Cambridge Union Society October 13th: Refugees/Immigration

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen:

Let me say first of all that we on this side of the debate recognise and respect the spirit of compassion which inspires the Motion tonight. We look at the situation in Syria and are appalled. And it is natural that when we see fellow human beings in dire trouble, we want to help.

But of course the issue is numbers. Let me offer you an example. Suppose you wake up one morning and find a starving child on your doorstep. You will feed it. Suppose you find a dozen? You will do your best, and perhaps get the neighbours to rally round. But if you find half a million, you will call the civil authority. Numbers matter.

For the avoidance of doubt, let me clarify the position of my party, UKIP, on immigration. We are not opposed to immigration, and still less are we opposed to immigrants. We recognise the important contribution that immigrants have made, and must continue to make, to our culture and our economy.

But we also recognise the pressures that mass immigration places on social cohesion and social infrastructure – on schools, and hospitals, and housing. As Milton Friedman said: “You can have open borders, or free welfare — but not both”. And we know that those who suffer most from the next wave of immigrants are the last wave of immigrants.

What my Party wants is exactly what most independent countries have – a managed immigration policy which brings in the skills our country needs, and at a level which our economy and our social infrastructure can sustain.

UKIP’s immigration policy, far from being discriminatory, is actually less discriminatory than our current UK/EU immigration policy, which favours Europeans, who are broadly white, and clamps down on non-Europeans, many of whom are non-white. We want a colour-blind policy based solely on numbers and skills. I have often said that I should prefer to admit an Indian dentist, or a Chinese engineer, than an unskilled European.

But most of all, we recognise that we live in a democracy, and I trust that no one in this room has any problem with that. And we are fast reaching the limits of democratic tolerance for mass immigration. Not just in the UK, but across Europe.

In the UK and elsewhere, the liberal establishment has sought to choke off debate on immigration by screaming “racism” from the rooftops whenever the issue is raised. But those of us engaged in day-to-day politics know all too well that immigration is a huge issue on the doorstep. We in my Party claim some credit for bringing the issue into the public square. And now, virtually all UK politicians (except Jeremy Corbyn) recognise the problem.

It is neither wrong, nor racist, in a democracy, for politicians to debate the issues that matter to their voters, and we make no apology for doing so.

We see a similar paradigm-shift across Europe. In Germany, Angela Merkel adopted essentially the policy in this motion – let ’em all come – with disastrous political consequences.

It may well be that the great majority of migrants – refugees and economic migrants – are decent, law-abiding people. Yet there are enough who are not to cause real concern among indigenous populations.

Many of these migrants bring with them cultural attitudes, not least towards women and gays, which are unacceptable in Western society. The offences committed against women in Germany and elsewhere hardly bear repeating.

Some migrants bring with them the feuds and vendettas of their homelands, and expect to pursue them on the streets of European cities. And a few – but a very dangerous few – will be deliberately spreading Jihad, and seeking to commit bombings and outrages in our countries.

As the public see this, as they see the overcrowding and pressure caused by sheer numbers, compassionate democratic consent crumbles away in the face of intractable problems.

I should like briefly to discuss one country – not Germany – which also adopted a policy of universal welcome. Sweden has always prided itself on its generous and liberal attitude towards migrants.

If it was difficult to discuss immigration here in the UK, in Sweden it was practically The Sin against the Holy Ghost. Those who dared put their heads above the parapet, like our colleagues from the Swedish Democrats, was howled down and denied media access.

Yet in 2015, Sweden accepted 30 per cent more migrants pro-rata than Germany.

I recently saw pictures in social media of cars burning in Malmö. So in our Group meeting in Brussels, I expressed my sympathy to Swedish MEP Peter Lundgren for the outrage. I was astonished by his response. “Which outrage?”, he asked. “The riots in Malmö” I replied. “Oh that”, he said. “But it is happening all the time in Sweden”.

The attitudes of acute political correctness survive. Swedish media are reluctant to report riots and offences involving migrants. Swedish police are reluctant to pursue illegals, lest it seem inhumane. The authorities allowed 35,000 so-called “children” to enter Sweden in 2015 with no age checks – though it was widely believed that a significant proportion were young adults seeking to benefit from children’s favourable terms.

In 2015 the Municipality of Malmö received and registered 15,000 unaccompanied minors (or claimed minors) – more than the whole of Germany accepted.

Sweden now has 55 “No Go Zones” where access for the police, the fire and rescue services, and even the postal service is severely curtailed, and some residents seek to impose Sharia law.

Healthcare, dental care, housing and schooling are under huge pressure. Migrants receive healthcare on better terms than citizens, causing great resentment.

But of course the Swedish people are not fools. Despite establishment attempts to keep a lid on the issue, we see the Swedish Democrats leading the opinion polls, while other parties reluctantly scramble to adopt parts of the Swedish Democrats’ programme.

In Germany as in Sweden, we see that an open-door policy lacks democratic consent. It cannot be sustained, whether we want it or not.

Mr. President: it’s not my remit to defend the Conservative government, but I have to say that I think their policy of discouraging mass migration by helping to fund resettlement camps in the Middle East is far preferable to an open-door policy. An open-door policy is simply unsustainable if Mrs. Lumsden in Gasworks Row, and millions of others like her, won’t stand for it. I urge the House to reject the Motion.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Cambridge Union Society October 13th: Refugees/Immigration

  1. catweazle666 says:

    Well said, Roger.

  2. George Morley says:

    It is difficult to find an argument against that.
    It’s much like overeating – you will get sick if you keep on until you cannot take any more
    and are basically torturing yourself.
    Then something has to give – and it will !

  3. Derek says:

    A masterclass – but did it win the debate?

  4. KennieD says:

    Excellent debate Roger, and perfectly correct throughout.
    However, just been watching a bit of Question Time and I fear some hear only what they want to hear. Some will still say that UKIP want NO immigration.

  5. alexr64 says:

    A great speech as always Roger, fair, honest, logical…and urgent. But how to get the public at large to listen? They only respond to short sound bites – ‘Pound down, fags up, blame Brexit’. Some years ago UKIP produced a good little video and when it was on the UKIP website, it had a lot of views, said most of the above in just two minutes, why was it taken off? Just found it:

  6. Ex-expat Colin says:

    Expect outrage and bile….
    Its the weakness of Europe again…3rd time I think? Plus the many slack heads here. Perhaps they’ll change their minds when something bad happens to them or their families…bit late and too long waiting – is happening. Its all males really from a belief system that favours such males over any society…thats apart from the physco’s amongst them and the failure to care for our own.

    No Go zones…Holland, Belgium and France most definitely for a long time. Italy and Greece quickly acquiring them. Oxford St blocked couple of days ago by a demo related to an awkward belief system. Just happens, suddenly, and not only London,,,why a main street of our capital, why not a field somewhere so that disruption of ordinary people does not arise. Its SFA to do with the majority indigenous and has no importance anywhere! Got to stuff it in your face though?

    Yes, we are friends of those in Europe..the europeans as I remember. Don’t think I’d want to go there again…see vids in link, the vids that the media will never show. Just keep asking for it and you will surely get it!

  7. angela barnardo says:

    I agree with every word you said Roger. How to get this heard and accepted all over our country? So many people agree with you, but the media,especially the BBC, try to silence you.

  8. Ex-expat Colin says: amongst yourselves but don’t do anything helpful…or carry on and simply destroy us!

    Scope of the inquiry
    The Economic Affairs Committee is conducting an inquiry in the Economics of UK Energy Policy.
    The Committee will consider the present mix of policy interventions and subsidies in the energy market. The core question for the Committee is what are the failures, if any, in the energy market and what measures are needed to correct them?
    The Government’s commitment to reducing carbon emissions is taken as given so the inquiry will not consider arguments about the science behind climate change.

    The Committee will hear oral evidence in the autumn and publish its report in 2017.


    Expect outrage and bile….

  9. Ex-expat Colin says:

    Another O/T…sorry: Good for an expense claim or two at the very least?

    Revoke the BBC’s charter
    The BBC has become increasingly biased in its news coverage. In particular, with its pro-EU stance, the BBC does not represent more than half the country, who are nonetheless legally bound to pay the licence fee.

  10. Phil Johnson says:

    Absolutely brilliantly put Roger – I have a file on all the illegal atrocities these people have created since leaving their homelands to destroy ours! You would be amazed at just how much crime has been kept out of print Roger!

  11. June A. Van Orman says:

    Most of these immigrants are militant, young and seem to have money. They should be in their own country, fighting for it. Instead these cowards run away and demand to be taken care of by us and at the same time they treat us like dirt. If we now start letting in the children, for each child 40 adults (family and extended relatives) will stream in. If these rich dudes are so kind hearted, why don’t they get together and build a huge housing facility for them and pay for ALL their needs. Better still build it in Europe. That is where they first landed.

  12. Dung says:

    I would like to establish one point of difference between your position and mine Roger ^.^ (like all the others I thought it was a great speech).
    It is Islam which is the problem and not just Jihadis. The attempted (and still ongoing) attempts to subvert Midlands schools is not being done by Jihadis.
    The setting up of Sharia courts is not being done by Jihadis.
    In the UK over time Religion has been disconnected from the role of government but in Islam religion is the government. We should not ignore the threat from Islam.

  13. wooding1 says:

    We have to be cautious, that in helping others we do not destroy our

  14. ian terry says:

    Bloody well said Roger bang on the button

  15. Ex-expat Colin says:

    A background niggle..likely worse:
    “Economist: Austria Should Leave the EU after Brexit”

    Its certainly a logical point…wrecked countries dominating the richer members or whats left of them. Sturgeon might like to consider it as a damaged destination…self inflicted. Note the imposition of property tax in Portugal…suddenly!. When/Why does writing on a wall not count for anything?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s