Immigration (1): Balkanising our country into foreign enclaves

There is one thing which even now the LibLabCon leadership class and its media allies (the BBC, all national newspapers except the Daily Express and Daily Mail) – the Polyblob – will refuse to discuss, is the fact that immigration from Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe has led to, inevitably led to, the establishment of virtually foreign enclaves in our great English cities, including the two biggest, London and Birmingham, in the Northern arc of the former mill towns from Oldham and Rochdale in the west of the Pennines to Bradford and Rotherham on their eastern side, and in Boston in Lincolnshire.

After the successful conspiracy by the Polyblob to make the late Enoch Powell a political non-person following his April 1968 speech predicting just this happening, this writer was the only senior businessman-academic from the 1980s[1] to raise a protest in the media against the continued flow of Asian and African immigrants into our country.  The Blair government decision in 2004 to let in 2.5 million impoverished East Europeans alongside a barely slackened flow of 90-100,000 from Asia and Africa finally fractured the Polyblob’s hitherto united opposition to those opposed to mass immigration into our country.

The Polyblob’s response is now to accept that these latest huge flows of 250,000, equivalent to a city the size of Portsmouth every year bring problems of benefit claims, school overcrowding, maternity wards overflowing, pressure on housing, and infrastructure overload, but it claims that these problems can be fixed with more schools, hospitals and houses being built.  In any case, as the Daily Telegraph and others have put it – there are so many benefits from mass immigration – above all “diversity” which the Polyblob loves, especially in London.  Here it has succeeded in reducing the native British population in its ancient capital city to 44%[2], the actual English population to well under 40%.

Those 33% of the native population who voted for UKIP in last year’s Euro Election did so not just because they wanted immigrants’ benefits trimmed, although they do want this, nor did they vote as a “protest” against “Westminster” as some in the media patronisingly claim to believe[3], they voted above all on two specific policies, the first enabling the second:

(1)  Leave the European Union;

(2)  Stop all immigration for settlement for 5 years[4].

Electoral Prospects at the forthcoming General Election

If the Conservative party offered these two policies in May 2015, it would win the General Election, irrespective any other issue.

It would garner the support of all those former Labour, LibDem, UKIP and Conservative voters who want an end to the unending dispossession of their country once and for all.

End Notes

[1]  Mine was in fact the very first letter in the national press, in July 1969, to expose the deceit in the Home Office figures of immigration by showing that the 5,000 Class A vouchers handed out in 1968, represented really 60,000 immigrants since each voucher holder was allowed to claim 12 dependants!  Nothing changes.  There are some 20 letters and articles published between 1984 and 2014 on and several items on Britain-watch on the “Immigration” page.

[2]  Census 2011

[3]  E.g. Mary Ridell in Daily Telegraph of December 3rd 2014.

[4]  The policy proposed by this writer at UKIP’s annual conference on October 7th 2007, accepted as policy for the following General Election (in 2010) and reported in the Daily Mail of October 8th.  EU nationals would have to obtain job permits for given periods not exceeding 3 years at a time, in line with the requirements for all our kith and kin from Australia, Canada, New Zealand.

Top| Home

Leave a Reply

Top| Home