Head Above The Parapet

so, here's today's ishoooo, one that rarely leaves our radar (such are the media), immigration.
now, anyone who writes anything about immigration these days is flagged up as racist, lily-livered liberal, provocative or whatever. it's the worlds most controversial subject. it probably shouldn't be; but because it is, it means it's a tricky subject. no-one seems short of opinions on it. worse thing is, it's almost impossible to have sensible debate about it: half those with something to say are thinly veiled racists, the rest are gonna get accusations of it, or accusations of being ridiculously PC.
It's a subject those on the Left often avoid, or adopt silly positions on, merely to avoid the R-word.As someone who firmly places themselves on the Left, but is sympathetic to the centre too, I'm probably running into a minefield. best really to enumerate my issues with immigration, and deal with them one by one:
1) why do people want to come here?- i have a concern that large numbers of people now are coming to this country for economic reasons, regardless of how much they subscribe to the underlying values of the country. For instance, it is no good preaching multiculturalism (which is a good thing, and perfectly suited to the pluralism and democracy of this country), if some of the individuals we in let are of a vaguely racist and xenophobic bent, and determined to preach their prejudices against other minorities in this country. the number of instances of racism I've heard from other immigrant groups: Caribbean disliking African, one Eastern European disliking another, Muslims hating Jews, and the one that always amuses me, those Oirish who seem to dislike most recent immigrant groups. the lunacy of this is obvious. most of us are immigrants at some stage. the only grounds we can disagree on are beliefs, not national origin or skin colour. The country Britain is (or perhaps should be) is founded on various general principles: democracy, anti-terrorism, the legal system (whatever its flaws, which need addressing), freedom of speech and thought, and a respect for civil liberties based largely on Mill's utilitarianism. no individual has primacy under law (or should do). unluckily we can't do too much about those who are naturalised and don't subscribe to these views, we can only deal with them as and when they break the law, and hope they go off somewhere else. we can, though, try to prevent people coming to this country with views that don't agree with this tolerance. it's that old chestnut, we should tolerate anything but intolerance. sounds daft, but its a good ethos (even if a little circular). so, we do not need people of extreme religious viewpoints, be they Christian, Jew, Muslim or otherwise. the recent growth of real religious intolerance, ie religious groups demanding privilege or protection when criticised, is profoundly disturbing. Sometime in the middle of the last century we managed to hit a decent settlement in this country whereby people had religious freedom to worship however they choose, provided their practise does not infringe on another individual's freedom, or go against the law. the obvious example would be something like forced marriage, or any restriction of female rights within some religions. It has to be consensual. the second part of this settlement,the one that has increasing attacks upon it from Christians and Muslims of certain types, is that your religion is a personal belief. so, like your political, economic, and social views, it is open to all criticism. Racism/xenophobia is wrong,it is prejudice based on incidental factors: coulour, where you are from. a prejudice against a religious or political group is perfectly reasonable. unfortunately, the former often goes under the guise of the latter, thus we have flagrant sillinesses like the incitement to religious hatred bill.

if people are to come to this country, we need more than mere commitment to an improved way of life, in material terms. this country should be a haven for people who subscribe to our basic freedoms.we have enough nasty racist, sexist homophobes to deal with already.


2) we have serious problems with what we do with people coming here- we need to make a serious decision whether we are prepared to put more money into helping immigrants into our way of life. for my part, i think we could afford to do a lot more. but if the electorate, continues to feel as it does, then maybe a limit on immigration is necessary just to make sure the immigrants we do accept get the proper help they need. what help? well, we need to sort the language issue for starters: having a friend who works in TESOL i get a fairly clear idea how underfunded and haphazard the teaching of English is to newcomers. not enough teachers, not enough equipment,not enough organisation.you wouldn't send children into society incapable of proper communication, we certainly shouldn't do it to adults. To pretend we don't have enough money to do this is daft. As is the view that we don't have enough jobs or houses for them. The council house stocks need building up again; Mrs T's fab idea of selling off a national resource has left us in trouble, and with house prices and debt increasing, it will soon become as clear as it once was that to expect everyone to buy their own house is a lunacy. We also need to address the integration issue. to have closed ghettos of immigrants with little English, or understanding of the culture. we need to spread the immigration throughout the country, and we need more than the citizenship test in terms of education. The citizenship test is useful but not really helpful in the long term; anymore than getting a child to cram for one exam, and then expecting them to be Maths geniuses.we forget our children have 11/12 years of education, home instruction and example to help them into society. And it is all too clear what happens when children's education and upbringing have been lacking. The same applies with immigration, they aren't children but they haven't had the constant exposure to the culture that makes a person comfortable within it. mind you, who has?!

3) we need to be extremely careful who we take from where- at present our immigration system
seems in some instances to see itself as a means of stealing the cream from other countries. Doctors, Nurses, businessmen,etc. we are not doing those countries any favours by taking these people from them,not to mention the anger we incur from Britain's current residents.we should be offering more opportunity to people in this country to become Doctors, lawyers, whatever. Not out of misguided notions of "native" preference, but merely because it is not good for society to have these people thrown into low-level employment. we need better education to do this (which is a whole different subject).
Furthermore, to take these people from their country when their country could do with them politically, is dangerous for its stability. if we drain, for instance, Arab or middle eastern states of their more moderate engaged sections, then we run the risk of more radical extremes controlling them. not good at all.
realistically, we need to be taking more on the basis of asylum, than economic migration. Or at least sharply delineating the two.Asylum seekers have a threat to their lives. Their need is simply greater.
anyway it isn't beneficial to use other countries to plug our skills/job gaps. they need these people, and we need to help more people here already to greater achievement.


i am all said out now, frankly. so, comment and maybe I'll reply and say more in the next few days. happy egg-snaffling!