Blogs Coffee House

Nigel Farage keeps on about EU migration, but non-EU migration is the greater problem

10 March 2014

Last week, I spoke alongside Nigel Farage in a debate about immigration organised by the Evening Standard. It was good fun, as you’d expect, with David Lammy, Tessa Jowell and Simon Walker of the IoD on the other side, and David Goodhart alongside me and Mr Farage. You’d be startled, mind you, at the way Nigel Farage gets mobbed by an audience, and in a good way. I did get the chance to get to talk briefly to him myself and ask the question I’d wanted to put to him for ages: why it is that he keeps on about EU migration, when it’s non-EU migration that’s the greater problem.

He was unfazed, of course, and said, look, when we meet again in the future to talk about all this, it’ll be EU immigration that’ll be the problem. Well, that’s as may be. He’s returned to the fray today in a piece in the Evening Standard in which he declares that ‘most of our school leavers are desperate to work but they have been blown out of the water by an endless stream of Eastern European migrants who are older, often better qualified, and ready to share bedrooms in shifts while they are getting established.’


And that’s what you get from Ukip…the invariable linkage of immigration and the EU; their answer to the question is that Britain must regain control of its borders. Look, I do realise that freedom of movement within the EU is a problem, though nothing like what it’d be if the main parties had their way and Turkey joins, because it is a virtually unlimited pool of labour. Nonetheless, in terms of numbers and the capacity to integrate, it is immigration from outside the EU which poses the real problem. Of the 532,000 people who came to Britain in the year to last September, 244,000 of them were non-EU citizens. That’s less than 269,000 the year before but still nearly half, and it was about half the previous year’s total too. And of the 3.8 million people – net, not gross – who came to Britain under Labour, no fewer than 70 per cent were from outside the EU. The notion that immigration is a problem of EU membership just isn’t true.

Besides numbers, there’s the problem of migrants’ fiscal contribution – though of course I do appreciate that people’s human potential is rather larger than whether they contribute more in taxes than they take out in benefits. But if we’re going to be vulgar and talk in these terms, there’s simply no comparison between the contribution of EU and non EU migrants. There’s a very good analysis of a recent UCL report on the question by Ruth Alexander on the BBC More or Less website. The report, on the face of it, bore out the standard contention that migrants pay in more than they take out in benefits. But only if you’re talking about recent arrivals, those who came between 2001 and 2011, most of whom are in their twenties. Of those, the arrivals from the EU (and almost certainly more from the older member states than the newer ones) contributed over a third more in tax than they took out in benefits; non-EU migrants contributed just two per cent more. And if you look at the figures from 1995-2011, including all migrants, the picture is even more dramatic. It appears that while those from the EU still pay £6,000 per capita more than they take out, those from outside it take out £21,000 per capita more than they contribute. Quite a difference, no? And I don’t think all of it is attributable to age – many people from the Indian sub-continent will have been here for quite a long time. In fact, it turns out that taking all migrants into account for that longer period, immigration costs the state £95 billion overall. Which is something to put in your pipe and smoke the next time someone declares as a matter of fact that migrants ‘contribute more’.

Of course, like every sweeping pronouncement, this one is riddled with exceptions to the rule. If you’re talking about Australians, none of the above applies. Seeing that most seem to come in their twenties for a while as part of a contemporary Grand Tour and return home to age and have children, and are more or less part of the family anyway, they’re pretty well the ideal immigrants.

More Spectator for less. Subscribe and receive 12 issues delivered for just £12, with full web and app access. Join us now.

  • Robin

    Non EU citizens are not allowed to stay in Britain without being either granted asylum or being granted permission to stay. EU immigrants do not require permission to stay or to seek asylum – that’s a big difference Melanie McDonagh, because only a few are granted permission. Those who stay without permission are illegal immigrants and if what you say is true then we have an enormous illegal immigrant problem and the only way of dealing with that is to stop all foreign visitors from outside the EU from coming to our shores, which of course you can’t. That would be like other non EU countries stopping you from going to their country on holiday. However, what you can do is don’t allow them in if they haven’t got a return ticket and also to retrieve a sizeable returnable deposit when they leave.

  • AgainstRacistPoliticians

    This whole article blows…there are and always will be more EU immigrants than Non-EU immigrants and EU migration will continue to grow as bans have been lifted from the remaining countries. You can’t cut Non-EU immigration IT EFFECTS BRITISH PEOPLE TOO…The government is essentially saying that you don’t have a right to marry whom you choose and many have felt the aftermath of such policies….There are people who still have Bristish citizenship living in other countries and when they want to return with their spouse their spouse is denied…

  • Andrew McNeilis

    as a resident UKIPPER in tower hamlets- I can assure all it is not just eu immigration that is the issue
    we welcome all contributing migrants to the UK- it is those who take, take take with a righteous entitlement and zeal who need working on

  • Angus_MacLellan

    This is indeed the big problem with Ukip. They don’t seem to have a response to third world immigration which is by far a much bigger problem than the eastern European variety.

  • mark tayler

    UKIP’s policy is to have an Australian style points system for both EU and Non-EU migrants.

    • outraged

      Withdraw your predatory capital from my country, then you can moan about immigration.

  • Bisanzio

    To be able to give the big picture, this article should have given some statistics about British and benefits. Are they paying in or taking out? The goverment reports are clear: taking out 11% more than they pay in.

  • bugshead

    We are NOT allowed to make any comments about people with brown or black skins as that could be considered racist – however white skins (from eastern Europe) are fair game. No matter that the Africans, Pakistani’s and many (not all) Indians have leached the system and benefits for decades. Hence Farage’s strategy is to stay focused and not to be distracted by trash like Dianne Abbott and David Lamy

  • Donafugata

    The trouble is that many immigrants who are originally from outside the EU have arrived here via another European country, not all Bangladeshis come directly from Dhaka, for example.

    Somalis used to like Holland until there was a change to the benefits, naturally they all decided that the UK was a better bet and moved here.

    The UK gets the dregs of the dregs whatever Cristina Odious is saying at the DT.

  • outraged

    Moderator wil delete my comment again – but before they do, let me say that free flow of predatory destructive capital, goods and services is far worse than free flow of people, especially hard working and accommodating.

    As per todays Telegraph – Britain is not getting the immigrants it deserves: they are far too good for this country – Telegraph Blogs

  • Smithersjones2013

    Putting aside the racist undertones of the above article (quotas should not be limited by national or supranational considerations but on our nations needs) we have yet another dim-witted Europhiliac luvvie who doesn’t get it. The open border immigration policy is a dereliction of government duty and a threat to national security for the simple reason that the government have abrogated all responsibility for controlling and regulating such immigration and therefore are impotent to respond to such issues no matter how big a problem it becomes for the country and no matter how much dim-witted commentators bleat about the relative cost benefit of such migrants (analysis that will never account for the real cost benefit anyway) that stark reality remains unchanged. As such their immigration policy is worthless and similarly in many ways so is their national risk and security management policy

    As in so many others ways (as has been proved by the flooding) just about every significant threat (Housing, power or water shortages, terrorist attack, public sector failure etc) to the people of the UK is in no small part exacerbated by our dysfunctional membership of the EU. Its getting to the point where any defence of the EU or its deranged outlook is a betrayal of this country!

    PS As for the UCL study . European academics (migrants) claim European migration is good for Britain. Does anyone see the potential for a conflict of interest in such conclusions ? Or in other words. Go figure!

  • Gregory Mason

    Why given Cameron’s promises (inb4 cast iron) has he allowed non-EU migration to remain so high? It’s outrageous that politicians these days can make pledges and so easily break them with little repercussions.

    • outraged

      Its because he does not want to offend Indians and Chinese.

      • Gregory Mason

        I was reading a Cabinet paper yesterday and the same concerns were raised in 1955 but were ignored for short term diplomatic and economic reasons, shameful really.

  • lojolondon

    No. Non-EU immigration we can legislate for and manage. EU immigration we just need to accept anyone and everyone, no limits.

  • Right Full Rudder

    Maybe we aren’t counting all the EU migrants then, because I’m not imagining the Polski Skleps and the amount of people I encounter every day on the street, in shops and on public transport speaking with East European accents. Granted, we let in too many from outside the EU as well, and it’s time we started debating Commonwealth immigration, if that’s possible without the left erupting like Mount Vesuvius. But the fact is we have open borders to 27 countries, many of which are either poor or have wrecked economies. We can end that easily by leaving the EU and Farage is right to talk about that.

    • outraged

      Really? There is no one Polski Sklep in my neighbourhood, but there are 5 Indian and 10 Chinese takeaways and 2 Chinese massage parlours and at least 3 Chinese manicure parlours. Even in Ealing which used to be Polish enclave for decades, there are only 2 such shops, and the people on the street tend to speak some kind of Hindi dialect.

      Some people are bothered by Polish businesses because they do not want to see us advance and prosper!

    • Slavic Girl

      What are you on about? The biggest problem I know of, is that very few “Polski Sklep” which managed to survive vicious hate campaign sponsored by the media are now owned by Pakistanis or Kurds (as evidenced by recent scandal with sale of smuggled cigarettes, for which the owner was fined pitiable £500).
      So lets be honest, its not really about the fact that you are bothered so much by evil Polish shops but you have nothing against Chinese, Indian or Pakistanis establishments. Its about who OWNS the “Sklep” and makes money out of it.

      Someone of Indian descent just advised me, but their comment is being moderated: “Stick to your corner, play nice & we won’t bother you.”

      Stop economic warfare against Polish people!

  • Vinnie

    I hate how the waters have been muddied on this whole immigration debate.

    On the Left they accuse the Right of being against Immigrants. It’s not about immigrants per se, it is striclty a number game. And I believe it was Jimmy Carter, the bastion of the Left. He said that everyone should be entitled the ‘chance’ not the ‘right’, the ‘chance’ to apply for a job, the right to healthcare etc. At the moment, British people aren’t being given a look in. Watching Question Time from last week and seeing the chap get bullied off of the show and called a racist tells you all you need to know about the Left.

  • Vinnie

    how is non EU the greater problem? Non-EU immigration can be dealt with, refused etc. A lot of non-EU migrants are Aussies, Saffas, Kiwis. I see a lot of Canadian coming over to work as Teachers. And I welcome that.
    Non-EU migration is a open door and anyone can just waltz in unchecked.

  • global city

    I can’t find a more appropriate article to which to place this link, but!

    it is useful to understand the dogma of the Europhiles if you can appreciate the lunatic and limited way that the fellow in this piece
    Constructs his argument and limits his own thinking.

    A bit like all those old Trots used to do when forcing everything through the prism of ‘the Marxian perspective’.

    When Clegg talks of ‘patriotism’, or uses nationalist terms to justify the UK staying in the EU he is doing so from a particular ideological perspective. He feels entitled to do these things as the ends justify the means….. which is basically justifying the twisting of meaning of words that he uses.


    The RARE good news is that government can & is REDUCING non-EU migration.
    In the latest period it was 244k down 25k while EU was 209k UP 60 THOUSAND. If students are excluded the figure is low with the ‘work route’ & ‘family route’ being reduced severely.
    However, the problem is that one can do nothing about EU unless we LEAVE. It is only in the last year that large numbers of economic refugees have stared coming in from the South. This will get WORSE. Spain has 26% unemployment & Greece 27.8 with youth (most willing migrants) about SIXTY %. These countries will only start to prosper 18 months after leaving Euro ? 2018 if allow for time to make decision.

  • br14

    No one bothers to ask the simple question, how many is too many? Surely even the most ardent of immigration devotee must have a limit.

    At the current rate of knots, the population increases by 1 million every four years. That’s two cities the size of Birmingham every decade (at least).

    500,000 homes. Loads of hospitals and schools and probably another 500,000 vehicles every decade.

    How long will it be before the entire south of the country is paved over (because not too many travel north)?

  • Conway

    The notion that immigration is a problem of EU membership just isn’t true.” You missed out the word “solely” from that sentence. EU immigration is something that we can do nothing about while we remain a member. That we can (and should) do something about non-EU immigration is a failing down to the government (both this and, particularly, the last).

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Let’s call a spade a spade shall we, rather than a earth relocating implement.
    When it comes to immigration into UK, Islam’s your problem Britisher pals. And where does that come from? Essentially not the EU.

    • rubyduck

      Islam may be a problem, but it’s not the same problem as immigrants taking jobs that should be available to British youngsters.

      • theGoldenOne

        It’s not a migrant’s problem that most British Youth are lazy, inefficient or drug-addled wrecks. Employment doesn’t seem to be a problem for Britons of Asian origin- Chinese & Indians are managing fine.

        Muslim kids are in trouble because they won’t work. White kids are in trouble because they can’t work. That’s British society in a nutshell.

  • The_greyhound

    Any immigration is a problem.

    There’s absolutely no reason to permit any foreigners to take up residence, and it’s about time the Government put real energy and resources into deporting hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants.

    It’s no good posturing about getting tough with the wilfully unemployed if people who don’t belong here get first pick of the jobs.

    • outraged

      There is – UK is taking an advantage of free movement of capital (mostly predatory), goods and services. Your businesses should bigger off from EU, and go to India.

      You are brainwashed by Farage and in the midst of feeding frenzy!

  • True_Belle

    Funny how the EU now want to make the invasive Rhododendron in Britain an alien species… What is Farage doing about that one, eh?

  • ADW

    Australians are also from a country with low disease rates, high education and no desire to remove our culture

    • FrenchNewsonlin

      … nor do Aussies indulge in consanguinity (with all its associated social and health costs).

  • @PhilKean1

    Pro-EU journalists would LIKE us to think non-EU immigration is the greater problem.

    But the facts are that there are serious political consequences from allowing EU immigrants unrestricted access to Britain.

    The more we allow in, the greater the trouble we are storing up for the future.

  • berosos_bubos

    It is more than just taxes. Most infrastructure is not being developed and is at capacity. To add further capacity is disproportionately expensive (i.e. inflation).
    Even if immigrants are paying their way they are not covering the cost for the extra infrastructure required or providing compensation due to the knock on effects of over-loaded infrastructure.

  • Framer

    Non-EU immigration could be controlled if we had the will, as we are beginning to do with the still numerous fake private colleges. However EU migration is a bottomless pit (a) because we can’t and don’t control it – we could tighten up the benefits payouts but the staff don’t like being thought racists, and (b) because every new asylum seeker granted nationality by an EU country will be here in short order. The UK now has critical mass for ghettos of every ethnic group, starting with (Dutch) Somalis.

  • colliemum

    This whole kerfuffle by the chatterati in London about immigration, numbers of immigrants, and what UKIP says is nothing but displacement activity.

    This is what has happened in our name – yours as well, Melanie! – but apparently isn’t worthy of notice:
    “British aid money intended to help the poorest people in the world has been spent by the European Union on training Ukrainian soldiers in riot control, The Telegraph can reveal.
    The EU spent more than £1 million of British-funded aid on instructing Interior Troops from Ukraine’s Ministry of Internal Affairs on how to control crowds and arrest protesters, documents show.”

    Nah – nothing to see here, it’s only tax payers’ money – move on and ask Nigel Farage if he’s a xenophobe, a little Englander, and why he so dislikes the wonderful EU …

  • Two Bob

    BOTH are the problem

  • Tom

    I think Melanie as got the wrong end of the stick,non EU migration is/should be controllable where we only allow those in that we wish too.
    We all know that we can do diddly about the numbers coming from the EU or set any criteria regarding the skills or lack of that they have.

    • outraged

      You are brainwashed by Farage to believe that EU migration is ‘unskilled’.

      Even if that was true, still the bigger problem is passing of unskilled non EU immigration under skilled label on tier 2 visa and placing them in highly skilled jobs.

      • Tom

        You are the deluded one, I work by these people every day and they are just doing the jobs brits used to do.

  • Ron Todd

    We need to discriminate on talent and culture not country of origin.

    • outraged

      Try to open business in India, buy property there or even work.
      People in UK really are being brainwashed by Farage.

  • sarahsmith232

    Don’t blame Farage for his constant harping about EU, how could he not? If he went anywhere near talking about non-EU he’d be looking at a court case, the Left would have him up in court facing ‘incitement to racial hatred’ in a second.
    Why do we live in a society where so many have been so successfully brainwashed by the Left? It has now become a statement of fact in their eyes that immigrants contribute more. But of course, they don’t, or, at least, some don’t. ‘Course the answer is the BBC. The fact that we don’t live in a society with a free media. Our left dominated media has spent years brainwashing people and there’s been nothing out there to challenge this. End result, your average Guardian reading member of the Left has been blindsided by them, brainwashed, simple as that.
    So, to the Spec’, when is this Spectator Internet TV going to start doing something to put all of this right? Can’t you all have a word, can’t there be some, you know, taxpayer funded job creation type scheme which the Tories feel really very necessary to fund to financially kick start your Spec’ Internet Telly? The Guardian is on it’s last legs, they could do the same for them, so no one can accuse them of bias? There must a million and one holes in all of Labour’s future jobs fund, future promise to not tax this, future commitment to spend stupid amounts of money on all of their green silliness. They need to start getting taken apart, when is this going to happen the Spec’?

    • Tom

      Fully agree with you regarding the left wing channel called the BBC.
      The amazing think is some of the guardian readers actually think it supports the right!.

      • sarahsmith232

        Agree. You know, just watched last Thursdays Question Time, did you see it? Did you watch the white working-class caricature plant play the part of the thick, uneducated, on their knees and offensive about immigrants? That, sure as it’s air we’re breathing, was a plant. He was on there to play a part, don’t know whether he was paid or just given drink and cig’s but the BBC had him put there. Outright fact. This needs to be exposed. They are constantly getting away with it all, it’s unbelievable.

        • Donafugata

          Quite, and half the audience was immigrant too.

          • outraged

            But not one Polish – and supposedly there are so many of us.

    • Gregory Mason

      A lot of people my age (23 year old) were brought up under the awful education system of New Labour and it feels that very few of them have any patriotism in them whatsoever. Internationalism to them seem far more enlightened despite its obvious dangers.

      • sarahsmith232

        I can well imagine. How much time did you have the ‘Mary Seacole, a . . . .er. . . ‘nurse’ that is a historically hugely important figure because she, as a almost completely white, just about visible to the naked eye. . ‘black’ . . .person interacted with white people that might have been slightly racist. . . ..that’s it, she didn’t do anything else, she’s absolutely utterly and completely irrelevant in every other way, apart from to show that white English people are simple minded cretins and absolutely rubbish to their core’.
        How many weeks did Labour make you sit through that? From what I understand the only way they could pull this off was by smearing Florence Nightingale’s reputation? I’m going to guess, something they were only to happy to undertake? Was there any that was able to spot this?

  • Chris Bond

    He can’t discuss non EU immigration because vile politicians, press and the general oppressive Marxist blob which has squatted down on our country since 1997 would bring out the old waaacissst bull. You know, the waaacisst which translates as white people are the bourgeoisie and minorities are the lumpen proletariat so any place with white people is de facto racist/ bourgeoisie. It requires no proof, they just are.

    • Colonel Mustard

      That oppressive Marxist blob was infiltrating to squatting position long before 1997. But yes.

    • Gregory Mason

      I think it’s a smart move by Ukip, arguing against EU migration is a proxy for immigration as a whole and with EU migration it allows him to avoid the wacist bull thrown around by the cultural Marxists.

  • global city

    the other point to consider is that unless the migrant is setting up a business, or genuinely going self employed they DO take a job that previously existed whether they came here or not.

    That is the area that is purposely neglected in these reports. The post would be filled by somebody here if the migrant had not come and joined the queue…. it’s basic stuff.

    • Baron

      Good point, global city, agreed, but explain this:

      Baron often buys a takeaway at Wasabi, a latte at Costa at Liverpool street, has lunch at Patisserie Valerie at Sloane Square. Not one of those serving him was born here, Baron knows, he asks. The nationalities are: Russians (3), Uruguayan (1), Portuguese (1), Polish (2), Iranian (1).

      Why aren’t these jobs done by the young born here?

      • global city

        I don’t know exactly why, but I do not go along with the mantra that they are all lazy gits, deluded or brought up to expect too much.

    • Tom

      That is to simplistic for the barking left, they must be filling a job because they are far better qualified and hard working.
      You are right of course I work on a building site and every single job taken by migrants could be filled by Brits and there is about 40% where i work about 50 men.

  • global city

    and so we come full circle… or not quite yet.

    Melanie. It is you and your likes in the MSM that has skewered the debate, as you all introduced loads of straw men arguments to cover an issue none of you had any real ideas on.

    UKIP mentioning EU immigration is a technical and constitutional issue. The fact that the UK has no control over it’s borders, and so immigration policy, employment policy, housing policy….etc, because they are controlled by the EU was the issue, but you all smelt a rat, or the chance to parade your PC credentials.

    It is not even an issue of numbers, as mass migration is a distinct issue. The point that UKIP had tried to make was that the UK cannot have any sort of migration programme all the while it is in the EU, you all turned it into an ‘anti immigrant’ issue, or at best and anti immigration one… thereby showing the world how bad you all are at analysing important issues.

    Please remember that the next time you think of crafting yet another sneering slow burn piece about UKIP?

  • Cooper1992

    I don’t want to sound defeatist but I think we are 10-15 years too late in identifying this problem. England has irreversibly changed for the worst, can UKIP really do something about it?

    If people had listened to all this in 1999 or 2000 then I would say that all would not be lost, but it is now 2014 and we are likely to have Labour until 2020 who will do nothing.

    My country Wales, and Scotland and Ireland, are still proper nations. England though is an irrepairable mess. England has no one identity now, it is a multicultural mess.

    • Tom

      Never say never we don’t know how it will pan out in the future.
      Should we get a country that puts its own first anything is possible.

    • Conway

      I have given you an uptick, although I think you are too pessimistic. You are correct that Wales, Ireland and Scotland have been allowed, indeed encouraged, to keep their own identities. The English are finally waking up to what has been done to them.

    • revkevblue

      15 years ago you would have been pilloried by the government PC enforcement terriers, under the guise of breaking the law of inciting racial discrimination, A set of laws whose sole core reason for enactment, was and is, suppression of written, and verbal objection to the EU flexible workforce policy, that is still operating at full force as we speak.

    • Gregory Mason

      Never say never. People forget that it is still possible that the North may rise from its stupor and stop voting for the idiotic Reds. Many areas of England (where I’m from) still hold to traditional values and what not and I think the problem is only evident in the cities, particularly London.

    • Angus_MacLellan

      Been to Newport lately -little Africa comes to mind.

  • Shazza

    And of course, no one is going to address the big elephant in the room, the one that is permanently offended and will continue to take offence until they are in the majority.

    • telemachus

      We rejoice in the increasing diversity of our land
      We are being wrested out of the torpor into which we sank with the loss of empire
      Folks from around the world marvel at our dynamic integrated multicultural England as they arrive

      • Tom

        I don’t know about marvel they must be flabbergasted and if they arrive in London they must ask themselves, we have arrived in England haven’t we?.

        • James_Dymond


      • Harold Angryperson

        Did somebody just fart?

        • Jackthesmilingblack

          How’s that for extra sensory perception?

      • perdix

        Certainly the Labour Party has and does rejoice in the thousands of new (Labour) voters which come here.

        • Pwlhelli

          Most Polish are for that matter conservative. And I say that as a left-wing Pole.

      • Ron Todd


        We now have FGM
        Forced marriage
        cousin marriage
        arranged marriage
        honour murders
        dowry murders
        Racist pedophile rape gangs targeting underage white girls.
        mass postal voting fraud

        But never mind the rich socialists get cheap staff and cheap curries.

        • Donafugata

          Not forgetting cheap nannies.

        • itbeso

          Halal mean, teaching of creationism in schools, sharia councils, segregation in meetings in universities, madrasas preaching hate, as well as mosques, and the imposing of Islam on Muslim heavy schools.

        • Bisanzio

          Weren’t the Tories to set 30% tax rate to the fracking companies which are earning milions?

          • Ron Todd

            Probably a bit higher than I would go for.

        • Angus_MacLellan

          Append – postal vote rigging to that list as evidenced in the R4 File on Four program last night.

        • James Lovelace

          You need to include:

          The most violent racist murders in Britain (Kriss Donald, Ross Parker).
          Rampant violent homophobia (over a 20 year period gays were driven out of east London)
          100% of all those convicted of terrorism since 2001 (332 people) are muslims
          Most of the attacks on jews are from muslims

        • John McEvoy

          You forgot about that fascinating little open-all-hours restaurant on the corner. And the cut-price 24/7 Nannies.

      • Colonel Mustard

        You do write some tripe. You could put that on a poster with billowing red flags and a family gazing at the Dear Leader and sell it on eBay as soviet kitsch.

      • global city

        That may be the taken in the FO, but they see the world and what is good for the country from the perspective of their own narrow benefit.

        Bureaucratic rule is facilitated by the EU ‘method’, so bureaucrats fight to build the project. Whitehall has too much power invested in the permanent secretariat. Leaving the EU would enable us to properly democratise our institutions and systems.

        Nobody that I know suffered any torpor at all from the loss of Empire. Don’t you know any real people?

      • Bisanzio

        Then we stop to marvel after few months, when we find out the truth.
        (an Italian living in Londonistan)

      • Russell Quinn

        I think that we are lowering our own standards to meet that of the lowest common denominator. This may suit you but I want better for my children.

    • BarkingAtTreehuggers

      Note to myself: the big white mammoth in the room is that NF are the initials of…
      the Nation Front.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        …you should remember to copy your note to all of your other screen names, lad.

  • CraigStrachan

    What about those pesky Canadians, coming over and taking jobs from British central bankers?

  • Kitty MLB

    Well obviously Nigel Farage’s biggest issue is with the EU ( please let us be free of it)
    unlimited free movement is an issue for this small country and the fact we cannot
    have a say or remove those who threaten up.
    Dare I say this, here, without being slayed. But my biggest issue is as you say not
    immigration from within the EU ( I have no issues with hardworking Indians and Chinese who have been here for years in fact I do not have issues with immigrants
    in general, more the politicians who lie to them pretending this is a land of milk and honey) we do have a bigger issue and a more dangerous threat from other countries
    outside the EU that come here and live in ghettoes of their own making.

  • Streben80

    The point is about the principle of control. Non-EU immigration is as high as it is because the government ALLOWS it because the government DOES have control. EU immigration is uncontrolled and therefore the government doesnt allow it, it is IMPOSED upon it.
    The level of non-EU immigration and the system through which they are allowed in is essentially the same discussion you would have once withdrawn from free movement of people, then you could decide what criteria you applied to all immigrants irrespective of origin. It is though an entirely separate discussion from which bits you can and cannot regulate.

  • HY


  • Pip

    Stating the obvious does not diminish the argument against unskilled EU immigration, both issues need addressing urgently and the only Party intent on doing so is UKIP, all the other Parties are lying due to the approaching Elections, a fact conveniently lost on Establishment supporting Journalists it seems.

    • Baron

      If you ever travel to Prague, pay attention to the men in the building trade, most of them come from Ukraine and Russia, non-EU countries.

      Altogether, there are some 200,000 foreigners in Prague, over 5,000 are British, in the city of 1.2mn.

      The massive migration movements of people are problematic everywhere.

    • Bisanzio

      unskilled? The least unskilled EU migrant is at least a skilled labour. More often they are graduated people speaking 2 or 4 languages.

  • Hexhamgeezer

    We all know that none-EU ingress is greater.

    One thing at a time.

    • global city

      The points based system that UKIP would introduce would include every nation’s people from outside the UK. That would be the EU, the Anglosphere and the rest of the Commonwealth and world.

      Right now we could stop anyone from beyond the EU coming here…EVERYONE, but we would still have a massive mass migration problem that we can do nothing about.

      That’s the point. Leaving the EU would free us up to encourage talent from anywhere in the world, where as right now we have to take anyone from the EU, regardless of talent or ‘previous’.

      • Lantern

        Many people mistakenly believe that UKIP will be “stopping immigration” or “reducing it to a trickle”. Thank you for setting the record straight in such a candid manner.

        • global city

          You have to factor in all the other things, like proper education, training and apprenticeships, etc, that UKIP would instigate. Business right now gets such an easy ride. They get low wages subsidised, can bring in any amount of labour, no matter how low grade the job, have little cost for training for their needs (see above). These send immigration through the roof.

          UKIP are not a blood and soil party.

          • Lantern

            There’s nothing wrong with proper education, training and apprenticeships, (I myself was fortunate enough to have served an excellent apprenticeship in a nationalised industry), but I don’t see what this has to do with the fundamentals of stopping immigration. An imperative issue which transcends economic pros and cons as it affects the very nature of the society in which we live.

            A question. Our nationalised utilities were sold off during the Thatcher era and are now in the hands of foreign companies who the public regard as rip-off merchants. (Interestingly, a major energy supplier is EDF, the French nationalised electricty company). Do UKIP plan to bring the utilities back into public ownership with a ethos to provide the lowest costs to the consumer?

            A second question. We are told that in a “global-economy”, It is cheaper for corporations to move their manufacturing operations to India/Far-East due to the lower labour costs. However, other European nations have thriving automotive industries (Peugeot, Citroen, BMW, Saab, Volvo, Renault, Mercedes-Benz, Seat, Fiat, Skoda, Volkswagon etc) I see the re-industrialisation of Britain as another priority which transcends economy politics. It provides mass-employment, a solid industrial base and living wages for millions of families. Do UKIP have a plan for large-scale re-industrialisation? (Please try not to mention the FSI). Do you not agree that it is the duty of government to ensure that all have access to employment paying a living wage?

            “UKIP are not a blood and soil party.” I don’t actually believe you’re a Civic Nationalist party either. Peter Hitchens wrote in his column about a political stratgem called “Triangulation”. That means, by zealously pushing a certain popular policy which resonates with the public, eg. EU withdrawal, they will mistakely conclude that because you are on their side on one issue, that you support a whole raft of other issues close to their hearts, when in fact you do not. UKIP have been seized upon by an angry Joe Public as a convenient stick with which to bash a despised political establishment. Ukip at its core, is an anti EU, laissez-faire capitalist party. My view is, globalism in both its cultural-marxist and global capitalist manifestations have shafted Britain’s well-being as a nation state since the 1950s. Let’s have Britain-centred politics please leaving ideological abstractions aside. The primary guiding principle for those governing us should be the question “Is it good for Britain and our people?”. Do you not agree global city?

            • global city

              If I’d written about Labour would you have assumed that I was a socialist?

              I do not agree that the UK should cease trading with the rest of the world, but I do agree that ideologues have hijacked the notion to further their Marxist/Corporatist interests, much to the detriment of the UK. Nationalisation does not work and never has, where ever it has been implemented. Free trade does not mean Open Borders.

              I quite like the description of UKIP that you proffer!

              • Lantern

                global city, I did not say that Britain should cease trading with the rest of the world, far from it. My points were that a) we must re-industrialise b) That industries must be British owned, British based, and benefit the people of this country as well as the shareholders. (Think Lord Nuffield). I see future prosperity as a seed planted here at home, blossoming into a healthy tree, growing outwards from Britain selling its fruit throughout the world. Export driven economy – patriotic second industrial revolution along the lines of post-war Germany and Japan.

                UKIP is contradictory when it claims to be a patriotic party, yet expouses the globalist free-market, which by definition is supra-national. Patriotic considerations play no part in its ethos. Moreover, it has utterly failed to deliver for the British people. Which comes first for UKIP, the interests of the British people, or those of trans-national capital? If it is the latter, then UKIP is a disingenuous trojan horse.

                As for nationalisation, I think the fact that we now have a privatised railway system that is too expensive for average people people to use on a routine basis is a case in point. The success of EDF, the French government owned energy company is another. SNCF is another. “Water rates” for example used to be a nominal amount paid on top of ordinary council rates. A mere trifle compared to what we have to pay today to profit-hungry corporations. If nationalised utilities didn’t deliver profits to shareholders, they certainly benefited Joe Public, which was the reason they were created in the first place.

                • global city

                  It is hard to disagree with your first point…and I don’t think that anybody would, but!

                  I believe more in the conveyor notion of enterprise, rather than the monolith and state chosen. Companies should not be ‘protected’ and nor should markets. That is not to say that we should be beholden to corporate might either…we can chart a course through those two extremes.

                  Of course the other alternative, nationalisation, has been tried. The main problem is that as soon as they are nationalised to massive vested interests (social) insist that they are not focused on the same things that a private company, but on some other ‘value’. ‘We’re not the private sector’ was often heard in defence of crazy demands throughout the dozens of nationalised interests in the 60s’ and 70s’.

                  My preferred option would be to be as open to commerce as possible whilst being perennially suspicious of corporate power…always side with the upcoming entrants, and build policy to favour them accordingly.

                • Lantern

                  Alright, well I I’ve made my points here and think we have some common ground. Just to underline that I prefer a pragmatic approach to Britain’s problems rather than an ideological one. I still cannot see how globalised laissez-faire capitalism has benefited Britain in the slightest. All I see is a nation of care-workers, clipboarders and burger-flippers, or jobless. I see supermarkets and legoland housing estates where great factories once stood. I’m old enough to remember being a young man in the industrialised, mixed-economy 1970s, and that ordinary people had a far better deal all round during those times. Yes, union militancy became a major problem, leading to actions and reactions which killed us as a world manufacturing nation. Both “Left” and “Right” must take the blame for that. The time is now ripe for a full “system restore”, getting back to those commonsense, pragmatic measures that work for the national good. (btw. I do not see private-enterprise and nationalisation as mutually exclusive and firmly believe that essential utilities should be publicly owned as before). I also do not see why new key industries, especially in their fledgling stages, should not be protected, and their markets likewise.
                  Thank you for this exchange and I will leave it here. Unless you would like to add more in which case feel free.

Can't find your Web ID? Click here