Share |

Sunday 27 June 2010

Raising the Retirement Age and Immigration

This week it was announced by the Condems that plans to increase the state retirement age to 66 had been brought forward to 2016, and they have stressed that in the years beyond this will need to be raised further, possibly to 70. The reasons underpinning this move are obvious, for our indigenous population is ageing and people generally now live for a considerable number of years beyond 65. Given that our economy is not producing vast amounts of additional wealth and our per capita productivity can hardly be said to be surging, the natural corollary to this is that the retirement age has to increase to balance the budget.

The BBC of course has a different take on this and wasted no time in deploying one of its favourite arguments whenever the question of an ageing population arises: we ‘need’ mass immigration. In his wisdom, that most sage member of the BBC commentariat Nick Robinson opined on Radio 4 that if we allowed large numbers of young immigrants into the country then the raising of the retirement age to 66 and beyond could be avoided. Does this man seem to think that all of these young immigrants possess some sort of terminator gene that means they will all drop dead before reaching the age of 65, or is he simply not bothered about the fact that when such people do retire it won’t be his problem as he’ll be dead?

England is bursting at the seams. We are the most densely populated country in Europe. We have a housing shortage, and that which is available is grossly overpriced owing to the pressure of population and new-builds are too small for the same reason. Our roads are clogged almost to the state of gridlock. Despite the fact that England receives plenty of rainfall, our water-supply system is put under strain in many areas whenever we experience a protracted dry spell owing to the sheer number of people requiring water. Our children’s education suffers as their classrooms are swamped by non-English speakers and teachers have to devote more attention to the needs of the children of immigrants and of the immigrant-descended population. Although we have not been self-sufficient in food production for many years, our country has far surpassed its natural carrying capacity for population, and as global overpopulation continues to accelerate and the prices of foodstuffs and commodities rocket, we will find ourselves in a very vulnerable position. Why are these factors never given any consideration by the BBC and largely ignored by our short-termist governments, whether they be Labour, Conservative or Condem?

Naturally, besides the very tangible negative impacts of mass immigration and a growing population outlined above, there is also the question of cultural compatibility. The inability on the part of many immigrants to speak English is problematic, but even worse than this is the fact that a very large number of them are Muslims. Muslims never integrate and always seek to take over. Our country has too many of them already, and we should encourage as many as possible to leave rather than allow more to settle here.

Some people may have been fooled into voting Conservative at the recent election in the belief that the Tories would be tough on immigration. However, an article in today’s Daily Mail should blow away that misconception, for it reveals that the Conservatives are already backtracking on their demand that all immigrants should be able to speak English. Although the presence of the Liberal Democrats as coalition partners will have significantly influenced this latest policy announcement, the Cameroons will certainly have been favourably predisposed towards it. The Mail states:
However, a little-noticed Commons written reply last week said: ‘The new language requirement will not apply to dependants of refugees and people granted humanitarian protection in the UK.’  
The Government granted the exemption after being warned that forcing refugees’ dependants to learn English breaks Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which gives everyone ‘the right to a family life’.
Lawyers say a refugee could argue that as they cannot return to their country, they can gain their ‘right to family life’ only by having it allowed in the UK – whether or not they speak English. Britons whose foreign spouses cannot speak English could get their right by emigrating.
A Home Office spokesman said: ‘In compelling circumstances where a refusal of leave would amount to a breach of Article 8, we will consider granting discretionary leave outside the immigration rules.’
About 20,000 people a year apply for asylum in Britain.
Taking into account the number of potential dependents that each of these people could have, the numbers that will enter the country will continue to be staggering. A large proportion of these will be Muslim, which will be pouring petrol onto the fire. Islamisation must be stopped and reversed which means that all immigration of Muslims must be stopped and reversed. If Nick Robinson thinks that such people will pay for the retirement of non-believers such as myself, he is utterly deluded. If I had the option, I'd sooner work until I dropped than let in these hostile hordes.


  1. Do you remember when you heard this item - I would be interested to see if I can capture it on the 'play again' facilities so I can write a little piece on the issue of demographics and pension/migration.


    British Activism.

  2. Hi BA. Given that I recall hearing Robinson speak whilst I was driving, I think it may have been sometime early Friday evening. However, my memory's not what it was: age you know. Premature senescence appears to be kicking in ;-)

    Still, the Any Questions panel started rambling on about the increase in the retirement age, and I seem to recall my blood pressure rising (as it is prone to do whilst listening to this programme)when immigration was touched upon again. Sorry I'm being a bit vague here, but try taking a look at Nick Robinson's blog. I'm pretty sure that he would not have been able to restrain himself from writing something pro-mass immigration in the past few days in response to the retirement age issue. Let me know if you find it.

  3. "Nick Robinson opined on Radio 4 that if we allowed large numbers of young immigrants into the country then the raising of the retirement age to 66 and beyond could be avoided."

    If we hadn't murder 7.1 million unborn indigenous children (and that figure is rising) we would never have needed to import an immigrant workforce, actually we still don't need too.

    But we are forever being told that we have the highest teenage pregnancies in Europe, if that was correct we would have a young and vibrant Indigenous population rather an ageing stagnating population unwilling or unable to reproduce and replace itself.

    The claim is probably right, but that most of the Indigenous teenage pregnancies are TERMINATED - and with the promotion of the pill and abortion clinics aimed mainly at the Indigenous population. You don't see many immigrants using or being made to use contraceptives, the powers that be never target the Islamists or other foreign groups to Family Planning clinics, unless it's for education and advice on Conceiving, that's why they have larger familys.

    This is GENOCIDE whatever way you look at it.


Comments that call for or threaten violence will not be published. Anyone is entitled to criticise the arguments presented here, or to highlight what they believe to be factual error(s); ad hominem attacks do not constitute comment or debate. Although at times others' points of view may be exasperating, please attempt to be civil in your responses. If you wish to communicate with me confidentially, please preface your comment with "Not for publication". This is why all comments are moderated.