All illegal immigrants in Britain should be granted an amnesty to stay in the country, a Tory MP has said.
Nadhim Zahawi, MP for Stratford-Upon-Avon, argued that the move makes sense economically and that a ‘seismic’ shift in policy is needed for the Conservatives to attract votes among minority groups.
Far from granting illegal immigrants an amnesty, government should deport every last one of the estimated three million in the country. Their presence depresses the wages and working conditions of our people, increases unemployment and underemployment, particularly among our young people, adds to crime and antisocial behaviour and constitutes an unwelcome burden upon our overstrained welfare state and public infrastructure.
To grant an amnesty to those who entered our country illegally, or who illegally overstayed their visa, would be unethical since it would reward wrongdoing. It would also be interpreted, no doubt correctly, as extending a tacit invitation to others of their ilk, in their countries of origin, to follow suit and head for ‘Treasure Island’, where, as they incredulously tell one another, the crazy authorities treat penniless foreigners better than they treat their own people.
In reality, of course, through a combination of officially contrived fecklessness, maladministration (the hiding of thousands of files, for example) and phoney humanitarian concern, the great majority of illegal immigrants and overstayers are eventually granted ‘indefinite leave to remain’ in our country, in any case.
Not only should every illegal immigrant and overstayer be expelled, but proper border controls should at the same time be restored, so that we know who is entering and who is leaving the country.
If the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights would hinder or prevent such measures, as they would, then so much the worse for them. We should repeal the 1973 Act of Parliament which took Britain into the EEC (without a prior referendum) and renounce our membership of the European Convention on Human Rights. Then we shall be free to put our own house in order, long overdue as it is.
Since the other EU countries export more to Britain than we export to them, they will naturally want to continue trading with us, whether we are a member state, as at present, or free of their political interference, like Norway, for example. A key difference will be that, once out of their clutches, we shall again be able to trade much more freely with the rest of the world, as we did so successfully in the past, as well as, of course, progressively increasing our degree of national self-sufficiency in as many areas of economic life as possible.
If we choose to impose import and exchange controls, as we shall, they will be our controls and designed to benefit our industries and our people, rather than controls imposed by the unelected foreign bureaucrats of the European Commission, designed primarily to protect German manufacturing industry and inefficient French agriculture.
Freed from the EU’s rules we shall also be able to retain, or restore, as publicly owned, financed and managed services, the Post Office and our hospitals, schools, prisons, railways, buses and utilities like water, gas and electricity. We should also facilitate the new development of such important industries as coal mining, iron and steel, shipbuilding and motor vehicle production.
I attempted to post part of the foregoing as a comment to the Daily Mail’s online version of the article cited below but they chose not to publish it. While they appear to be willing to publish any number of spluttering one-liners of the “Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells” variety, they are evidently unwilling to publish a measured and cogent rebuttal of the Establishment-approved dogma that permanent immigration is a boon to our people, all protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.
As they say in their Terms and Conditions “We [ie, the Management] decide” [which comments are published].
The Daily Mail’s hidden agenda evidently entails creating the false impression among their readers that patriots who oppose the colonization of our country, by destitute hordes of semi-civilized ethnic aliens from the Third World, tend to lack the ability to construct a convincing rational argument to support their position.