Bigotry is no answer to immigration

THE recent publication of population statistics has thrown up concerns on your Letters page, some of these being in vehement terms about colour and religion, therefore rather at odds with any espoused Christian faith of those writers. Others have expressed a more sensible question of the ability of the state to manage such a sharp rise in population, together with the toleration of established society to accept change.

The last Government may well have been careless in its attitude to immigration but the solution does not lie in displays of antagonism to faith or colour. Peaceful solutions do not come with bigotry and xenophobia. After all, the population of the country has been made up from centuries of other people coming here and settling amicably. Our medical services are an example of a considerable number of talented, skilful and caring people doing just that.

However, in our considerations we could perhaps recall that for about three centuries Britons were busily occupying other countries and imposing our ways on their indigenous peoples, at times shipping them around the world against their will. How just was that?

From: David W. Wright, Uppleby, Easingwold.

YES, the results of the 2011 UK Census make very serious reading and simply confirm the warnings made by many UK citizens and political parties, but there is absolutely nothing we can do to stem the immigration from within the EU countries until the UK leaves the EU to regain our independence.

In the meantime, our government and Border Agency must tighten up the controls and security systems to stop the almost uncontrolled immigration from the rest of the world and to avoid the problems of overcrowding, formation of ghettos, and abuse of our over-generous welfare system.

Enough is enough, and a halt must be made to further immigration “through the back door” whereby people from India, Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan and the African subcontinent get into our already overcrowded country. Is anyone listening out there – particularly in the Government?

From: Norman Mellor, Highfield Avenue, Meltham, Huddersfield.

HOW I agree with David Quarrie (Yorkshire Post, December 15) and Terry Palmer (Yorkshire Post, December 17) on the subject of immigration. Never have I felt so bad about the future of this once great nation.

Many would argue that we have been governed this last 50 years or so by the worst politicians in the western world, with one or two exceptions. In an earlier age had these dregs of humanity inflicted the treason on us that they have, they would have suffered the ultimate penalty and rightly so.

The great tragedy is that not one of the three leading parties are any better than the other. I foresee in the next 15 to 20 years all the problems that Eastern Europe had a few years ago. I shall not be here but my grandchildren will, God help them.

From: Rodney Atkinson, Meadowfield Road, Stocksfield, Northumberland.

A LEADING policy adviser to 
the Blair government recalled coming away from policy discussions on immigration 
“with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn’t its main pur pose – to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date. That seemed to me to be a manoeuvre too far.” The Blair-Brown Labour Government alienated its working class support, promoted the BNP and lost the election.

This is exactly what David Cameron seems to be doing with homosexual marriage – or redefining the ancient social and religious pillar of almost every religion in the world.

Cameron seeks to alienate Conservatives and woo 
Liberal Democrats and Labour, just as he did in the 2010 
election where he attacked Conservatives who voted Ukip and went out of his way to promote Nick Clegg.

Cameron was unable to win the election even against the catastrophic Gordon Brown and set Ukip on a new course of electoral success. Cameron was and remains “the heir to Blair”.

Move will aid counterfeiters

From: Mike Ridgway, Ghyll Wood, Ilkley.

IN response to your recent article relating to “No fears over no-logo tobacco packaging claims over plain packaging”, and as someone who has worked in the packaging manufacturing industry for over 40 years, it can be assured that the introduction of plain packaging for tobacco products would undoubtedly make it easier to copy and increase the volume of counterfeit and fake cigarettes coming onto our streets.

When people look at packaging, they often think it is simple, but to those who know the manufacturing processes, tobacco products feature a number of sophisticated and complex markings and techniques that make counterfeiting difficult.

It stands to reason that a 
plain package without marks specific to a brand and product will be easier to reproduce. Imagine a £20 note without the hologram, watermark and other security features. Would it be easier to forge? Of course it would. While the Government’s aims of reducing the number of young people smoking should be supported, there is currently no evidence that plain packaging will have any impact and could potentially have the opposite effect with illicit sales on street corners to young people and those only influenced by low price.

Easy-to-copy packs will increase the number of fake and counterfeit cigarettes on our streets, sold by criminals to anybody wanting to buy. Will they ask for age ID? Will the police and law enforcement agencies welcome the increased workload that this will involve?

Of course not, in both situations.