Home page EU Immigration - Transition or a failing state? British public services in education and health will not be able to deliver what the Government is promising nor will British people be the main beneficiaries of the promised 210,000 housing units within the next three years. This is because the government has failed to plan realistic provisions for the human resources situation in the country. Double-speak The Government remains in denial over the real cause of pressure on national resources in the shape of an uncontrolled immigration from the European Union. This lack of strategic planning is a direct result of the irresponsible elitism of the Labour and Conservative governments in not explaining the implications of European Legal impositions and their tendency to have prevented the people of Britain from having a say in the decisions which have integrated this country more directly into the European Union. This is the result of politicians selling visions as opposed to delivering practical benefits which serve everyone's interests. The issue is that we see the beginning of a massive immigration from Central and Eastern Europe to the United Kingdom which cannot be controlled without breaking European Law. The Government makes robust statements such as how tough they are on immigration, that immigration will be on a points based system (a la Australia), that the European Union is considering a Blue Card like the US Green Card for non-EU workers and the British Government is employing highly paid private security companies to force the diminishing numbers of failed asylum seekers out of the country. But such non-EU immigration is irrelevant compared with the influx from the EU which outweighs non-EU immigration by more than a factor of ten. We are now seeing the results of such irrationality as the "suitcases full of work permits" for EU workers joked about in the British press concerning a "deal" between Tony Blair and the Romainian Government based on a "self-employed" loophole. These irresponsible government attitudes are affecting the people in this country and sooner, rather than later, this will catch up with the political parties. Indeed, all political parties have on this aspect of "closer union in Europe" failed to give adequate thought and consideration to the subsequent government responsiblities in upholding the expectations of the current population not to have their lives disrupted. The economic impact of immigration The British government is of course aware of the issue and for this reason has initiated an offensive to argue the "benefits" of immigration through a recent Home Office document stating that the economy benefits to the tune of £6 billion per annum from immigrant workers assuming a 0.5% contribution to working age population. This seems to be a serious underestimate of the true size of the working population concerned. It also fails to take into account the completely different dependency ratios between EU immigrant families and UK families. Some EU immigrant families have three to four children against the less than two for average British families. As a result there is a disproportionate diversion of public resources into government provisions for these families in the areas of public education and health services. At a time when the cash flow of the Government budget is tailing off this is a potentially perilous situation for the Government since the only option open to Government is more stealth taxes to cover the increasing shortfall. Low cost housing and the property ladder The Labour Party's concern with "low cost housing" is geared not only to the British and mainly English population but also to new immigrants. By way of example the number of people from Poland working in the United Kingdom and who have come here in the last 3 years now exceed 1 million. This figure is based on industry estimates in the construction and packing sectors and their accompanying family members. Some workers have not brought their families to Britain because of the unacceptable housing conditions under which many such workers live. However, the demonstration effect of an increasing number of immigrant children enjoying a British education, the numbers considering remaining and settling in the United Kingdom will increase. This suggests that something like 50% of the current Government new housing commitments of some 210,000 units within the next three years could be taken up by Polish immigrants alone. How Labour power has relied on immigration in the past But there are sound reasons why the Labour Party in particular would not wish to disturb this trend which is causing considerable upset in many English communities because of the overwhelming influx of foreigners. Historically, the Labour Party has sustained its position in England largely on the basis of the vote of immigrants. This included, initially, a significant support from the Irish from the Irish Republic who can vote in the United Kingdom. Indeed, many such Irish were important supporters of the creation of the original Labour Party in Scotland. These have also included the Commonwealth immigrants who came in after the second world war and more recently the less controlled influx from EU member states. Helping immigration It is the easiest game in the world to "support immigrants" who are from very low income countries in Europe benefiting from an improvement in their standard of living without in fact doing much to assist them. Immigrants are particularly vulnerable to being influenced in favour of those political parties who do not create problems for them and there is a natural gravitation towards those political parties who are neutral or understanding of their circumstances and thereby bolster their confidence and presence within society. Labour has always been a deft operator in this field in England contrary to the Conservatives. Immigrant right to vote Something which is becoming an explosive topic and therefore it is not even whispered in party conferences is that under existing European Law, which takes precedence over British Law, any citizen of the European member state may vote and stand as candidates in municipal elections where they are resident and of which they are not nationals (Council Directive 94/80/EC of 19 December 1994). These include those who: are European Union citizens, i.e. persons with the nationality of a Member State of the European Union (EU); are resident in the Member State where they would like to vote or stand as a candidate; comply with the conditions imposed by the national legislation of the Member State of residence on its nationals concerning the right to vote and stand in municipal elections. The principle of equality and non-discrimination between national and Community voters and candidates must be observed (European citizens to satisfy the same conditions as nationals of the Member State of residence). In order to take part in elections, citizens must apply to be entered in the electoral roll of the Member State of residence as an expression of their interest in voting. The Member States must make the necessary arrangements to enable them to be entered on the electoral roll in due time before polling day. Some Labour Party supporter blogs are recommending a change to European Law, and therefore British Law, so as to enable citizens of European Member States to also participate in general elections in the United Kingdom. So far this interest has not received much publicity in the British media, if indeed they have even noticed. This right to vote issue, amongst others, is one of the a reasons the Labour Party does not wish to encourage public questions, especially in England, on the considerable disruption of social comity caused by the current intensity of immigration and, in particular, involving citizens of the European Union. There is a subtle and intentional confusion created by the mixing of discussions on immigrants from non-EU member states and those from EU member states. There have been suggestions that Gordon Brown's "commitment" to low cost housing is also with an eye on the European Union immigrants and workers; the location of such housing projects would be of critical importance to the success of Labour Party strategic plans to convert marginal Labour constituencies in England into "safe" seats over the medium term. Immigrants of voting age, including those from the EU, now total around 2.75 million and this is equivalent to some 40 English constituencies. In terms of the conversion of marginal seats into safer Labour seats this vote, if distributed tactically, could perhaps swing 60 constituencies towards Labour (10% of the total in England). Thus, with the West Lothian effect on the one hand (see "What was the West Lothian Question, and why is it important?") and the immigration vote impact on the other, the Labour Party could consolidate its decision-making power in Parliament to impose legislation on the English population without increasing its electoral support amongst the English electorate. This links in with the other Labour Party strategy related to their support of the European Union's regionalization agenda which was sold as devolution in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales and as "regionalization" in England and concentrated on those areas where the Labour Party was well represented (see "You can't fool all of the English all of the time") The politically correct argument is all about the "economic contribution" and greatly exaggerated benefits of immigration but the main public complaint is that the too-fast pace of change is resulting in social disruption which does not seem to interest the politicians. The other politically correct but amazingly a misrepresentation of the facts is that the United Kingdom has always advanced and been strengthened through immigration. This is basically not true and there is little economic evidence to support this contention (see "A Nation of Immigrants?"). The marginalization of the population There remains the gaping hole of the failure of British governments to address the issue of the participation of the people of Britain in deciding on such commitments, and others, related to the European Union. On the question of promoting democracy by bringing about a full participation of the people of Britain in decisions which affect them, all governments since 1975 have been fundamentally flawed in theory and in practice. Indeed, all leaders of all British political parties are completely unconvincing on this issue (see "Britain's anachronistic political parties" and see "Tam Dalyell, where are you?"). The Balkanization of England? The uncontrolled disruption of social comity in England promoted by political party inaction and the preventing of the people of the country to have a greater say in the evolution of their own society is what happened in Hungary during the 19th Century and this lead, under the Trianon agreement in 1920/21 to the break up on Hungary into many different countries each characterised by populations of former immigrants. The important lesson was that Hungary had tried to enforce assimilation just as Gordon Brown is now suggesting for non-EU immigrants. However, at the rate at which the influx is occurring the feasibility of assimilation of EU immigrants is low. Indeed, rather than have, for example, Poles being required to learn English we have local authority staff and even bank staff learning Polish. This makes a complete nonsense of the Governments approach to the whole question of immigration and citizenry. The only solution, it would seem, is to reduce immigration from the European Union member states. A European constitution? In interviews concerning a referendum on the Amending Treaty (re-named constitution), Gordon Brown remains unconvincing. Others such as David Milliband have tried to argue the case that there is no constitution. This is a disingenuous and slightly absurd position for a British minister to take in Britain where historically our constitution is made up of many separate written documents, court decisions and previous European treaties, none of which is "called" a constitution. The fact that the single example of excessive and uncontrolled immigration is disrupting communities and public services and of the fact that British ministers and Gordon Brown agreed with other European "leaders" not to permit the people of Europe to have referenda is proof in itself of the lopsided nature of agreements and of the underlying constitutional impact of European Treaties. A transition or a failing state? The government wishes to ignore the reality of the current immigration crisis by calling it a transition. Unfortunately, the reality is that a lack of strategic planning by all political parties on this issue and their blindness of the constitutional impacts of massive immigration on the native population points to a failure in statehood where the population has no say in its affairs because a government which enjoys the support of less than 19% of the electorate place their own survival in power over the interests of the people of the country. Posted: 24th October, 2007