With reference to a column in The Times by Rachel Sylvester, on immigration, (MPs not immigrants are the real problem) she is quite right to say that the majority of people have no objection to immigration, but that they very much feel that the matter has been handled incompetently by our politicians. Indeed, they are quite correct.
One of the characteristics of the English is that they believe the world ends at the Channel, and they never bother to see what Europe is doing. Thus, our government has not noticed the fact that France and Germany have no problem with immigration. Why? Because they have sensible rules. Some years ago, the Home Office shamelessly announced that they had “lost” 500,000 immigrants. More recently they announced that they had “lost” 250,000 immigrants. Clearly, they seem to be improving. The reason this could not happen on the Continent is because they have I.D. cards for all immigrants.
Most immigrants come to England via the Channel, which means they have to travel through France, and usually through Germany too, to arrive at the Channel. Why do they not stop in France or Germany? Both are rich countries, and more sparsely populated than England? Because they all want to take advantage of the UK’s insane benefit laws, whereby an immigrant can receive benefits from the day he arrives. Now, in both France and Germany, you are not allowed to receive benefits unless you have worked for at least twelve months in that country. Now, why has not England done that? One reason under UK laws is that you are required to have the same benefit laws for immigrants as for your own citizens. France and Germany do, but in England that would mean toughening our own benefit laws. One has to conclude our politicians are much less competent than those on the Continent.