Friday's Letters: How we can count the true cost of immigration policy

We are assured of his opposition to the catastrophic Labour Party immigration policy of recent years, though we are urged to recognise that certain categories of migrant labour can be useful. He tells us from his personal experience of those he regards as acceptable: the Bulgarian beautician who barely speaks English; the stunningly pretty caf waitress from Lithuania; the Kurdish car washers who performed a first- class job on his car, under Polish supervision, and for a mere 18, the price no doubt being a fraction of the rate of pay of the men doing the job.

The types of service economy work described are not exactly wealth creating, but how useful for busy professional people rushed off their feet; and at such competitive prices! Cheap labour exploitation? Never!

The irony of this particular attitude towards migration lies in the fact that were it not for those other English, those "parasitical free loaders" of Bill Carmichael's, who are not prepared to join the reserve army of cheap labour, we might have had a restrictive and enforced migration policy, tailored to genuinely serve the national interest: at the cost of having to wash our own cars, if we are prepared to make that little sacrifice!

From: D Harrop, Malton Street, Sheffield, South Yorkshire.

From: D Robinson, Lumb Lane, Liversedge, West Yorkshire.

I BEGAN to read the article about Polish refugees by Chris Bond (Yorkshire Post, June 3) when I had a vivid flashback to the time when I was a young 20-year-old soldier.

My army duties took me to many army camps throughout Yorkshire and I immediately recalled the Polish camps in the area. At the time, I was passing by on the way to another camp when I realised the Polish camp was nearby, and on the spur of the moment I decided to call on a courtesy visit, nothing more, except perhaps a bit of curiosity.

I parked my motor cycle and then began to wonder what to do next. Luckily, two Polish soldiers approached and beckoned me forward to what appeared to be an orderly room. As I entered, I found three soldiers in heated argument and two others concentrating on some paperwork. All stopped and there was an awkward silence.

Eventually, I said a cheery "good morning" and offered a courteous and correct salute. The effect was amazing. They all jumped to their feet, on caps, snapped to attention, saluted and remained standing to attention. Once again, an awkward silence. The senior soldier called a name and a young man hurried in, explaining that he was the interpreter. What a relief. His English was precise but limited, it was also most welcome as I had not one word of Polish to offer.

He explained to me that this was the camp committee room and not an orderly room. My greeting and salute had taken them completely by surprise as they did not salute any more because they were no longer soldiers. They were civilian Polish men who lived in England. I protested that they were all in full uniform and the reply was that they wore uniform because they had no civilian clothes and no clothing coupons had been issued to them.

Then the buzz words of that time came back to me – recalcitrant Poles. I had never encountered that word before, but the newspapers and the wireless broadcasts were full of the deeds, misdeeds and rumours concerning recalcitrant Poles. They just didn't fit into the bureaucratic pigeon hole they had been allotted. They were adamant that they would not go back to Russian rule, insisting that they stay in England. I think recalcitrant is too harsh a word to define their situation.

My acquaintance with the Poles was brief, I visited a second time and then was transferred to Nottingham District. I'm 84 now and thankful for that brief encounter. It's refreshing to be reminded of your 20s and the people you met more than 60 years ago.

From: MK O'Sullivan, Victoria Street, Allerton Bywater, Castleford.

SO now we know. Ed Balls told Gordon Brown, before the election, that Labour were not listening to voter concerns on the immigration issue.

Yet why did he not speak out at the time?

Politicians show fancy footwork

From: David McKenna, Hall Gardens, Rawcliffe, Goole.

THERE are two events that have taken place over the past few days that may have been quite puzzling for some of your readers since they admirably illustrate the deft footwork of some members of the previous Government.

The first of these momentous changes happened when the latest tranche of "New Labour" Lords was announced. Along with that old stager and Commons expenses concealer Gorbals Mick – Michael Martin – previously taking the ermine, another erstwhile champion of the working classes, John Prescott – who earlier had said that he was "against flunkery and titles... I don't want to be a member of the House of Lords. I will not accept it" – has now redacted his statement, saying that his elevation "gives me an opportunity which I would never have had before", without mentioning what that opportunity is.

Presumably more croquet or even another 10 Year Transport Plan (Tom Richmond, Yorkshire Post, May 31).

The second event which is causing both merriment and concern, depending upon your political stance, is that of the leadership hopefuls as they now distance themselves from Blair and Brown even though, with the exception of Diane Abbott, they were all fervent acolytes of the New Labour "Third Way". With moral compasses thrown aside, they now attempt to outdo one another with mea culpas.

What both of these events tell us is that these people either have no principles or just think that the electorate is pretty dense, or both.

From: D Smith, Sandhill Way, Harrogate, North Yorkshire.

IS it a joke? Is somebody having a laugh?

I refer to the proposed elevation to peer of the realm, of one whose demeanour is more reminiscent of a playground bully. Maybe it is time to emigrate, or perhaps choose a headstone and die.

From: AW Clarke, Wold Croft, Sutton on Derwent.

HEARING our esteemed class warrior, John Prescott, in discussion with Zac Goldsmith on the Today programme regarding the decision to treat private gardens as brownfield sites for building new homes, it really does beggar belief that he can be so self-deceiving that he apparently sees no irony in the possibility of his joining the most exclusive club in England as a bar to his claiming to care for the underdogs of the country (Yorkshire Post, May 31).

I can only assume that there is no shortage of housing for poorer

families in Hull or he would surely have offered his own substantial garden for housing by now (free of charge, of course) to stem his bleeding heart.

Backing for BA chief

From: John Watson, Hutton Hill, Leyburn.

YOUR leading article "Turbulent Times" seems to be inferring that because British Airway was not transporting the England football team to South Africa, the company is in steep decline (Yorkshire Post, May 4).

I thought you would have emphasised the fact that the present unreliability is due to outrageous greed among the well-paid cabin

staff and headline-seeking unions and their bosses, who, in this

dispute haven't a leg to stand on.

At a time when BA is trying to protect itself from archaic unionism, it is no wonder that the Football Association chose something a little more reliable at this time.

I suggest that we let the BA chief executive Willie Walsh get on with his job, get the unions off his back and demand a little more loyalty from his cabin staff who, after all, have jobs a lot of young people would die for, and only then will BA return to its rightful slot in the

airline business.

Let's get rid of the dead weight from public sector

From: Tim Hunter, Farfield Avenue, Knaresborough, North Yorkshire.

THE point Malcolm Naylor is missing (Yorkshire Post, June 5) is that public sector jobs are created by the Government and they can only be paid for by a thriving private sector, which governments are unable to create.

If governments were able to create a private sector, then now is the time they would be wanting to do it, with the country left virtually bankrupt after 13 years of ruinous Labour rule.

The nave notion that we needn't pay our way in the world has held sway for too long.

One thing that governments can do to help is to cut public spending and reduce tax. Apart from that, governments can only wait and hope that sufficient entrepreneurs perceive it is worth their while to work hard and build up businesses in tough, competitive market conditions.

In the current economic situation, we need as many businesses as possible to succeed. Those entrepreneurs that do succeed, deserve to reward themselves appropriately.

The suggestion that an entrepreneur, who might breach the "maximum wage" of his director's earnings after three months of the year, should close down his factory and lay off workers for the rest of the year, is a preposterous one.

Obviously the work would be moved out of the country, the entrepreneur would move to somewhere like Switzerland and we would all be worse off.

Any restrictions on the private sector can only lead to fewer public sector jobs. Public sector jobs may not always be even necessary. For instance, why do we need the British Potato Council quango? Public sector jobs are certainly quite inefficient compared with their private sector equivalents.

It is quite clear to most of us that the private sector is struggling to make the wealth we all need because it is weighed down by a useless, inefficient and largely unnecessary public sector.

Mr Naylor is effectively suggesting that we moved down the road to

Communism. I offer a much better solution.

Let's get rid of the public sector completely and get this useless dead weight off the back of the private sector.

We could privatise everything and let charities run essential services. Then we can arrive at a genuinely low tax, high incentive society that will benefit us all.

Issue that cuts to the heart

From: Luke J Charters-Reid, Flaxton, York.

I RECALL in July last year, David Cameron said that (cuts would) "make or break" any future Tory government. And here we are today with a Conservative Prime Minister. So what can we expect from the forthcoming emergency Budget? Tax breaks or serious cuts?

When asked in a news conference, David Cameron stumbled slightly on the thought of ring-fencing. Can we expect a Thatcher mark two or someone who will act in the national interest? Only time can tell what happens in a fortnight.

David Cameron said that the cuts "will change British life". These cuts may be felt for decades, and the cuts are at the heart of whether the Tories will be re-elected or not.

Unequal treatment

From: Peter Gallagher, Embsay, Skipton, North Yorkshire.

I READ with interest the headline (Yorkshire Post, June 9) about a benefits cheat who has been jailed for over-claiming benefits of 40,000 over seven years. We had similar headlines last year about politicians who had been claiming, fraudulently, over many years, far more than 40,000. Surely there is not one law for them and another law for us?

Double trouble

From: Peter Bye, Park Crescent, Addingham.

REGARDING the Baftas (Yorkshire Post, June 7), what is an antondeck and what does it do? Can anyone help?