There are lies, and then there are damned lies.

U.K. socialist Labour party policies on mass immigration and multiculturalism mentioned in the article fits into the second category.

UK conservatives pander islam with the brothers

Now for Labour’s lies about immigration

Ed Miliband has tried to atone for Iraq, but his party’s open-door policy is impossible to excuse


The Opposition leader, it seems, wants his party to be in the truth-and-reconciliation business. If that’s the case, then it’s time for Mr Miliband not just to acknowledge the past mistakes of Labour’s open-door immigration policy, which he has already done, but explain the brazen dishonesty and cynical deceptions that were used to justify a crucial element of Gordon Brown’s domestic economic strategy.

Labour MP Jon Cruddas admits that “historians will look back on the past few decades and identify immigration as perhaps the major change to our country.” Not everyone thinks it is a change for the better. According to a weekend poll of 20,000 people, 60 per cent believe immigration has brought more disadvantages than advantages. Under Blair and Brown, Labour’s approach to immigration was voodoo economics masquerading as respectable politics. Its 2005 manifesto, all 112 pages, was a masterpiece of obfuscation, devoting just 16 lines to “Migration: the facts”.

Instead of setting out the possible consequences of a policy that would result in 1.5 million net (legal) immigrants in seven years, 2004-2010, it simply stated: “Skilled migrants are contributing 10-15 per cent of our economy’s growth”. No mention of housing shortages, pressures on schools or anything else remotely negative. The rest was a red herring about how much business visitors and tourists spend in Britain, which has nothing to do with immigration, and a wholly misleading paragraph on asylum seekers, creating an impression that Labour was on top of the problem.

This was a false prospectus. Had similar claims been made by company directors, they would be facing a ban from corporate life. After the 2005 election had been won, Home Secretary John Reid came clean, damning his department’s immigration operation as “not fit for purpose”. Strange, isn’t it, that such a glaring flaw was overlooked in the run-up to polling day.

More here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.