BS: UK immigration too high?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:28 AM

Was there just a funny smell in here?

:D

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 04:06 AM

Mudcat Dictionary

Dodgy Factoid: A piece of hard evidence that weakens or destroys your argument.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 03:43 AM

Dodgy factoid!
Oh dear.
Please give me an example so I will know never to post one again.
Just one will do.
Make it the very worst one I have ever posted.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 11:12 PM

Still, immigration is probably too high in every developed country.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 07:59 PM

""I am reopening this only because Royston has, in a current thread, said that my views expressed here show me to be a far right bigot.""

Keith, it is well known on this forum that I am a Tory voter, and also that my income is sub £12000, yet I find your posts to show a bias considerably to the right of my own.
_____________________________________________________________________

""Richard, I do not know but suspect that that is how some people label anyone who challenges their dearly held beliefs.""

An odd answer, given that the people who are most in agreement with you persist in calling those who challenge their dearly held beliefs "liberal fascists".

No, my friend, it is your insistence upon posting the opinions of others with suspect motives, and disseminating their dodgy "factoids".

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 09:18 AM

Two threads are becoming confused here.
Sorry.
Lox re me not seeing AIDS as gay or African, my post on 21st Jan
"Globally HIV / AIDS is overwhelmingly a disease of heterosexual people both in absolute number and in terms of the percentage of sufferers"
Yes, I do agree.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 09:09 AM

I provided the opinions of experts in the field for consideration.
I did not find but withold anything because it did not fit someone's agenda. I put up everything relevant that I found.
The Guardian columnist included some statements from very well informed professionals, beside extreme opinions of his own.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 08:57 AM

"Opinions I did not challenge, only supposed factual information."

You did provide your subjective interpretation of stats.

You also posted others opinions, including that of a guardian columnist.

"I had no desire to enter that bull pit."

I think this may have been unrealistic. I don't believe it is possible to contribute to a disussion and not be a part of it.

Had you done the research you referred us to, that might have given you an immunity if sorts, but what you did was refer us to research and opinions from other sources.

It is not possible to be neutral in that respect, though with careful attention it is possible to provide as balanced a picture as possible and to draw attention to inaccuracies across the board where you think you see them.

I would like to reiterate that I am of the view (not that I see myself as meriting any position of judgement, but for the purpose of reassurance) that you are honest and well intentioned, and that this is demonstrated extremely clearly in your retractions and where, when asked, you have clarified your position.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 08:30 AM

Richard, I do not know but suspect that that is how some people label anyone who challenges their dearly held beliefs.

Lox , on the other thread I kept out of the dicussion of morality. I had no desire to enter that bull pit.
Opinions I did not challenge, only supposed factual information.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 07:46 AM

Exactly, with context: -

"Keith, most people here suspect you (from your posting history in general) to hold a number of rather right wing prejudices; that you are a right wing bigot. You need to consider, if you believe us all to be mistaken, just what is it that you say and do that leads people to hold that suspicion of you."


So why are we, and so many of us, so mistaken?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 06:35 AM

Just to clarify, I also have seen no evidence of Keith holding racist or homophobic views, and my experience of him has been that when he has wound me up with his posts, he has been able to set me straight as to his intentions pretty quickly.

Of course noone is perfect, and we can all learn from each other.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 05:58 AM

I cannot remember if I have posted to this thread before so apologies if I am repeating myself. I do not subscribe to the view that everyone who thinks immigration should be restricted is a racist. I do not personaly agree with the view for various reasons, mainly becuase I believe the flow is distinctly tidal and will always ebb and flow, but I can see how it will bother some people. Maybe if the term 'UK population is too high' was applied it may be seen as less controvertial?

I have seen no evidence of Keith saying that immigration should be restricted on grounds of race, colour or creed so the views are more exclusionist than right wing. Whether the exclusive use of one piece of land by the people lucky enough to be on it is right or not is yet another matter. Whether the borders should go up when a particular country is full is yet another. What constitues full is a third as, even if we were to accept many more people, our standard of living would still be much higher than some of the less densely populated countries in, say, Africa.

Bearing these things in mind I think it is a fair question to ask but one that was always bound to attract the extemists from both ends. To imagine otherwise would be naive.

Cheers

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 05:08 AM

Just to clarify, it wasn't clear until you stated clearly in a recent post that you do not see homosexuality as a gay or african disease.

However, I fear that Ake would miss the subtlety of your post and simply see it as a point scored for his team.

For the record, I live in inner city London and live on less than 25K a year. The reason why I do not subscribe to racist politics is not that I am part of a demographic which benefits from immigration, but that I am lucky eough to have an open mind so I have been able to consider racist ideas in a bit more depth and have consequently rejected them.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 04:58 AM

Keith,

If you wish people to be clear about what your political position is, then you should make it clear with each post, and if people get the wrong end of the stick you should explain what your actual opinion is.

You may feel that it is up to others to understand things the way that you meant them, but sometimes that is simply unrealistic and you have to allow for a margin of error and misinterpretation on all sides. That is the subtlety of good communication (something which I could do well to develop in my own posts).

In the Ugandan death penalty thread, your posts do appear is if they were posted to add credence to Ake's or GfS's position, not least because Ake repeatedly indicated that he saw you as being on his side.

This was something that you never distanced yourself from, just as you made no attempt to refute his numerous unfounded assertions about homosexuals.

It could easily be inferred that the reason you do not take Ake to task when he describes Gays as having a natural propensity for child abuse, and when he says that Gays should effectively be imprisoned, (amongst other things)is that you agree with him.

It could easily be inferred that you are more concerned with refuting those who are outraged by his position than you are with setting the record straight wholly neutrally as you claim you are.


Civil rights is a fundamental principle of our society, and when people argue to limit them, they condemn us to a return to the jungle.

We live in a world that depends on ideas to continue functioning.

Political debate is the arena in which ideas are examined and developed.

Money for example is nothing more than an idea. It only exists because we all agree it does.

The law, parliament, the courts, queueing for the bus, ... all these things are nothing more than ideas ... yet their agreed existence has allowed human beings to survive in a way unprecedented by any other species.

Of course Ideas can also result in the creation of solid tangible things too, like cars and computers, but I am more concerned with the imaginary mechanisms that mean we don't have to live in caves and hunt big game with spears, or have a life expectancy of about 30 years.

So if you wish to engage in political discussion, why not share your ideas, and why not give your reaction to the ideas that are around you.

So in short,

1, what do you think

2, what problems do you find with the assertions made by GfS and Ake?


If you aren't prepared to answer these questions, then it may be realistic to expect people reading your posts to view you as being an apologist for homophobic and racist politics.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 04:00 AM

Never mind "roughly"
He said exactly "Keith, most people here suspect you (from your posting history in general) to hold a number of rather right wing prejudices; that you are a right wing bigot"

Do you think he did not include himself?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 03:46 AM

No, Keith. What Royston said (roughly) was that many people here thought you were a right wing bigot, and that if you were not you might care to ponder how they came to form such views.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 03:23 AM

I am reopening this only because Royston has, in a current thread, said that my views expressed here show me to be a far right bigot.

The views of John Denham and Gordon Brown quoted in my last post here exactly coincide with mine expressed throughout.
You never responded Royston.
Did you recognise yourself in their description of the kind of person who shouts loudest for mass immigration?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:43 AM

The middle classes are "insulated" from the effects of immigration and find it hard to understand fears about housing and jobs, John Denham, the communities secretary said.
The affluent often are able to see opportunities within change and uncertainty, whereas those who are less insulated from potential drawbacks may see the same change as a risk or a threat

People who were better off tended to look more favourably on mass immigration, he said.

"Crudely expressed, the higher you are in the pecking order, the more likely you are to benefit from immigration," he said.

"Those of us who feel culturally enriched by the benefits of migration and who are insulated from the competition for jobs, housing and public services that is potentially posed by migrants, often find these views difficult to appreciate.

It echoes a speech last month by Prime Minister Gordon Brown who said: "If the main effect of immigration on your life is to make it easier to find a plumber, or when you see doctors and nurses from overseas in your local hospital, you are likely to think more about the benefits of migration than the possible costs."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8389701.stm

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 09 - 02:20 AM

Paul, you were lucky to find someone like Martin in amongst all this.
Music related threads are in the top half of the forum.
I hope you find plenty to interest you there. We usually have at least one thread about Irish music running.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 09 - 02:16 AM

Tug, I accept that you have a point, and that the expression was not well chosen.
What is not acceptable is for you to use that trivial point to claim that I am not worthy of any respect, and to dismiss all the hard factual information on that site.
I am just arguing that immigration is now much too high. The precise number of pupils with no English does not matter, only that there are a large number of schools who feel overwhelmed by the unprecedented influx of such children.
That is amply borne out by the BBC reports.
I have seen high profile campaigns against the admission of a few Traveller children to village schools, but this problem is confined to poor, inner city scools.
And who cares about the children of the poor?
Not the Left, who collude in grinding them down, and just call them racist scum if they complain.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 21 Nov 09 - 06:35 PM

Oh Dear, Keith, talking to you really is trying to walk through a swamp. OF COURSE, there are children in our schools with little or no English. Your 'Bakanced Immigration' group deliberately conflated these with fluent English speakers who have a diffewrent mother tongue. You must realise this, musn't you. Just go back and look! My God, why don't you use YOUR critical factors in a balanced way?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: MartinRyan
Date: 21 Nov 09 - 04:51 PM

GUEST Paul

There's some relevant information in THIS THREAD

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Nov 09 - 04:38 PM

First time user on board.
I am hoping to find out if anyone knows anything about the hanging of Dr Lynn [United Irishman]in Randalstown in @1800, three days after Roddy McCorley?

Paul from Randalstown

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 09 - 01:21 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7072843.stm

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 09 - 01:18 PM

Another.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7306903.stm

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 09 - 01:17 AM

Tug, if you are going to use one expression out of several pages in a report that I linked to for information, that is your right.
i do not know why they chose to use it, but you found a note explaining it so there was no deception.
I suspect that many of the pupils you taught were of immigrant families but had been born here and had some years in English schools.
Here is a BBC report on the issue so that you can not pretend that it is not an issue.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7372853.stm

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 20 Nov 09 - 09:05 PM

Keith, I am being absolutely precise. Non- English speakers is not a term you can find anywhere in government documents. As I illustrated above, this was a deliberately misleading usage introduced in the much vaunted report by the 'balanced ( sorry...reduced) immigration group. You then immediately tried to justify this with the rather absurd
A non English speaking child will have a few words of English after just a few days at school, so technically he is no longer a non English speaker, but he is still requiring of much extra attention.
Which has no warrant anywhere. You really have lost the respect I had for you as an assiduously honest reporter of facts ( I was always suspicious of your choice of facts). It is now clear that you will stoop to, and collude with, the most lowly of rhetorical usages in order to be 'right'. You're not, and I wish this corresp[ondence to cease.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Nov 09 - 12:52 PM

Are you being precise?
It would not apply to pupils born in UK, whose mother tongue would be recorded as English.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 20 Nov 09 - 11:39 AM

Then lets be precise, having taught in multi racial schools in London and Leicester, I know that the vast majority of the kids for whom English was not the mother tongue were fluent in english...with a local accent. The report is deliberately misleading.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Nov 09 - 02:26 AM

I will answer for you then.
You have no cause to say that at all.
From the start I have only debated the practical and rational issues surrounding immigration.
I have been concerned only with numbers, never origins.
The only exceptions being when language is an issue, or when someone else has raised the issue of EU v non EU migration.
I described my views as in line with a cross party group that includes ethnic minority members and the last Archbishop of Canterbury.
Like them I have never advocated an end to immigration, but a reduction over a period of years to a state of balanced migration.
I am no racist so have never made a racist statement Don.
But you believe you can see beyond the posts of a member and straight into his soul.
Do you see yourself as a kind of Deity Don?
That would explain why, from your lofty moral superiority and knowledge, it is OK for you to be in favour of controlling immigration, but not a mere mortal.
It would also explain how you know that the arrival of people like the Jutes has improved our population, making us somehow better than others not so blessed.
Not racist when you say it.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 09 - 06:07 AM

If they did we could not cope Don.
It is just about numbers.
What cause do you have to refuse to believe me?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Nov 09 - 05:58 AM

""Don, I keep telling you it is about numbers not race.""

I know you keep telling me, and if you keep telling me for another decade you'll even believe it yourself. But I won't!

If all the thousands of British Expats all over the world started coming back tomorrow, you would object to them being allowed in?

YEAH RIGHT!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 09 - 05:52 AM

Don, I keep telling you it is about numbers not race.
Tug, it is about precise meanings.
A non English speaking child will have a few words of English after just a few days at school, so technically he is no longer a non English speaker, but he is still requiring of much extra attention.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 19 Nov 09 - 05:30 AM

A third of schools in Blackburn and Leicester have a non-English speaking majority
while in Birmingham that figure is about a quarter

There's one false fact for a start. If you look at the footnote given, you will see that the figures about those for whom English is not a mother tongue....not non-English speaking people. Elsewhere bi-lingualism is celebrated as an achoievement.

Thw whole report seeks to colour the facts by using ambiguous and misleading language.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Nov 09 - 05:18 AM

""If you think that anything that happened over a thousand years ago has any relevance to modern Britain, you are on your own.""


I live in hopes that one day you will answer what an opponent says, instead of interpreting it to mean something entirely different, and then answering your interpretation.

You take my statement that in 2000 years of its history, this little bunch of Islands has always seen foreign influx, and on the whole, by assimilation, strengthened and improved the nation, and you try to claim that I am equating 2000 years old figures with today's figures.

You know very well that I was talking about an ongoing infusion of new blood, new ideas, and new achievements, and you can't find a sensible argument against that, so your only recourse is to change the premise to suit your heavily twisted perception.

Nobody has claimed that immigration should not be controlled. I would just prefer that it weren't controlled by anti foreigner bigots.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 09 - 02:29 AM

You can have every confidence in their facts Tug.
You can be sure that their enemies scrutinise everything they publish looking for something to nail them with.
Parliamentarians can get away with many things, but not being caught in a lie.
Especially not on such a sensitive subject.
That is why you can make snide innuendo, but you can not challenge a single one of those facts.
Can you?

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 07:33 PM

And who are ..'balanced migration'

The co-Chairmen of the Cross-Party Group on Balanced Migration are Frank Field MP (Labour) and Nicholas Soames MP (Conservative).

The Group's Vice-Chairmen are Lord (Bill) Jordan CBE (former President of the Amalgamated Engineering and Electrical Union) and Daniel Kawczynski MP (Conservative, Shrewsbury & Atcham).

Other members include Baroness Cox, David Taylor MP, Field Marshal Lord Inge KG, GCB, PC, DL,
Lord Ahmed, Lord Carey (former Archbishop of Canterbury), Lord Skidelsky, Roger Godsiff MP,
Tobias Ellwood MP, Michael Ancram MP, Colin Burgon MP, Julian Brazier MP, Ann Cryer MP,
Ian Davidson MP, Peter Lilley MP, Lord Lamont, Lord Leach, Robert Key MP, Peter Kilfoyle MP, Peter Bottomley MP, Mr Archie Norman and Mr Hazhir Teimourian.

hardly fills you with confidence.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 05:25 PM

David, many of us are not badly effected by immigration.
But some are.
Here is some stuff about the effects on services.
http://www.balancedmigration.com/pdfs/ourcase_2.pdf
There is also a problem for many with housing and work.

To be content with current levels of immigration is a point of view, but it is an increasingly rare one.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 03:58 PM

Maybe we can look at it another way. It is generaly accepted that world has become a 'global village'. If that is the case then surely the issue is world overcrowding rather than national migration. If we look at a village, or council estate for us commoners, there are often a few houses that are overcrowded. It is not an issue usualy. If however the whole village/estate becomes too full we do have an issue. Do we have problems with the global village or the houses therin? I don't know - honestly. If the problem is the world then overcrowding in the UK pales into insignificance. If it is only in the UK then what the heck - we'll get over it. Maaybe the immigrants will bring their own doctors, dentists and teachers with them?

Cheers

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 03:54 PM

Don,
If you think that anything that happened over a thousand years ago has any relevance to modern Britain, you are on your own.
Or can you come up with anyone else who thinks that?
If you are happy with immigration as it is, that is fine for you, but you are very nearly alone on that too.
Can you list any well known persons?
All the main parties and most of the population think you are wrong.

You say I bleat about an English Nation and link me with BNP.
Please explain.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 03:09 PM

G.S. Scheik,
The Statistics Commission has confirmed that, leaving aside the movement of British citizens, 68% of foreign immigration in 2006 was from countries outside the European Union.1 The development of non-EU immigration since 1992 is shown in Figure 4.
Find that here. href="http://www.balancedmigration.com/pdfs/ourcase_1.pdf">http://www.balancedmigration.com/pdfs/ourcase_1.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 03:05 PM

""Please explain why you felt the need to bring it up here, and why my failure to mention it constitutes "bollocks"!""

Well then, in short words that you might understand. This country has for two thousand years been subject to foreign influx, and mostly, the end result has been positive.

There has never been the kind of "English Nation" that you and the BNP bleat on about, and that mixture of types and cultures led to a nation that was strong enough to populate the so called New World, and to manage an empire that owned one third of the rest.

So we've always been multicultural, and we've done pretty well on it.

So I say roll on the future, let's see where it leads next, and if it ain't broke, there's not much need to fix it.

And it AIN'T BROKE yet mate, in spite of what xenophobes and racists would have us believe.

Towns are crowded, even in underpopulated countries, and I don't see much evidence of people packed shoulder to shoulder outside of towns.



Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 02:51 PM

""Don, unlike those on your side of this debate, I do not often resort to abuse. I called Schweik a fool because he thinks that whingers, ie anyone exercising their right to question the government, should go into exile.""

Reality check, Keith.

You have called Richard Bridge, and Royston, and numerous others "FOOL".........REPEATEDLY!

Have a look at your own posting record on threads dealing with immigration, and Ireland, just two subjects, and you will see just how often you have used that particular type of ill mannered language.

The fact that you have the bare faced effrontery to complain, and assert that you do not do this, lends credence to the characterisation of you as a liar by Richard and Royston.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 12:49 PM

I am serious,do what people from other countries have to do,they have to leave their countries to find work.
the trouble with the English is they are reluctant to learn another language,and they expect everyone else to learn English[which most foreigners do],and then become indignant[as does KeithA] when it is suggested they should learn another language,and possibly have to emigrate, no, the English are too good for that,why should they do what foreigners have to do.
people like ,Keith vote Tory,but expect everyone else other than them to take Tory Tebbitts advice.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: GUEST,Lass in Leeds
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 11:34 AM

I think "Good Soldier Schweik" (GSS GOOD SWEATY SESSION)is trying to extract the Michael here. Please keep the posts civil gentlemen, it is a serious topic.

Thanks
Queenie

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 10:17 AM

Most of our immigration is from outside EU.[lets have statistics].
why dont you move to northern ireland,they speak English.their economy is booming[all those shoppers from Eire].
it is your fault you only speak English.
do something about it learn another language.
you complain, why should you have to emigrate?why should the Irish have had to emigrate for hundreds of years?,now you know what it feels like.
Do what the Irish have had to do for years,get another job make a new home,and stop moaning,Brittania doesnt rule the waves any more,learn a new language and get on your bike,you support the Tory party,then take Norman Tebbits advice.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 07:54 AM

Schweik, we still have some autonomy.
Most of our immigration is from outside EU.
We have every right to decide the limits.
EU migration is approaching balance, but anyway many people argue that Britain should renegotiate or leave the EU.
We have the right to do that too.
Have a whinge about it if you like.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 06:27 AM

you dont seem to understand the concept of Europe, England is now a European state,Europeans are free to live and work anywhere in Europe[that includes England].
this gives certain advantages to multinational capatilism,it also makes european wars less likely.
if you dont like it tough,[stop whingeing, your stuck with it] England decided to enter Europe,they did have the sense to keep their own currency,so they can devalue sterling whenever they like,as they have done recently to boost exports,but they are part of Europe.
that means under European law, Europan immigrants have a right to come to England,.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Folkiedave
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 06:19 AM

It's one of the biggest reasons we're having to build so many new houses and concrete over our country.

Actually the biggest reason we are building so many houses is because many UK couples divorce.

Subject: RE: BS: UK immigration too high?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 09 - 05:54 AM

I do not like the ever increasing urbanisation and overcrowding of England, but I refuse to leave.
As I have said, I am not a lone voice crying in the wilderness.
All three of the main political parties agree that immigration has reached unacceptable levels. Polls show that the majority of the population agrees.
You would have us all leave?