New Years Immigration

Considering today is the last day before 28 million, not 29 million as UKIP claim, Bulgarian and Romanians are able to come to Britain it is worth commenting on. A news report in the Telegraph said that it is likely 385,000 immigrants will come to Britain it total, but the honest answer is we have no idea how many people are coming. However, it definitely won't be the whole populations of Romanian and Bulgaria despite UKIPs scaremongering. All we know is a lot of people are coming, mass immigration in other words.

UKIP is busy scaring half the population about immigration.

Personally I don't have any problems with people coming over and contributing to Britain. Immigration is a boon to Britain. I take a rather Athenian Metic view of the whole situation. The Athenians allowed foreign peoples (Metics) to come live in their city to trade and make money. They were required to fight for Athens but did not get the vote. This turned out pretty good for Athens as people like Aristotle were able to go to the Acadamey and the army and, most importantly, the navy was bolstered. Although I doubt every Bulgarian and Romanian is going to be required to fight in the British military the idea of immigrants trading goods and labour is overall a good thing.

The Greeks used to know something about economics, before they joined the Euro.

However there is one problem Athens didn't face which we do. A large part of our economy is under the control of 'the public sector', these are the council houses, schools and hospitals etc. . Unfortunately for us we don't live in a free market and so the country cannot react in these areas very well to mass immigration. Unlike Plato who could just set up the Acadamey it is astoundingly hard to set up a school in response to an increase of people. We cannot plan for a huge unknown amount of people coming to Britain. Nor do we have the upfront money to do so.

The likelihood also is that immigrants will come mostly to specific areas like Wisbech in the Fens where there is a lot of agricultural work. In other words Wisbech's schools, council housing and hospital services could come under great strain. Wisbech's population has increased by a 1/3 or 10,000 in a decade and that is over 90% due to immigration. Despite people being quite resilient to the mess Tony Blair dropped us in, we need to be build a large amount more of schools, council houses and increased hospital capacity for the people of Wisbech. This of course comes for a large part out of the Cambridgeshire County Council budget which coincidently has one of the lowest spends per capita of all the counties across the whole country, it might be about to get lower still. Our centrally planned public service economy is/ will be creaking in the areas of mass migration.

To be fair though this is not the fault of immigrants and so people shouldn't be attacking them. They do contribute to the country in taxes, but this money is not up front and thus we have mass planning problems. They are not just here for benefits the vast majority of them want to work. They're only trying to look out for their families so they have better lives by escaping a post Soviet country. And they're certainly not taking our jobs because the more people in work the more economy grows which in turn produces more jobs.

A lot of this is our fault as a nation because we for a long time have has sub standard education which a lack of choice so that people can't compete. Furthermore we have has an NHS run by chimpanzees who seem to be eating half the vast amounts of money spent on health and a benefits system which means you're severely disadvantaged if you work and earn the average or below the average wage. My suggestions is we start to fix these problems before we start letting mass migration take place because we could soon be again in a position where public services are close to grinding to a halt in the areas of most strain. We will still be able to feel a net positive benefit from migration if we allowed 100,000 migrants into the country. Mass migration however would cause too many problems.

Lefties of course want to ignore all these points. Indeed both Red Ed and Nick Clegg seemingly want half the European Continent to turn up in Britain. However, as often escapes their mind, we don't even have the money to throw at these problems in a vain attempt to solve them. The deficit may have been cut by a 1/3rd but we still have one and our mahousive national debt is still going up. We are in real terms only a bit better off than we were in 2010.

In other words Britain wants migration but mass migration is too pie in the sky. With an economy relying too much on the centrally planned public sector unable to respond properly, let alone the massive debt and deficit we have which will be strained even more. I think we need to make sure our public services are able to serve the public and that we're not creating more debt.

New Design for 'Go Home Immigrants' Van

Romans Go Home

Mamma Mia

I'm quite interested in Sweden at the moment in light of the riots going on. I'd like to pull out some of the inconsistencies on this Scandinavia Country that the Left have spun and continue to spin.

Till very recently the only way has been Scandinavian for the Left. Sweden is apparently one of the few countries in the world where growth is high, the economy is always booming, everyone loves immigration and the government is so big that everyone receives a massive pile of cash in welfare. In short a Social Democratic utopia where everything is rosy. In Sweden this utopia is thanks mostly to the Swedish Social Democratic Party being in government since 1930 to 1991 and the Centre Right Party changing few policies when ever in power.  

Utopian riots in the Swedish Capital.

That above paragraph could have been written by a Guardian journalist. A Few Years ago the Guardian wrote this article saying how the 'Tories can learn from the centre right Swedish Government'. It said that "For three generations universal, efficient health care, access to education, child care, generous funding for arts and cultural activities have been simply assumed in the conduct of people's lives. The result has not been, as was once alleged, an ant-like conformity, but its opposite: a degree of individuality and autonomy that is becoming its major cultural challenge." (if you want to see even more recent Guardian Sweden love see the recent videos they published in February about how Sweden has bucked the economic trend).

Interesting stuff from the Guardian. Looks like a social utopia. But now they are saying "After decades of practising the Swedish model of generous welfare benefits, Stockholm has reduced the role of the state since the 1990s, spurring the fastest growth in inequality of any advanced OECD economy. […] successive governments have failed to substantially reduce long-term youth unemployment and poverty, which have affected immigrant communities worst." So a complete turnaround. Why is that?

I'm surprised the Guardian hasn't been recategorised in all Libraries as fiction rather than a newspaper.

Well it's because people would realise that what they had said before about Sweden was one massive Porkie. Sweden has never had this left wing utopia. The reason why it can spend so much on welfare is because it has one of the smallest states in the world. There is no minimum wage in Sweden, taxes are low and the people are free to do what they want. Welfare consequently is able to be very high in Sweden, they get in more tax with a bigger economy that has low tax than a small one with high tax. Thatcher did it in the 1980s, don't you know people from the Guardian.

So why is Stockholm on fire every night? Well the same reasons why there was problems in London, it's almost a copy. Unlike what the Guardian has said above its nothing to do with reducing the role of the state and how now there is no welfare and so everyone is in poverty. It's to do with the open door immigration policy and its effect on the Swedes jobs market.

Swedes have a big history of emigration as well as immigration.

As it stood in 2010, 14.3% of the population are immigrants more than 2/3rds of these were born outside of the EU.  In a country where the population is just shy of 10 million, that's a lot of people. Most of these immigrants as with the UK live in major cities so you get a large proportion of immigrants living in certain districts. The problem is probably as acute as a cultural divide as in Oldham, Luton or Tower Hamlets, to give a rough scale of what is going on.

The vast majority of immigrants have come over for jobs and most are employed. Sweden has a long history of migrations doing low skilled jobs and coming over to fill the positions. Thus they under cut most of the low skilled workers already living in Sweden. These workers then rely on a substantial welfare state to rely on, a classic situation of a large proportion trapped on welfare. The Swedes are stuck in catch 22 position of being unable to move socio-economically because welfare pays best but unable to leave because work pays worst. Thus the Swedes are not a happy bunch abandoned by their government on welfare and blaming immigrants for it.

So there you are. Sweden far from being a left wing Utopia is stuck in a benefits trap.

Weekly Poll Lowdown

So it's time for the first weekly poll lowdown in a while having finally fixed the voting problems. I asked what you thought is the best way for the PM, our good friend Dave, to counter the spread of UKIP. And you believe brining forward the EU referendum is the best way to stop the pressure of UKIP and to make our party overall more in touch with the population. 20 of you voted, so we got a very decent spread of ideas.

Bring forward the referendum on the EU	50% (10)
Introduce better immigration control	5%(1)
Carry out more spending cuts	0% (0)
Introduce more tax cuts	10% (2)
Spend more on the economy	5%  (1)
Do nothing, UKIP will go away one day	30% (6)

Before I move on to what I think I want to say why 30% of you are wrong for thinking UKIP will go away. Within a decade or so I agree that UKIP probably won't be here. It's a party made around one man and some rather populist policies that in time will be seen to be as realistic as Nick Clegg's pledge to vote against any rise in tuition fees. In the meantime however they will do bad damage to Conservatism. A loss of activists and splitting our vote is just the start. In safe Tory seats in the East UKIP now have a large proportion of council wards, will the constituencies go purple in 2015 too? Possibly not, but a well organised local UKIP could cause huge problems.

One other thing I'd like to say is that virtually all of UKIP's vote is based on immigration, as Lord Ashcroft's polling has shown. Its fairly visible when canvassing as well and this leads people who don't like the immigrants for one reason or another, even if they have never voted in their lives, to come out and vote for UKIP and it's populist policy.

So what should we do. I actually agree we should bring forward the referendum date, but the solution is to get the economy going with tax cuts mostly. Why do people care about immigration as a nation at the moment? Some of it is generalisation and hate for the rapid change, which is not acceptable and should be tackled. But the main bug bear is economic strain. Whether this exists or not the solution to this problem is to create more jobs and have a growing economy. If we do so people will be much happier and more opportunities. Give people a positive reason to vote Conservative.

Let's make sure the economy is on the up

The reason why I choose to tackle the economy rather than the of route problem of UKIP vote is because we are more likely, more practically and more quickly going to be able to grow our economy than leave the EU and its open borders policy. I do not believe that Dave would support a referendum on the EU before 2017, but to rub salt in the wounds the Lib Dems and Labour will also block the proposed vote in the House of Commons later this week.

Getting Control

Trouble has been brewing on the UK's borders for years and now Mrs May, Queen of Fashion, is going to sort it out.

'Thunderbirds are Go!'

Well this is at least the plan. The Border Agency is seemingly the worst of all parts of government. They can't use a computer, they lose more people than the population of Iceland and are dysfunctional at the best of times. The UK's borders were better protected and worked more efficiently when the 'real' staff were on strike and the people checking your passport were civil servants from No.10. Also they don't know how many immigrants now live in Britain. They predict it to be 312,726 at the end of September last year but they actually believe it to be massively more than this.

So soon the Border Agency will be no more. Theresa May will incorporate it in to the Home Office. I think this is a god idea although it will be hard.

Mrs May has done well in the Home Office, one of the many successes of this government. But she has also dealt with the biggest headaches with Abu Qatada and Abu Hamza. But she has got somewhere deporting Hamza and coming fairly close to Qatada, hopefully there will be some success there soon. She has also been a great critic of the Border Agency forcing change by sacking the former chief Brodie Clark for relaxing border checks. Furthermore she is there to stop Ken Clarke making sure that we are always a part of the ECHR, a British Bill of Rights is a much better way of going around things. I think she will be fairly successful in what she does.

Clarke v May

However, this is an odd thing to do. She is now personally taking control of the UKs borders. Immigration is of course a big issue in Britain. The government has had recent success in the area. Perhaps Mrs May wants some of the credit? I think this is a good way of securing our borders, on paper at least, but I wonder if there isn't some personal motivation.

Mrs May sporting the recent Rag Doll costume