Keith, stop fantasising about Enoch Powell's "Rivers of Blood" speech. "Babies born to immigrants" indeed!

The facts are that the excess of births over deaths contribute more to population growth than immigration, and that immigration is still falling. All political parties plan to be able to restrict it in some ways (that itself is new) and there is no reason (other than "It's happened before, so it will happen again) to believe that it must rise again.

A major part of the excess of births over deaths is typical longer lifespans. That necessitates funding elderly care (unless you plan a program of compulsory euthanasia too). That in turn necessitates a growth in the economic sector, and the growth needs to be greater than the growth in population because of the ageing trend. So immigration is necessary and control measures are in place or are being put in place. The points system that you deride can operate as a soft cap because it is always possible to regulate (almost instantly, by statutory instrument) the number of points needed to immigrate.

I'd probably want to adjust A8 policy and the Employed Workers' Directive too - but the former largely on humanitarian grounds to alleviate the situations that Pierre le Chapeau describes, although the more that is publicised, the less A8 workers will want to come here (and indeed many have gone home or are going home already).

What is necessary is an explosion in the building of social housing, and as Roosevelt taught us that and an infrastructure program will drive economic growth - and if correctly located, no-central economic growth. It's that or a Malthusian doctrine, or a "drawbridge" policy that will, as Europe demonstrated in the 20s produce a severe recession.

Net A8 migration is probably negative at present. Policies to control 3rd world migration are in place. Asylum claims are down. Asylum rejection rates are up. Asylum decision times are down. Removal rates are up (although a more effective tracking system and a workable detention or tracking policy for those awaiting visas would be more effective still. It is not correct to say that immigration is rising faster than ever. The population may well be, but immigration is not. If you want to know what a falling population will do to a country, study the economic effects of the pneumonic and bubonic plagues in this country.

What else do you want? Or is it still "No foreigners, and no children of foreigners"?

With respect the very articulate black gentleman on Question Time was in a lawyer's suit and sounded like a lawyer to me - but was not challenged perhaps because of the amazing bottle he had to be so "dog in a manger". I think he MUST have been a barrister. But I have answered his question above.