturalism.

But suspicions of a secret agenda rose when Andrew Neather, a former government adviser and speech writer for Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett, said the aim of Labour's immigration strategy was to 'rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date'.

Mr Neather said he helped to write the 2000 report which outlined a strategy to 'open up the UK to mass migration'.

The document was not published in its original format over fears of an adverse public reaction. Instead it was released a year later as a research document on the economic benefits of migration.
THE UNEDITED DOCUMENT

The highlighted text below was contained in the original draft of the document drawn up in 2000 for a discussion on immigration policy - but deleted from the version published in 2001.


1) The emerging consensus, in both the UK and the rest of the EU, is that we need a new analytical framework for thinking about migration policy if we are to maximise the contribution of migration to the Government's economic and social objectives.

2) Indeed, over the medium to longer term, migration pressures will intensify in Europe as a result of demographic changes. But this should not be viewed as a negative - to the extent that migration is driven by market forces, it is likely to be economically beneficial. On the other hand, trying to halt of reverse market-driven migration will be very difficult (perhaps impossible) and economically damaging.

3) Chapter 4, focusing on the Government's aim to regulate migration to the UK in the interests of social stability and economic growth, argues that it is clearly correct that the Government has both economic and social objectives for migration policy.

4) The more general social impact of migration is very difficult to assess. Benefits include a widening of consumer choice and significant cultural contributions. These in turn feed into wider economic benefits.

5) In practice, entry controls can contribute to social exclusion, and there are a number of areas where policy could further enhance migrants' economic and social contribution in line with the Government's overall objectives.

6) It is clear that migration policy has both social and economic impacts and should be designed to contribute to the government's overall objectives on both counts. The current position is a considerable advance on the previously existing situation, when the aim of immigration policy was, or appeared to be, to reduce primary immigration to the 'irreducible minimum' - an objective with no economic or social justification.

Mr Neather's claims last October were denied by ministers, including Justice Secretary Jack Straw, who said they were nonsense.

A draft of the original Cabinet Office report has now been published following a freedom of information request by Migrationwatch.

It contains six references to social policy, all of which were removed from the later, published version.

One deleted paragraph said a framework was needed to 'maximise the contribution of migration to the Government's social and economic objectives'.

Another says that migration pressures will intensify because of demographic changes across Europe but that this 'should not be viewed as a negative'.

It states: 'The entry control system is not closely related to the stated policy objectives.

'This is particularly true in the social area, where in the past the implicit assumption has largely been that keeping people out promotes stability.'

Also cut out was a statement that 'in practice, entry controls can contribute to social exclusion'.

Damian Green, Tory immigration spokesman, said: 'This is a very significant finding because it would mean that Labour's biggest long term effect on British society was
based on a completely secret policy.

'This shows Labour's open-door immigration policy was deliberate and ministers should apologise.'

Mr Neather's claims were made in a column for the London Evening Standard. He said Labour's relaxation of immigration controls was a deliberate attempt to engineer a 'truly multicultural' country and plug gaps in the jobs market.

He remembered 'coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn't its main purpose – to rub the Right's nose in diversity'.

Whitehall research shows that the number of foreigners arriving in the UK rose from 370,000 in 2001 to 510,000 in 2006.

The figures for net foreign immigration– the number of non-British citizens arriving, less the number leaving – are even more dramatic.

In 2001, this figure stood at 221,000 but by 2007 it had risen as high as 333,000 – up 50 per cent.

The number fell to 250,000 in 2008 mainly because of a decline in arrivals from Eastern Europe.

It had already emerged that the Cabinet Office report was censored to remove details of possible links between immigration and organised crime, street fights and begging.

One of the sections missing from the final report said: 'There is emerging evidence that the circumstances in which asylum seekers are living is leading to criminal offences, including fights and begging.'

A second section warned: 'Migration has opened up new opportunities for organised crime.'

Last night, immigration minister Phil Woolas said there was 'no open door policy on migration'.

He said the draft report made clear that migration was 'not a substitute for Government policies on skills, education and training of British citizens – which the Government has invested in over the past decade'.

THE UNEDITED DOCUMENT

The highlighted text below was contained in the original draft of the document drawn up in 2000 for a discussion on immigration policy - but deleted from the version published in 2001.


1) The emerging consensus, in both the UK and the rest of the EU, is that we need a new analytical framework for thinking about migration policy if we are to maximise the contribution of migration to the Government's economic and social objectives.

2) Indeed, over the medium to longer term, migration pressures will intensify in Europe as a result of demographic changes. But this should not be viewed as a negative - to the extent that migration is driven by market forces, it is likely to be economically beneficial. On the other hand, trying to halt of reverse market-driven migration will be very difficult (perhaps impossible) and economically damaging.

3) Chapter 4, focusing on the Government's aim to regulate migration to the UK in the interests of social stability and economic growth, argues that it is clearly correct that the Government has both economic and social objectives for migration policy.

4) The more general social impact of migration is very difficult to assess. Benefits include a widening of consumer choice and significant cultural contributions. These in turn feed into wider economic benefits.

5) In practice, entry controls can contribute to social exclusion, and there are a number of areas where policy could further enhance migrants' economic and social contribution in line with the Government's overall objectives.

6) It is clear that migration policy has both social and economic impacts and should be designed to contribute to the government's overall objectives on both counts. The current position is a considerable advance on the previously existing situation, when the aim of immigration policy was, or appeared to be, to reduce primary immigration to the 'irreducible minimum' - an objective with no economic or social justification.

Paying the price for a decade of deception

COMMENTARY By Sir Andrew Green

Chairman of MigrationWatch and former British Ambassador to Syria and Saudi Arabia

So there was indeed a Labour conspiracy to change the nature of our society by mass immigration.

New evidence confirms claims made by a Labour political adviser last October which
he subsequently tried to recant.

In an article for the Evening Standard, Andrew Neather revealed that 'it didn't just happen: the deliberate policy of ministers from late 2000 until at least February last year ...was to open up the UK to mass migration'.

He went on to describe a Government policy document which he had helped to write in 2000.

He said that 'drafts were handed out in summer 2000 only with extreme reluctance: there was paranoia about it reaching the media'.

The paper eventually surfaced as a purely technical product of the research department of the Home Office but earlier drafts that he saw 'included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural'.

We in Migrationwatch have now obtained an earlier draft of that policy paper, circulated in October 2000.

It had already been censored but it was to be neutered still further. In the executive summary, six of eight references to 'social' objectives were cut from the version later published.

What could have been meant by social policy in the context of immigration, especially as it was dressed up as combating social exclusion?

This must surely have been code for increasing the numbers substantially, as Mr Neather revealed. If not, why all the secrecy?

Why the censorship that has now been laid bare? Reading between the lines of these
documents it is clear that political advisers in Number 10, its joint authors, were preparing a blueprint for mass immigration with both economic and social objectives.

None of this was in the Labour manifesto of 1997 or 2001. One passage in the report that the political censors failed to cut was a prediction about foreign immigration from outside the European Union.

This had it climbing from 142,000 in1998 to nearly 180,000 in 2005 (in fact, it reached nearly 200,000 by that date).

But what this shows is that ministers were clearly warned about a continuing rise in immigration which, even leaving aside the East Europeans, has been even greater than expected.

So what can we deduce from all this? Mr Neather later withdrew some of his remarks but examination of the texts shows that he had, in fact, blurted out the truth.

It seems there was a project led by Downing Street political advisers to introduce
a secret policy of mass immigration.

Their economic arguments surfaced in an obscure research document but the social objective of greatly increased diversity was entirely suppressed for fear of public reaction – especially from the white working class.

These are the very people who are now paying the price for a decade of Labour deception. What the Government now fears is that they will take their revenge on election day.

Why on earth should they have taken such a risk with their traditional supporters? Was it pure ideology or were there other factors at play?

One point to consider is the impact on the electorate. It is not generally realised that
Commonwealth citizens legally in Britain acquire the right to vote in general elections
as soon as they put their names on the electoral register.

In Labour years we have now seen an additional 300,000 from the Old Commonwealth and about one million from the New Commonwealth.

They may well have been conscious that they have much stronger support among the ethnic communities than their Conservative rivals.

Given that mass immigration is heavily in Labour's electoral interest, they may have thought that they could get away with it.

The trades unions have been silent despite the concerns of their members. And they
may have calculated that anyone who opposed it could be silenced by accusations of racism.

They have not succeeded but we are left with a tale of betrayal which has generated a very dangerous current of extremism which could yet come to haunt us.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/7200470/Sir-Andrew-Green-the-public-are-too-polite-on-immigration.html

Sir Andrew Green: the public are too polite on immigration
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of MigrationWatch UK, says that the public have known for years about the problems caused by mass migration, but were too polite to talk about it.
...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/7198329/Labours-secret-plan-to-lure-migrants.html

Labour's 'secret plan' to lure migrants
The Government has been accused of pursuing a secret policy of encouraging mass immigration for its own political ends.

The release of a previously unseen document suggested that Labour's migration policy over the past decade had been aimed not just at meeting the country's economic needs, but also the Government's "social objectives".

The paper said migration would "enhance economic growth" and made clear that trying to halt or reverse it could be "economically damaging". But it also stated that immigration had general "benefits" and that a new policy framework was needed to "maximise" the contribution of migration to the Government's wider social aims.
...

[kohmelo]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-1250096/Using-immigration-turn-Britain-nation-Labour-voters-shameful-I-hardly-believe-it.html

Using immigration to turn Britain into a nation of Labour voters is so shameful I can hardly believe it
What will future historians consider to be New Labour's greatest legacy? I don't believe it will be economic collapse or ill-judged foreign adventures or even the apparent peace settlement in Northern Ireland, though all of these will have long-term effects.

My guess, bordering on conviction, is that the achievement for which the Government of 1997 to 2010 will be remembered above all is the unprecedentedly fast rate of immigration into this country.

During this period, some three million immigrants were added to the British population.
...

[kohmelo]

Britain's immigration boom is stretching schools and hospitals to breaking point, council chiefs warn
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1251480/Continued-immigrant-boom-stretching-council-resources.html
Town hall chiefs yesterday condemned the Government's immigration figures, saying high and uncounted numbers of new residents are putting too much strain on services.

A string of local authorities said few of the 1.5million Poles and other Eastern Europeans who came after 2004 had gone home.

Ministers say they arrived in Britain for only short-term stays and more than 700,000 have left, but councils in Peterborough, Slough and Westminster in London claim otherwise.
...

Britannian julkiset palvelut natisevat maahanmuuttobuumin johdoista, vaitää Lonuseampi kaupunginhallituksen edustaja. Onneksi maahanmuuttoministeri kuitenkin tyrmää tälläiset höpötykset.

[kohmelo]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1251736/Time-come-clean-real-immigration-numbers.html

Time to come clean on the real immigration numbers
Even some of Labour's own councils are complaining to the Government that it is not being straight about the levels of immigration – and the resulting strain on public services.
The Government claims that 700,000 of the 1.5 million Poles and others from central and eastern Europe who have come to live here since 2004 have returned to their countries of origin. But council leaders suggest this is a fantasy and that overwhelmingly the new immigrants are still here.
...

Olisiko aika selvittää maahanmuuton oikeat määrät? Hallitus puhuu yhtä, mutta kuntien paikallishallinnot toista.

Hallituksen mukaan niistä 1,5 miljoonasta itä-eurooppalaisesta jotka saapuivat 2004 jälkeen on 700 000 palannut kotimaihinsa. Paikallishallintojen mukaan tälläistä takaisin muuttoa ei kuitenkaan ole tapahtunut. Paikallishallinnot ovatkin sitä mieltä, että heidän väestönsä on suurempi kuin viralliset luvut osoittavat. Ongelmana tässä on tietenkin julkisten palveluiden kuormittuminen.

[BeerBelly]

Kohmelon linkkaamasta jutusta löytyi kohta mikä aiheutti spontaanin naurupurskahduksen.

'We've nothing against migration - it is great for the economy and great for Newham. However, it needs to be properly funded.

Loistavaa taloudelle ja muutenkin fantastista!, mut rahat ei riitä tähän rikkauteen. Valdee!

[kohmelo]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/7279436/Thousands-of-illegal-immigrants-win-right-to-stay-in-Britain-under-squatters-rights.html

Thousands of illegal immigrants win right to stay in Britain under 'squatters' rights'
Thousands of illegal immigrants have been granted "squatters' rights" to remain in Britain permanently after proving they have lived here for 14 years, it can be disclosed.

A little-known rule, introduced by Labour in 2003, allows illegal immigrants to claim "indefinite leave to remain" if they manage to live in Britain's black economy for long enough or are failed asylum seekers who manage to avoid deportation.
...

Vuonna 2003 labour otti käyttöön säännön jonka mukaan henkilöä ei voida karkoittaa, jos tämä voi todistaa eläneensä 14 vuotta Britanniassa.
Esim. laitonsiirtolainen voi näin laillistaa maassa olonsa ja noin 1000 henkilöä vuodessa on hyödyntänyt tätä järjestelmää. Nämä henkilöt saavat täydet oikeudet hyvinvointipalveluihin ja oikeuden Britannian passiin.

Arvostelijoiden mielestä tämä järjestelmä palkitsee laittomasta käyttäytymisestä, kuten viranomaisten välttelystä ja pimeiden töidentekemisestä. Sillä laillisten oleskelijoiden (viisumilla oleskelevat ja pakolaiset) joutuvat hekin odottamaan 10 vuotta eli laittomilta menee odottelussa ainoastaan 4 vuotta pitempää.

Vuonna 2005 valtio arvioi, että Britanniassa on 310 000 - 570 000 laitonta siirtolaista. Monet järjestöt kuten Migrationwatch UK olettavat lukujen olevan kuitenkin huomattavasti suurempia, ehkä jopa miljoonan luokkaa.

[Phantasticum]

Massamaahanmuuton tarina jatkuu. Salaisen suunnitelman mukaan maahanmuuttoa vastustavat oli tarkoitus leimata "rasisteiksi". Näköjään there is sama meininki in England as in Suomi. Daily Mailissa on pitkä juttu.

Ministers were accused today of drawing up secret plans to increase immigration - and branding opponents of the controversial scheme 'racist'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1252926/Government-drew-secret-plans-increase-immigration--feared-racist-backlash.html

[kohmelo]

Daily Mail: Ainakin nyt tiedämme totuuden: Työväenpuolue halveksuu niitä jotka rakastavat Britanniaa, sen arvoja ja historiaa.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1253295/MELANIE-PHILLIPS-At-know-truth-Labour-despises-loves-Britain-values-history.html
At last we know the truth: Labour despises anyone who loves Britain, its values and its history
Of all the issues of concern to the public, immigration is possibly the most explosive - and the one about which the most lies are continuing to be told.

During the period that Labour has been in office, mass immigration has simply changed the face of Britain. The total number of immigrants since 1997 is pushing three million.

Ministers claim that immigration policy has been driven principally to help the economy. They have always denied that they actually set out deliberately to change the ethnic composition of the country.
...
They did this mainly because they hated what Britain was, a largely homogeneous society rooted in 1,000 years of history. They therefore set out to replace it by a totally new kind of multicultural society - and one in which the vast majority of newcomers could be expected to vote Labour.

They set out to destroy the right of the British people to live in a society defined by a common history, religion, law, language and traditions. They set out to destroy for ever what it means to be culturally British and to put another 'multicultural' identity in its place.

...

[herranen]

Hyvä radio-ohjelma reaktiona uutisiin Labourin motiiveista maahanmuuton suhteen :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00qh0zf

In the past decade, Britain has experienced mass immigration on an unprecedented scale. A former government aide recently suggested this was a deliberate policy, motivated in part by a desire to increase racial diversity. David Goodhart investigates the ideological forces behind one of the most significant social changes to have affected the UK.

Jos saarivaltakunnan kehitys kiinnostaa samoin kuin kootut selitykset kun mitään ongelmaa ei ole ja jos onkin niin kukaan ei ole vastuussa.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8494275.stm

[kohmelo]

Vielä kertauksena maahanmuuton määrät Briteihin:

(http://chromatism.net/current/images/ukimmigration.gif)


(http://www.focus-migration.de/typo3_upload/groups/3/focus_Migration_Publikationen/Laenderprofile/bilder/Country-profiles/cp-12-uk/grafik2_gr.gif)
http://www.focus-migration.de/United_Kingdom.2708.0.html?&L=1

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_mJmwQtPmusk/SuoM0Tdu5pI/AAAAAAAAENc/Jc45lu_Yzjc/s1600-h/migration.gif)
http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2009/10/migration-update.html

(http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/maps_and_graphs/2008/09/10/1009.Immigration.gif)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/sep/10/immigration.immigrationandpublicservices

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/UK_net_migration.png/450px-UK_net_migration.png)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_Kingdom_since_1922

(http://www.migrationwatchuk.com/images/graphs/Paper11_13/graph1.jpg)
http://www.migrationwatchuk.com/BriefingPaper/document/161

---------------------
Daily Mailin artikkeli vuodelta 2007, siitä mitäs tämä kaikki maksaa:

Government finally admits: Immigration IS placing huge strain on Britain
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488005/Government-finally-admits-Immigration-IS-placing-huge-strain-Britain.html


(http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/10_03/immigrationDM1610_228x241.jpg)

[escobar]

Vieläkö joku kehtaa väittää salaliittoteoriaksi että vasemmisto raahaa maihin ulkomaalaisia saadakseen poliittista voimaa? (tod.näk. aika moni)

[kohmelo]

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/159888

LABOUR SAY WE ARE ALL RACISTS
LABOUR dismissed the British public's widespread opposition to mass immigration as "racism", a Government document revealed yesterday.

Officials made it clear that public opinion was strongly against relaxing border controls.

But ministers were urged to ignore voters' "racist" views and press ahead with a secret policy to encourage migrants to flood into Britain. Whitehall experts even proposed a major propaganda campaign to soften up voters in preparation for the mass influx of newcomers.
...

[kohmelo]

Number of foreigners given British passports surges
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/7316184/Number-of-foreigners-given-British-passports-surges.html
The number of foreigners given UK passports jumped by more than half last year.

A total of 203,865 people were granted British citizenship in 2009 - an increase of 58% on 2008.

Tens of thousands more immigrants were also given the right to settle in the UK - the total was up 30% to more than 190,000.
...

Vuonna 2009 jaettiin 58% enemmän Britannian kansalaisuuksia kuin vuonna 2008.

Oleskelulupia jaettiin 30% enemmän.

Työntekoon liittyviä oleskelulupien määrä kasvoi lamasta huolimatta seuraavasti:
2007 - 37 000 kpl
2008 - 60 000 kpl
2009 - 81 000 kpl

Opiskeluun liittyviä viisumeja jaetiin 30% enemmän kuin vuonna 2008. Vuoden 2009 viimeisenä 3 kuukautena jaettiin opiskelijaviisumeja 92% enemmän kuin edellisenä vuonna. Herääkin kysymys, mikä uusien pisteperustaisten opiskelijaviisumien tarkoitus.

Hallituksen edustajien kommentit siitä, miten rajat ovat tiukemmalla kuin koskaan - voi lukea itse artikkelista.

Sama uutinen Daily Maililta:
Two passports a minute are given to foreigners as 1.5m issued since Labour elected
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1253657/Number-asylum-seekers-arriving-Britain-falls-30.html

[Phantasticum]

Labourin tiimoilta kuohuu taas. Kun maahanmuuttoluvut nousevat ja laskevat tarkoitushakuisesti. Ei jaksa suomentaa enempää. Sorry. Se on 1:27 a.m.

Daily Mail tietää paljon lisää.

How Gordon Brown's podcast turned an immigration rise into a fall

Labour last night faced damaging claims it had 'misled' the public by claiming immigration is falling sharply - when it is likely be on the rise again.

In a rare intervention, Gordon Brown yesterday released figures which he claimed showed a steep 16,000 reduction in the net level of immigration into Britain last year.

It was the centrepiece of an internet broadcast by the Prime Minister designed to reassure voters that the Government is listening to public concerns about the population soaring towards 70million.

But it has now emerged Mr Brown's claims were produced by using two completely different sets of statistics which should not be compared. In fact, analysis suggests he is likely to have underestimated the net level of immigration to the UK last year by more than 35,000.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1261067/How-Gordon-Browns-podcast-turned-immigration-rise-fall.html

[PaulR]

Se on 1:27 a.m.

Joko taas! 

[kohmelo]

Mikä mahtoikaan olla työväenpuolueen 13 vuotisen valtakauden perintö? Perintönä on ovien avaaminen massamaahanmuutolle jonka seurauksena valkoiset britit tulevat olemaan vähemmistönä vuonna 2066...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1335556/Special-report-Will-white-British-population-minority-2066.html

Special report: Will the white British population be in a minority in 2066?


When future historians consider the most significant legacy of 13 years of New ­Labour rule, what will they decide upon?

Chapter upon chapter will focus on the spending binge and subsequent debt crisis. Likewise, much will be written on the weakening of this country's moral authority in the world, caused by the last government's shameful complicity in torture, and military misadventure in Iraq.

But, in an article for this month's left-of-centre Prospect magazine, the Oxford University academic Professor David Coleman indicates the longest-lasting impact on society may well be something else: the demographic upheaval brought about by the policy of mass immigration.
...

[kohmelo]

Tutkimuksen mukaan Britannian muslimiväestö on kasvanut 70% kymmenessä vuodessa.



http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100069830/the-muslim-population-has-grown-from-1-65-million-to-2-87-million-since-2001-say-researchers-what-does-this-mean-for-liberal-britain/

The Muslim population has grown from 1.65 million to 2.87 million since 2001, say researchers. What does this mean for liberal Britain?

There is a remarkable statistic in today's main Daily Telegraph leader:

    The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life estimates that there are 2,869,000 Muslims in Britain, an increase of 74 per cent on its previous figure of 1,647,000, which was based on the 2001 census. No demographic statistics are reliable in an era of open borders, but such an expansion is unprecedented.
...
The material about global Islam in the 2010 report is fascinating, but it's the revision of British figures that took me by surprise. Why was it not more widely reported in the autumn? And what are the implications for society?
...

[kohmelo]

Konservatiivi ministeri Theresa May: Työväenpuolue tehtaili maahanmuuttoa pitääkseen palkat alhaalla. Homma meni kuitenkin puihin sillä jokaista 100 EU:n ulkopuolelta tullutta kohden 23 brittiä jäi kokonaan ilman työtä.


http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/351152/Labour-used-migrants-to-keep-wages-low-

LABOUR 'USED MIGRANTS TO KEEP WAGES LOW'

LABOUR fostered a policy of mass immigration to the UK in a deliberate attempt to keep British wages down, Theresa May said yesterday.

The Home Secretary said Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's open-door to immigration was part of a "covert" 21st century incomes policy.

She said the plan failed because for every 100 non- European working age immigrants 23 fewer British-born workers found jobs.
...
She added: "That's right, Labour – the party of the working man and woman – admit that they deliberately used
immigration to keep down British wages."

[Ajattelija2008]

Tuo on Suomessakin todennäköinen motiivi Kokoomuksen vilpilliselle maahanmuuttopolitiikalle: kehitysmaista tulevien "turvapaikanhakijoiden" avulla pyritään pitämään tiettyjen alojen palkat alhaisina. Samalla heikennetään suomalaisia ammattiliittoja. Vasemmisto on ilolla mukana tässä politiikassa, koska he haluavat lisää äänestäjiä itselleen sekä lisätä rikollisuutta ja yhteiskunnallista levottomuutta.

[kohmelo]

Entinen työväenpuolueen ministeri Lord Mandelson on myöntänyt, että työväenpuolue tehtaili massamaahanmuuttoa ihan tarkoituksella.

Eikä tässä kaikki. Työväenpuolue ei istunut käden ristissä vaan lähetti aktiivisesti etsintäpartioita maailmalle houkuttelemaan
maahanmuuttajia muuttamaan Britanniaan. Lisäksi Mandelson myöntää, että työväenpuolueen toiminnan ansiosta puolueen
perinteinen kannattajakunta on ilman töitä.

Kaiken tämän toiminnan takana oli työväenpuolueen halu tehdä Britanniasta oikeasti monikulttuurinen.

Täytyy myös muistaa, että vielä kolme vuotta sitten työväenpuolueen edustajat kielsivät kaikki väittämät massamaahanmuuton tehtailusta.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324112/Immigrants-We-sent-search-parties-to-come--hard-Britons-work-says-Mandelson.html

Immigrants? We sent out search parties to get them to come... and made it hard for Britons to get work, says Mandelson

- Former minister admits Labour deliberately engineered mass immigration
- Between 1997 and 2010 net migration to Britain totalled 2.

Labour sent out 'search parties' for immigrants to get them to come to the UK, Lord Mandelson has admitted.

In a stunning confirmation that the Blair and Brown governments deliberately engineered mass immigration, the former Cabinet Minister and spin doctor said New Labour sought out foreign workers.

He also conceded that the influx of arrivals meant the party's traditional supporters are now unable to find work.

By contrast, Labour leader Ed Miliband has said his party got it wrong on immigration but has refused to admit it was too high under Labour
...
Mr Neather said the policy was designed to 'rub the Right's nose in diversity'.

He said there was 'a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural'.
...
But, at a rally for the Blairite think-tank Progress, Lord Mandelson said: 'In 2004 when as a Labour government, we were not only welcoming people to come into this country to work, we were sending out search parties for people and encouraging them, in some cases, to take up work in this country.'

He said: 'The problem has grown during the period of economic stagnation over the last five, six years.'
...

[Eino P. Keravalta]

Tuo on Suomessakin todennäköinen motiivi Kokoomuksen vilpilliselle maahanmuuttopolitiikalle: kehitysmaista tulevien "turvapaikanhakijoiden" avulla pyritään pitämään tiettyjen alojen palkat alhaisina. Samalla heikennetään suomalaisia ammattiliittoja. Vasemmisto on ilolla mukana tässä politiikassa, koska he haluavat lisää äänestäjiä itselleen sekä lisätä rikollisuutta ja yhteiskunnallista levottomuutta.

Kirjoittamasi on varmaan totta.

Mutta on olemassa myös syvempiä ja piilotellumpia syitä: tarkoituksena on myös kansallisvaltioiden alasajo, demokratian rapauttaminen, sosiaalisen kriisin luominen ja talouden romahduttaminen. Näiden turvin voidaan ajaa globaalia poliisivaltiota, joka on Eliitin tavoite.

[-PPT-]

Pahinta on tietenkin se, että monet brittiläiset työläisluokan ihmiset edelleen luulevat, että Labour on heidän puolueensa ja siten ollen äänestävät sitä puoluetta joka vaaleissa. Labourin takia brittäistyöläisluokkkaiset alueet alkavat olla historiaa, nyt ne muistuttavat kolmannen maailman katuja. Labourin omat pomot asuvat vauraissa esikaupungeissa, joihin heidän tekemiensä päätösten seuraukset eivät ulotu, ainakaan vielä.

[Lalli IsoTalo]

Nosto.

[niemi2]

Nosto.

Kun punavihreillä ei ole äänestäjiä, niin sitten tuodaan äänestäjiä, jotka äänestävät sen puolesta, että saadaan vielä enemmän äänestäjiä.

Lahjukset maksetaan sosiaaliturvan muodossa ja vaikka asuntoja Lontoon kalleimmilla aluieilla.

A family of former asylum-seekers from Somalia are living in a £2.1million luxury townhouse in one of Britain's most exclusive addresses at a cost to taxpayers of £8,000 a month.

Abdi and Sayruq Nur and their seven children moved into their three-storey property in a fashionable area of London last month because they didn't like the 'poorer' part of the city they were living in.

Mr Nur, 42, an unemployed bus conductor, and his 40-year-old wife, who has never worked, are now living in Kensington despite the fact that they are totally dependent on state benefits.

They live close to celebrities, including artist Lucian Freud, singer Damon Albarn and designer Stella McCartney, and their home is just minutes from the fashionable Kensington Place restaurant which was a favourite haunt of the late Princess Diana.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1293730/Somali-asylum-seeker-family-given-2m-house--complaining-5-bed-London-home-poor-area.html#ixzz4091AHgcc

[Lemmy]

Pomppasi taas ajankohtaiseksi
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3466499/Conman-betrayed-Britain-immigration-utterly-amoral-PM-led-conspiracy-let-MILLIONS-migrants-breaking-rules-deceiving-public.html