Immigration Arm-Waving

Once again, David Cameron has been able to muster all his pragmatic talents to deliver a significant policy speech, this time on immigration.  I have previously set out Sir Andrew Green's ground rules for debate: stick to the, facts, don't demonise your opponents and don't condescend to the public. His measured approach, presumably cleared by key stakeholders in advance, was certainly compliant but I wonder, being thus constrained, if he went far enough?  Indeed, before we get carried away, this politically reasonable and compelling speech seemed more about stemming the tide of UKIP than tackling the flood of immigrants.

I do not underestimate the difficult position he is in but I have 2 fundamental criticisms. 

•  Firstly, when he talks of the future, is he talking about the usual political horizon of the next election or a more profound concern for the legacy we shall provide for future generations.  It seems to me of equal moral irresponsibility to bequeath an unworkable multi-cultural society as it is to saddle the future with our spiralling national debt.  Surely Conservatives should feel they have a duty to conserve the structure fabric of our great country and maintain our defining way of life?  It is not clear to me whether the economic sanctions proposed will achieve this.

• Secondly, it is disingenuous not to admit that the problem is Europe (I know he hinted at it but that is not good enough).  We are where we are, ensnared in the structural economic decline of Europe and bound by the insidious political rules that previous politicians, of both parties, failed to see coming.  We are not going to be able to change any treaties so let us have it straight please!

On the plus side, he adhered to the advice that most Staff Colleges graduates would have absorbed fairly soon after being thrown into the pit of serpents in Whitehall, namely, never write anyone a nasty letter.  At least, unlike UKIP, we have not compromised our negotiating position by threatening immediate exit nor denied our "friends" in Europe a way out through compromise.

So, for me, its 7 out of 10 - a promising start that provides some hope in a non-specific sort of way but we need to show results on the measures proposed.  It is not good enough to sideline them until we eventually get round to negotiating our pre-referendum position.  In sum, it was potentially fruitful arm-waving but still arm-waving for all that!