Big Debate: Do current immigration levels threaten national cohesion?

Source: Sebastian Murphy-Bates – Newham Recorder, 14/10/2015

Secretary of State for Home Affairs Theresa May delivers her speech to
delegates in the third day of the Conservative Party annual conference
at Manchester Central Convention Centre.


This week`s debate asks whether current levels of immigration threaten
social cohesion
Speaking at the Conservative Party`s annual conference, home secretary
Theresa May promised immigration reform, saying that high levels of
migration made a "cohesive society" impossible. The remarks have been
criticised by politicians from opposing parties and her own, with
longstanding Tory MP Ken Clarke telling The Andrew Marr Show on Sunday
that the "tone of Theresa May`s speech was all wrong".

This
week, our Big Debate asks: Was Theresa May right in claiming that
current levels of immigration threaten national cohesion?
To share your views vote in our poll or leave your comments below or
on our Facebook and Twitter pages. You can also contact Sebastian
Murphy-Bates at sebastian.murphy-bates@archant.co.uk and 020 8477
3778, or send a letter in to letters@newhamrecorder.co.uk
David Thorpe, Lib Dem communication officer
Everyone has bad days at work, and when home secretary Theresa May
made her speech on immigration to the Tory conference, that was hers,
as evidenced by the fact those traditional supporters of her party,
the Times newspaper and the Institute of Directors criticised her,
finding unusual common ground with newspapers and unions more often
opposed to the Conservative Party.


The speech`s problems are many, but share a common thread, – Mrs May
shows an uncanny ignorance of British history and concerning lack of
insight into challenges facing Britain`s economy.


On history: May opined that, if the present levels of migration
continues in the coming years, social cohesion in Britain could
collapse.


The initial nonsense implicit in May`s speech is all migrants are
sinister radicals intent on destroying British values, of which the
Tories see themselves as the sole guardians.


Yet the party has its origins in the work of 19th century MP Edmund
Burke, credited as its founding father and an Irish emigrant.


And Sir Mancherjee Merwanjee Bhownagree, among the very first ethnic
minority MPs in Britain, was a 19th century Tory.


Mrs May seeks to lecture on the future consequeneces of emigration in
the UK, while being ignorant of the past contribution of emigration to
the society she seeks to prolong.


As to the present, forget the rhetoric of Mrs May at conference, her
party`s 2015 manifesto shows a commitment to tens of thousands of
migrants coming to the UK every year.


People are living longer, and needing pensions for longer, and the
country needs more young people to pay for this.


The UK and US are the only major world economies where the working age
population is expanding and that is positive for the prosperity of
Britain.


There are big, tough solutions required to make a migration system
that works for all, but Theresa May isn`t supplying them.


Dan Oxley, Ukip`s Newham treasurer
If a clock breaks at 8.30 it doesn`t become useless – it shows the
right time twice a day. The same is true of Tories like Theresa May,
who say anything to get votes, saying so many contradictory things
they eventually accidentally stumble on the truth.


First, they said mass immigration was great then, while saying the
same, bragged how they`d reduce it, then increased it far beyond their
target. Now they say it`s bad after all.


They won`t admit their views on immigration are unimportant because
they don`t control it. It`s controlled by our real government, the
unelected one in Brussels – the EU Commission.


There`s a difference between past immigration levels and the mass
immigration Theresa May acknowledges. The former meant huge benefits
from immigrants enhancing our economy and culture. Mass, uncontrolled
immigration threatens cohesion, with efforts to sustain cohesion
causing problems. These efforts lead to political correctness, which
is seen as politeness but assaults freedom.


Uniformed soldiers shopping in Tesco are told to leave in case they
offend minorities, crosses are removed from graveyards and owners of a
Christian café displaying Bible verses are interviewed by police about
their "behaviour" and left fearing prosecution. Much worse was seen in
Rotherham`s sex abuse cases, where political correctness meant the
council and police were more worried about cohesion than saving
children.


Mass immigration also disturbs cohesion due to the numbers of new
entrants to the UK at a time of relatively high unemployment. When I
ask advocates of mass immigration why we need more (often unskilled)
workers when we have unemployment, I never get a very convincing
answer and often get the racist cliché about immigrants doing jobs
lazy British workers won`t. If we had an Australian points-based
immigration system then arrivals could be welcomed and assimilated.