Big lurch:  British Labour Party goes racist?

From one extreme to the other.  The vote for UKIP has got both sides of politics running scared

Labour was today accused of peddling 'xenophobic rhetoric' after a senior frontbencher complained about receptionists in hotels being foreign.  In controversial remarks, Labour’s shadow immigration minister Chris Bryant said it ‘would be nice’ to go into a hotel in this country which had a British receptionist.  He said he was ‘angry’ at employers for failing to train and employ Brits, relying instead on people from Latvia and Estonia.

But the Tories said the comments were proof that Ed Miliband's party was 'confused' on the issue of immigration and was 'cynically' trying to grab headlines.

Mr Bryant, the MP for Rhondda in south Wales, said local businesses had been unable to fill jobs with local people.  ‘I have very high levels of youth unemployment in my constituency; it has risen by some 200 per cent in the last year,’ he told BBC2’s Newsnight.

‘I do get quite angry with some British employers, who’ve decided not to bother train British youngsters to work in the hospitality industry or the construction industry.  ‘It would be nice sometimes when you go into a British hotel if the receptionist was British.

‘We need to give our young people to have the skills and the opportunities to get those jobs.

‘There is a hotel in my constituency quite often it’s not been able to employ locally, it has ended up employing people from Estonia and Latvia, often people from Estonia and Latvia have so much get up and go they’ve got up and gone.’

He was speaking during a debate on the impact of immigration in the UK, ahead of limits being lifted next year on the number of people from Bulgaria and Romania who can settle elsewhere in the European Union.

Conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi said: 'Chris Bryant's choice of words are irresponsible and unwise.  'His comments demonstrate how confused Labour are over the issue of immigration. Labour have gone from an "open door" policy leaving the country to cope with 2 million migrants, to cynically  peddling xenophobic rhetoric.'

Victor Ponta, the prime minister of Romania, admitted there is a problem with citizens of his country coming to Britain and committing crimes.

He said Roma gypsies, in particular, posed a 'huge challenge' to law enforcement by begging and stealing mobile phones.  And he backed Britain's moves to tighten up access to benefits for Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants.

It came as surverys suggested 150,000 Romanians and 200,000 Bulgarians are planning to move to Britain.

During the debate Mr Bryant apologised the immigration policy of the Labour government, in which he was a minister.  He said:’ In all situations where you have one country where wages are much lower than in another country, then people will be prepared, despite having very advanced skills and knowledge and qualifications, to work at much lower level in another country.

‘One of the things we have to take into consideration – absolutely – well, yes – can I do the apology on behalf of the Labour party.

‘I mean look, there was a very serious mistake that was made in 2004, which is that, all the main political parties believed in enlargement of the European Union.

‘The point is that we went out – Britain went out on a limb – Britain decided that unlike France and Germany and Italy that we would allow people to come to the UK, immediately from day one.’

SOURCE





Enforcement Deceptive in U.S. Immigration Bill

Exit-tracking system mandated since '96, but promise not kept;

Bill requires system only at sea and airports, not land borders

The public doesn’t believe Congress will enforce the kind of immigration enforcement measures included in the new Schumer/Rubio immigration bill. After decades of deliberate non-enforcement, the political class has undermined its credibility and created a major trust gap. A recent poll published by the Center for Immigration Studies shows that just 27% of Americans expressed confidence that immigration laws would be enforced in the event of a legalization, while 70 percent indicated that they were not confident immigration law would be enforced.

One provision in the newly released Senate immigration bill, S. 744, exemplifies the reasons for this trust gap. Sponsors of the bill tout its toughness on enforcement by pointing to its mandate to develop an exit-tracking system for foreign visitors. This is important because perhaps 40 percent of illegal aliens entered legally but remained beyond their allotted time, and only an effective check-out system can identify those who don't leave when they're supposed to. The completion of the exit system is one of the goals, or "triggers", that has to be met before an amnesty beneficiary can upgrade from “provisional” status to a full green card and then citizenship. Without it illegal immigration would simply resume after an amnesty, ensuring this same debate a decade from now.

But Congress mandated the development of such a system in 1996, and has reiterated that demand five more times over the past 17 years. Sponsors of the bill offer no explanation why the seventh promise to complete the system will be any more likely to be honored than the first six, especially since there is virtually no political incentive to do so, the illegal population having been amnestied within months of the bill's signing. What's more, the new bill mandates exit-tracking only at airports and seaports, even though the majority of foreign visitors come across our land borders.

"This is the kind of chicanery that justifiably feeds public skepticism," said Mark Krikorian, the Center's executive director. "A focus on keeping past enforcement promises, before arguing for amnesty, would be an important step toward regaining public trust."

See the report from a 2010 Center symposium on "The Politics and Practicalities of Exit Controls"  here.

The above is a press release from from Center for Immigration Studies. 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820,  Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076.  Email: center@cis.org. Contact: Marguerite Telford, 202-466-8185, mrt@cis.org.  The Center for Immigration Studies is an independent research institution which examines the impact of immigration on the United States.  The Center for Immigration Studies is not affiliated with any other organization