Cameron promises coherent strategy to manage net immigration and its consequences

Later this morning David Cameron will deliver a speech on population and immigration.  He'll be addressing the Policy Exchange think tank.  I'll be there and will report with more afterwards.

It is expected that Mr Cameron will say that Britain needs a much more coherent strategy to cope with Britain's rising population.  Britain's population is projected to rise by more than ten million over the next 25 years (although population projections are notoriously unreliable).

He is expected to highlight the need to...

• Curb net immigration.  The Conservative Party has proposed an annual cap on immigration from outside the EU but has limited powers to control immigration from within the Union.
• Improve border controls.
• Invest in family life so that we reduce the pressure on the housing stock caused by splits in households.
• Improve the skills base of British workers so there is less demand for qualified workers from overseas.

The Conservative leader will say that the Blair-Brown failure to get to grips with Britain's demographic challenges is a large part of the reason for frustratingly slow progress in the NHS, schools and in housing:

"This country faces a choice. Some people argue that the demographic changes I've talked about are just an inevitable part of the modern world and that policymakers had better get used to it. This assumes that we can't do much about family failure, we can't get significant numbers of people off benefits and into work, and that we use immigration to deal with our capacity shortages. That is Gordon Brown's choice. But I don't think it's sustainable - for a simple reason."

Mr Cameron's focus on immigration - the CCHQ's advance press notice promises a speech on The Challenges of a Growing Population - is a triumph for the traditionalists advising him.  Certain leading modernisers will have opposed this speech and they have been over-ruled.

The speech comes after renewed public anxiety about the level of immigration into Britain.  The issue regularly tops the list of voter concerns.  Simon Heffer and Peter Oborne both wrote about the subject (in characteristically strong terms) on Saturday.

Also well worth reading is the leader in last week's Business.  These were the concluding paragraphs:

"The biggest danger associated with immigration is that it becomes an excuse not to tackle the deep seated problems that have been created by the welfare culture, with migrants used as substitute labour while a British-born underclass is paid not to work. It is a national scandal that, while youth unemployment is increasing, 43% of the Eastern European workers arriving are aged 18 to 24.

Immigration has been at the heart of Britain’s success; newcomers continue to make huge and essential contributions to culture, the arts, the professions, sports, academia and, of course, business. Over the past few years, immigrants have fuelled Britain’s economic renaissance; long may it remain so.

But it is also undeniable that the country is buckling under the strain; to avoid the public turning against migrants, the government must make Britain more like America: a country that accepts that it is a nation of immigrants, seeks to integrate them and builds new homes and schools to accommodate them. Pretending that levels of immigration are much more modest than they really are, or that they are not causing any problems, is no longer a tenable strategy."

Reducing the level of low-skilled immigration into Britain and investing in our own young workforce must be at the heart of the Conservatives' promise of an integrated 'population strategy'.

Comments

[Robert McIlveen]

Linking to the total failure of the state to equip many young people for work is vital, to undermine Labour's claims on the economy and to enable us to talk about immigration with a pragmatic optimism rather than foaming at the mouth...

It was notable in Blackpool that a quarter of the town were on benefits while all the workers in the cafes were Polish - sums it up really.

[James Maskell]

Its all well and good doing a speech on immigration, but its what comes in the speech thats important here. Since the traditionalists will be paying particular attention here, if the speech is poor, then Camerons going to have a tough time.

The speech will be one of generalities, outlining rather than detailing the Conservative approach.

[Helen]

I trust Mr Cameron will point out how much of the immigration and its control is not actually in the British government's hands, there being this little problem called the European Union.

I trust he will also mention, if only fleetingly, the abysmal level of education and training in Britain that successive governments have allowed and, indeed, encouraged by their endless interference.

[ONG]

"I trust Mr Cameron will point out how much of the immigration and its control is not actually in the British government's hands, there being this little problem called the European Union."

Don't hold your breath

[Derek]

Last week on Question Time both Francis Maude and Lord Falconer agreed that we can only control one in three immigrants. No one on the panel said that immigration was in any way harmful. No wonder four out of ten don't bother to vote - as their views are not being expressed. I am pleased that Cameron will express a different view, though it will no doubt be couched in very moderate tone.

In reality, of course, we could do a great deal more by renegotiating our EU Treaties and tightening up our immigration policy.

[Tony Makara]

A way around the question of EU workers might be to introduce legislation stating that EU workers have to be paid in their own currency and at rates commensurate with the going rate in their land of origin. The Poles in particular are only here to milk the differential between their own currency and an overvalued Pound Sterling. So if employers here were compelled to pay the Poles in Zloty and the Poles then had to exchange those Zloty for Sterling at the current rate, any incentive to work in Britain would quickly disappear and they would have to go home. I can't see how such a move would possibly contravene EU law?

[Iain]

If Cameron is going to raise the issue of immigration he has to do it via population/ environmental sustainability, in that way he will shut up the BBC, who will have trouble reconciling their two contradictory positions of being for immigration as well as environmental issues, so unable to shout racism, as they inevitably will if Cameron just talks about immigration.

[Al Gunn]

And whilst he is delivering his speech, the BBC cut to Hillary Benn talking about the consultation period for the Climate Change Bill...

[Edison Smith]

I think Cameron's speech today has been pretty good. It's weak on detail - precise figures etc - but it's hard to be exact when you're merely in Opposition and at least 18 months away from power.

What he's done well is linking immigration to his arguments on the family and 'General Well-Being'.

He raised an interesting fact - the average UK commuter travels for an hour a day, the most in western Europe. He said that this can erode the 'spirit' of people, which really chimed in for me as someone who commonly has to stand up on crammed trains for an hour a day (whilst paying £1,000 a year for the pleasure) to commute to London. It's like the living dead on there most days, and one wonders at the general morale of these people...

All in all, Cameron's doing exactly what is required: Acting like he and his party have the power to change things when effectively, as the Opposition, they have none.

BBC naturally missing the point - 'This is to sure-up the core Tory vote....'

Why, according to the BBC, do you have to be a 'core Tory' to want sensible control of immigration??

[Tony Makara]

Iain, yes I agree. Its crazy how people can claim immigration is anything to do with race. Most of the immgrants arriving from eastern Europe are white. Of course the left/liberals just use the term 'Racist' as a blanket term to intimidate and to suffocate any sort of debate on the issue.

[Patrick Ratnaraja]

The biggest problem we have now is immigrants from EU Countries. If you look at the number of people who have come to UK from the EU, it is much higher than those who have arrived here from outside the EU.

Most people who arrive here from outside the EU are asylum seekers people who get married to British Citizens. If we keep on selling arms to Countries like Sri Lanka, we will get more asylum seekers.

The other immigration problems we face:

People from certain communities will only get married to some one who lives in thier country of origin.What are we going to do about this.I can honestly say that I guilty of this too.

Work visas are being issued for jobs which can be done by people who actually live here.

If we try to limit immigrants from Non EU countries and allow immigrants from EU countries, there is a danger of the party being accused as racists.

[John Leonard]

Patrick Ratnaraja:

The biggest problem we have now is immigrants from EU Countries. If you look at the number of people who have come to UK from the EU, it is much higher than those who have arrived here from outside the EU.

Not according to David Davis. EU immigrants and non EU immigrants account for approximately 50% of economic migration each.

As he is Shadow Home Secretary and knows far more about this than I, I am not going to question his stats...

[Patrick Ratnaraja]

The latest detailed numbers available from 2005 only. Since then I am sure there has been an increase of EU immigrants.

As I have said before there must be controls on immigration. That does not mean we should let any one from Europe to settle here and not let the others.

EU or non-EU, immigration certainly puts pressure on our resources.

[John Leonard]

Patrick:

As you will see in the later thread on the essence of what you say, I fully agree with you. I was only questioning the presumption of your stats. I believe in fully controlled immigration. Believe you me I am no promoter of the European Union!

[Votedave]

"It's weak on detail - precise figures etc"

So say Liam Byrne and Nick Clegg. Clearly they don't believe in taking time to think these things through properly, consult with businesses, etc before making a final decision.
No doubt if David Cameron had declared a figure now he would have been accused of inflexibility by the same opponents. These attacks by Messrs Byrne and Clegg are feeble.

[Rod Sellers]

The Daily Telegraph reports the unguarded comment caught on mike from Sky Presenter Julie Eltchinghan which underlines the continuing Tory problem with most of the Broadcast Media.(Daily Telegraph)
As David Cameron was outlining how Population growth undermines all attemps to improve the quality of life - she was heard to mutter'Extermination'

The malign influence of these overpaid, self regarding lefties living in an insulated world of their own - has compounded the damage done by misguided Social and Welfare Policy. Soon she joins (Sir) Trevor Macdonald on ITV News !!