There is never any excuse for rioting and racism. It is also true that large numbers of people have legitimate grievances which have not been adequately addressed. A distinction must be drawn.
"Parliament is the place for the peaceful airing and resolution of the public’s grievances"
Unfortunately this was undermined by parliament itself on the issue of mass immigration. All the main parties at one point or another, and in particular the Conservative party, promised to reduce immigration in their manifestos and then immediately reneged on those pledges once in power. This has been a pattern for at least 2 decades now.
MPs should reflect on the democratic deficit they themselves created.
I certainly don't support any of the violent acts seen over the last week, but they were predictable and avoidable.
MPs certainly should reflect yes and I think I cover that above. And policymakers too. They are not the same.
I had little to do with immigration apart from casework where it went wrong and voting for the legislation as presented. I was caught up in other matters and thought ministers were on top of it. That is what happens I am afraid and I will write about the experience of being an MP in later posts.
Certainly, successive immigration ministers, Home Secretaries and Prime Ministers should have seen to it that manifesto promises were kept.
Ultimately, however foreseeable trouble may be, riots and racism can never been excused by legitimate concerns. Those concerns must not be violently expressed and a main point of this article is that commentators ought to do better than to seem to excuse riots.
Yes, absolutely. The curse of differential treatment has weighed heavy on the police. I have seen it myself, though in Wycombe, we navigated it successfully.
Consistency is important but one must cope with the oroblems at hand. A revolutionary liberalisation of society would not answer the present moment, surely?
Thanks Steve. Broadly agree with all you have written as per the principles of a free society.
One area that I would oppose on principle (appreciating that I am in a minority in their view) is the following action:
- "The Government must stop illegal migration and dramatically reduce the number of legal migrants. Alas that Labour threw out our plans."
In your own words, immigration puts a massive amount of pressure when you have state controlled and taxpayer funded schooling, health, land use planning, welfare etc. Being consistent with the principles of a free society - the root cause is 'legal plunder' and 'false philanthropy' in the words of Bastiat and immigration is just a manifestation of this issue.
Yes overnight revolutions rarely address the real challenges and that's not what I'm suggesting.
However I'm not convinced that focusing on immigration alone will make any impact considering all other competing priorities, which you and I can't know and neither can government. We have seen time and time again the unintended consequences of single issue action.
"Parliament is the place for the peaceful airing and resolution of the public’s grievances"
Unfortunately this was undermined by parliament itself on the issue of mass immigration. All the main parties at one point or another, and in particular the Conservative party, promised to reduce immigration in their manifestos and then immediately reneged on those pledges once in power. This has been a pattern for at least 2 decades now.
MPs should reflect on the democratic deficit they themselves created.
I certainly don't support any of the violent acts seen over the last week, but they were predictable and avoidable.
MPs certainly should reflect yes and I think I cover that above. And policymakers too. They are not the same.
I had little to do with immigration apart from casework where it went wrong and voting for the legislation as presented. I was caught up in other matters and thought ministers were on top of it. That is what happens I am afraid and I will write about the experience of being an MP in later posts.
Certainly, successive immigration ministers, Home Secretaries and Prime Ministers should have seen to it that manifesto promises were kept.
Ultimately, however foreseeable trouble may be, riots and racism can never been excused by legitimate concerns. Those concerns must not be violently expressed and a main point of this article is that commentators ought to do better than to seem to excuse riots.
The first point you make regarding the police upholding the law is fundamental, as long as they do not face inquiries whenever they attempt to do so
Yes, absolutely. The curse of differential treatment has weighed heavy on the police. I have seen it myself, though in Wycombe, we navigated it successfully.
Yes does not appear to be an issue in Wycombe, but has been an ongoing problem in the country
Of course you make a good point.
Consistency is important but one must cope with the oroblems at hand. A revolutionary liberalisation of society would not answer the present moment, surely?
Thanks Steve. Broadly agree with all you have written as per the principles of a free society.
One area that I would oppose on principle (appreciating that I am in a minority in their view) is the following action:
- "The Government must stop illegal migration and dramatically reduce the number of legal migrants. Alas that Labour threw out our plans."
In your own words, immigration puts a massive amount of pressure when you have state controlled and taxpayer funded schooling, health, land use planning, welfare etc. Being consistent with the principles of a free society - the root cause is 'legal plunder' and 'false philanthropy' in the words of Bastiat and immigration is just a manifestation of this issue.
Yes overnight revolutions rarely address the real challenges and that's not what I'm suggesting.
However I'm not convinced that focusing on immigration alone will make any impact considering all other competing priorities, which you and I can't know and neither can government. We have seen time and time again the unintended consequences of single issue action.