Connect with us

Politics

Democrats' immigration debate plays out inside Hispanic Caucus

Published

on

With Democrats poised to deliver an early immigration victory to President Donald Trump, members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus split over how to approach the issue in a closed-door meeting Wednesday morning.

Some discussed using Democrats’ limited political leverage under unified GOP rule: Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.) floated conditioning Democratic support for a debt-limit increase on protections for Dreamers — undocumented migrants brought to the U.S. as children.

Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Linda Sánchez (D-Calif.), meanwhile, debated how to respond to hard-line Republican-led immigration bills — such as the Laken Riley Act, which has attracted Democratic support and is poised to pass Congress Wednesday. Two people familiar with the meeting were granted anonymity to describe the private conversations.

Ocasio-Cortez emphasized the need for her party to develop a winning strategy and better messaging to respond to the Republican bills and prevent swing-district lawmakers from having to break party ranks.

Advertisement

But Sanchez, who leads the caucus’ political arm, said progressive members’ messaging efforts weren’t working and said that Democrats were at risk of losing the larger battle over immigration policy as a result.

It was the latest manifestation of an intense debate that has racked Democrats since the 2024 elections, where many blamed immigration and border issues for swinging the presidential and congressional results to Republicans.

The Laken Riley Act was only the first of numerous tough-on-immigration bills that Republicans are likely to bring to the House floor. Dozens of Democrats have broken ranks so far, much to the dismay of many Hispanic Caucus members who are watching the party move to the center on its issue — including, they fear, its leaders.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries stopped by the Hispanic Caucus meeting, the people familiar said.

Advertisement

Coming out of the broader House Democratic Caucus meeting earlier in the morning, Jeffries said Democrats were “unified in the position that we want to secure the border and fix our broken immigration system in a bipartisan and comprehensive manner.”
Hispanic Caucus chair Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) called the meeting an “informative discussion” about members’ positions and said, “we all agree that the situation at the border needs to be stronger but that we also recognize that Dreamers, farmworkers and families must be protected.”

“We are all united on this,” he said, adding that included Jeffries.

Democratic lawmakers have broadly emphasized to leadership in the wake of the election there needs to be a cohesive message from the party on immigration. But the particulars of that has been tricky, with Republicans eager to put them on the spot by holding votes on bills that would, for instance, require the detention of many migrants accused of crimes.
Rep. Chuy García (D-Ill.) was among those calling for a more forceful response to the GOP legislation.

“I think we need to stand firm, as we’ve done on other causes in the Democratic caucus,” he said. “While we firm up a position on immigration policy in general as we plan forward, it’s important to push back on efforts like this, because if not, then you cede the ground to all kinds of other falsehoods that are to come.”

Advertisement

Some other lawmakers, however, said there had to be some recognition of political reality.

“I think each member has to have a response based on what’s in the best interest of their district,” said Rep. Darren Soto (D-Fla.). And he took a longer view of their response to Trump: “It’s not a sprint, it’s a two-year marathon.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Keir Starmer branded a ‘very dangerous man’ as PM raises ‘authoritarian’ fears with protest crackdown

Published

on

Political commentator Aaron Bastani has issued a stark warning about Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, describing him as a “very, very dangerous man” who could quickly become “authoritarian”.

Speaking on GB News, Bastani expressed deep concerns about potential restrictions on protest rights under Starmer’s leadership.


“I think he’s a very, very dangerous man and I think he’d be a very authoritarian man very quickly,” Bastani said.

The commentator warned that attempts to criminalise protest could lead down a “slippery slope”.

Advertisement
Keir Starmer and Aaron Bastani

Aaron Bastani is fearful of Keir Starmer cracking down on protests

GB NEWS / PA

The warning comes amid recent protests in London that saw significant police intervention.

Advertisement

Just days ago, 77 protesters were arrested during a pro-Palestine demonstration in central London.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Pro-Palestine protestersPro-Palestine protesters have taken to the streets of London PA

The Metropolitan Police said the arrests followed “a coordinated effort to breach Public Order Act conditions and cause serious disruption to Londoners”.

The demonstration, which took place on the eve of a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, was confined to a static rally in Whitehall after police rejected the organisers’ initially proposed route.

It marked the largest number of arrests at such rallies since they began in October 2023.

Advertisement

Bastani defended the fundamental importance of protest rights, regardless of political stance.

GB News panel

The matter was discussed on GB News

GB NEWS

Advertisement

“The right to protest is only meaningful if it applies to people you disagree with,” he told GB News.

He pointed to recent farmers’ protests as an example of positive democratic expression.

“If you look at the recent farmers’ protest, that was really powerful and positive in many ways to see so many people from around the country protesting their point of view and their rights at the heart of Government,” he said.

He stressed that protest rights shouldn’t be limited only to those whose views align with the authorities.

Advertisement

Bastani warned that restrictions on pro-Palestinian protesters could set a concerning precedent.

“If he’s doing this to Palestinian protesters, who do you think is next?” he questioned.

The political commentator emphasised that protecting fundamental rights was crucial for everyone.

“I think everybody should care deeply about the rights of free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of protest, because it won’t stop here if this man is given a free hand,” he said.

Advertisement

His comments highlight growing tensions between protest rights and public order enforcement in the capital.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Kwasi Kwarteng accuses Liz Truss of desperate attempt to stay relevant in brutal swipe at former ally: ‘Pathetic!’

Published

on

Former Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng has branded Liz Truss’s appearance at Donald Trump’s inauguration as “pathetic” and “regrettable”.

Speaking on GB News, Kwarteng accused his former boss of attempting to “stay relevant” by attending the Washington DC event.


The ex-Chancellor took particular aim at those who previously held office but have lost their Commons seats, suggesting they were trying to “borrow Trump’s image”.

“These aren’t people who are Trump all the way”, Kwarteng said, drawing a contrast with figures like Nigel Farage who he noted had genuinely backed Trump since 2016.

Advertisement
Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng

Kwasi Kwarteng hit out at his former ally

X / LIZ TRUSS / GB NEWS

Truss travelled to Washington DC ahead of Trump’s inauguration, posing for a photo wearing a “Make America Great Again” baseball cap.

Advertisement

The former prime minister posted on social media platform X: “In DC. The Donald Trump term can’t come soon enough. The West needs it.”

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Donald Trump and Melania Trump

Donald Trump became the 47th president of the United States

Reuters

The inauguration itself has faced last-minute changes due to expected freezing weather, significantly reducing attendance numbers.

Advertisement

While wealthy and influential figures are guaranteed seats at the event, it remains unclear whether Truss will be among those attending the ceremony in person.

Kwarteng specifically criticised Truss’s political transformation, noting her shift from being a Remainer to a Trump supporter.

“Liz Truss was a Remainer and has now morphed into a Brexit, Trump supporter”, he said on GB News.

GB News panel

Kwasi Kwarteng spoke to Martin Daubney on GB News

Advertisement

GB NEWS

He dismissed her Washington connections, stating: “She obviously has friends in Washington but trying to use this as a way of staying relevant I think is regrettable.”

The former Chancellor expressed particular disdain for ex-government members, “some of them Remainers, turning up to the inauguration”, adding bluntly: “Give me a break. These guys are trying to get in the limelight.”

Advertisement

Truss’s Washington appearance comes after she lost her parliamentary seat in the recent general election.

Her trip has sparked widespread mockery on social media, with critics drawing parallels between her appearance and Paddington Bear due to her red hat and blue coat combination.

The ridicule follows recent controversy where Truss sent a “cease and desist” letter to Keir Starmer over his comments about her crashing the economy.

The New European magazine commented: “Many people thought Liz Truss couldn’t embarrass herself further. But they seriously underestimated her on that front.”

Advertisement

Her 44-day tenure as Britain’s shortest-serving prime minister ended following the fallout from her disastrous mini-Budget.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Keir Starmer’s decision to blame Amazon for Axel Rudakubana failings is ‘puzzling’, Mendoza claims

Published

on

The head of a leading think tank has accused Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer of going down a “bizarre rabbit hole” of blame in his response to the Southport attack case.

Alan Mendoza, Executive Director of the Henry Jackson Society, told GB News he was “puzzled” by Starmer’s approach to the failings that led to Axel Rudakubana’s deadly rampage.

FULL STORY HERE.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump’s budget pick is famous for defying Congress. GOP senators want to confirm him anyway.

Published

on

Senate Republicans are eager to seat the man who could undercut their funding power.

As President Donald Trump boldly defies the will of Congress by issuing executive orders freezing billions of dollars in federal cash that lawmakers have approved in recent years, Senate Republicans are still speaking accolades of Russ Vought, the president’s pick for White House budget director and the man famous for withholding government money during Trump’s first administration.

Key committee chairs are predicting that the Senate will confirm Vought without issue to head the Office of Management and Budget again, even as some GOP senators raise concern about protecting Congress’ “power of the purse” — granted under Article I of the Constitution — from presidential overreach.

“I think all of us are going to vote for you,” Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham told Vought on Wednesday, as the nominee testified before the South Carolina Republican’s committee in his second public vetting this month.

Advertisement

“Bottom line is, I think you’re qualified for the job. I know why he picked you,” Graham said of Trump’s selection of Vought. “And again, we just had an election. And when you win, you get to pick people. And I’m glad he picked you.”

Loyally confirming Trump’s desired budget director amid the new president’s sweeping funding pause would immediately strengthen the White House’s ability to pick and choose what cash to spend, shirking the spending laws congressional Republicans have voted to enact and calling into question the soundness of any bills they clear in the future.

Notably, Vought would not promise Wednesday to avoid circumventing impoundment law, which is meant to block presidents from withholding money Congress has previously passed through the Congressional appropriations process.

Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) arrives for the confirmation hearing of Russell Vought, President Trump's nominee for director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), on Capitol Hill in Washington, on Jan. 22, 2025.

Federal watchdogs concluded that Vought and other Trump administration officials violated impoundment law several times during Trump’s first term, including the freezing of aid to Ukraine that helped fuel Trump’s impeachment in 2019.

Advertisement

But Vought said the executive orders Trump issued within hours of taking office Monday are simply “programmatic delays” or “pauses,” explaining they are meant “to ensure that the funding that is in place is consistent and moves in a direction along the lines of what the president ran on.”

While Vought vowed to “faithfully uphold the law” if confirmed, he noted that Trump disagrees with the Impoundment Control Act enacted more than 50 years ago to insulate the congressional appropriations process from executive branch meddling.

“The president ran on the notion that the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional. I agree with that,” Vought said, further insisting that “what the president has unveiled already are not impoundments.”

Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon, the Budget Committee’s top Democrat, told Vought on Wednesday he was “deeply disturbed” with his answers.

Advertisement

“Congress makes the law, not the president,” said Merkley. “The fact that you continue to advocate for this impoundment strategy, that is completely in violation of our Constitution.”

Under the far-reaching orders Trump issued after he was inaugurated on Monday, federal agencies are now being forced to pause funding from Democrats’ signature climate and spending law called the Inflation Reduction Act, as well as from the bipartisan infrastructure package Republicans helped enact in 2021.

Foreign assistance is also on hold for 90 days, including to Ukraine and Israel as the two U.S. allies are in the midst of wars.

Not every Republican is giving Vought a total free pass. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), the chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee — which also has jurisdiction over the OMB director nomination and held its own confirmation hearing with Vought last week — said he didn’t think a president should have the power to use government funding differently than how lawmakers have dictated in the bills they pass.

Advertisement

“The power of the purse is Congress,” Paul said during that hearing. “I think if we appropriate something for a cause, that’s where it’s supposed to go. And that will still be my position.”

Nonetheless, less than a week later, Paul led Republicans on his committee to approve Vought’s nomination, stating, “There is no doubt he will be swiftly confirmed.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

SAS veteran hits out at Labour over ‘imbecilic’ inheritance tax raid

Published

on

An SAS veteran has hit out at Labour’s decision to hit grieving families of military workers with inheritance tax from April 2027.

The money given to families of deceased Armed Forces members, called death in service payments, may be subject to a hefty cut after Labour MPs voted in favour of a raid.

READ THE FULL STORY

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Kemi Badenoch ‘wastes PMQs AGAIN’ after failing to quiz Starmer over Axel Rudakubana murders

Published

on

Kemi Badenoch has seemingly missed an opportunity to grill Sir Keir Starmer on the failings surrounding Axel Rudakubana’s horrific killings last summer.

The Prime Minister, who vowed not to leave a stone unturned in an inquiry into the Southport murders, might have expected Badenoch to take aim over a number of issues raised by other Conservative colleagues, including Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick.


But speaking in the House of Commons, Badenoch said: “I also know that the thoughts of many will be with the victims of the Southport killings.

“There are important questions to answer and I will return to those after the case is concluded.”

Advertisement
Kemi Badenoch

Badenoch missed an opportunity to grill Starmer on the failings surrounding Axel Rudakubana’s horrific killings last summer

PARLIAMENTLIVE.TV

Badenoch continued by instead opting to quiz Starmer on Labour’s education reforms.

Advertisement

Ahead of the Leader of the Opposition’s first intervention, the Prime Minister also addressed the Southport killings.

He said: “We will change the law so that the most serious offenders attend their sentencing hearings.”

In response to the exchange, Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice argued it was “unreal” that Badenoch had not probed Starmer on a topic other than education.

MORE ON KEMI BADENOCH:

Advertisement
Starmer

Starmer was pressed on Labour’s education reforms rather than the atrocities in Southport

PARLIAMENTLIVE.TV

He said: “Kemi wastes PMQs again. Should have led on Trump and shocking debt figures to challenge Starmer.”

Advertisement

While leader Nigel Farage prodded: “Not a single question on Southport from Kemi Badenoch at PMQs today.

“What is the point of the Tories?”

A friend of Badenoch later told GB News’ Political Editor Christopher Hope that she raised the economy last week and acknowledged the Southport killer at the top of her contribution to PMQs.

Richard Tice

Richard Tice warned that Kemi Badenoch had ‘wasted PMQs again’

Advertisement

PA

While another said there was “genuine anger” from Kemi and the wider party at what Labour is “doing to schools”.

“They’ve put some important stuff on safeguarding in the bill, but the bulk of it is reversing schools freedoms – rolling back academies, giving unions more control over who can be a teacher and reducing curriculum choice.”

Advertisement

Another Badenoch ally came to her defence after PMQs – Tory leadership runner-up Robert Jenrick, who said Sir Keir Starmer “had no answer” to the Leader of the Opposition’s questions – “because there are none”.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Number of Britons who believe migration is too high reaches greatest level on record as Starmer told to ‘get a grip’ on crisis

Published

on

The amount of Britons who think migration to the UK is too high has reached record levels, a damning new poll has found.

Analysis by pollsters at YouGov has revealed that 71 per cent of Britons now think too many people are arriving in the UK – the highest percentage since its records began in July 2019.


The data also shows that 63 per cent of Labour voters now think immigration is too high – also the largest percentage on record.

And voters for Sir Keir Starmer’s party appear not to be alone. The groups which have voiced fears at record levels include 25-64-year-olds, men, women, Conservative voters, Remain voters, and Britons from every region of the UK except Scotland and the North of England – which still poll at 68 and 69 per cent, respectively.

Advertisement
YouGov migration poll

71 per cent of Britons now believe immigration is too high

YOUGOV

The only group which didn’t show majority support for the view that migration is too high was 18-24-year-olds, at 44 per cent.

Advertisement

The data has sparked calls for Starmer and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper to act – led by Migration Watch UK chairman Alp Mehmet.

He told GB News: “Public concern about immigration is longstanding, and has now reverted to the levels we saw before the electorate were fooled into believing it was going to be controlled and reduced.

“We warned that was never going to happen with the ridiculously lax immigration system introduced after Brexit.

MORE ON BRITAIN’S MIGRATION CHAOS:

Advertisement
u200bSir Keir Starmer and Yvette Cooper

‘Sir Keir Starmer and Yvette Cooper would do well to regard this poll as another red flag and get a grip,’ Alp Mehmet warned

PA

“We also warned that failure to control immigration and reduce immigration would further erode trust in politicians and our political system.

Advertisement

“It gives me no satisfaction to say we were right.

“Sir Keir Starmer and Yvette Cooper would do well to regard this poll as another red flag and get a grip of both legal and illegal immigration.”

Migration under the former Conservative Government has been the subject of attacks from Starmer himself – he has accused the Tories of running “a one-nation experiment in open borders” and has claimed cutting migration “will only be done with a serious plan”.

Starmer Plan for Change

Migration under the former Conservative Government has been the subject of attacks from Starmer himself

Advertisement

PA

Setting out his five ‘milestones’ in Labour’s “Plan for Change” at the end of November, Starmer warned: “This happened by design, not accident.

“Policies were reformed deliberately to liberalise immigration.

Advertisement

“Brexit was used for that purpose… to turn Britain into a one-nation experiment in open borders. Global Britain – remember that slogan… That is what they meant.”

While the Home Office’s line is the same – Seema Malhotra, Minister for Migration and Citizenship, said: “Net migration quadrupled in the past five years and we have been clear that we will get the numbers down and restore order to our broken immigration system as part of our Plan for Change.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Labour told to ‘hang their heads in shame’ as Lee Anderson lashes out over Axel Rudakubana ‘cover-up’

Published

on

Reform UK MP Lee Anderson has accused Labour politicians of orchestrating a “cover-up” over the Southport attack, saying they should “hang their heads in shame”.

Speaking on GB News, Anderson claimed the public had suspected terror links from the start, while politicians at Westminster denied them.


He praised Nigel Farage for demanding immediate answers about the case last summer.

The MP suggested the riots in the North West could have been “nipped in the bud” if authorities had been more forthcoming with information.

Advertisement
Lee Anderson

Lee Anderson blasted politicians in a furious rant

GB NEWS

“The great British public deserve to know the truth and there has been a cover-up,” Anderson told GB News viewers.

Advertisement

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer yesterday admitted he had “withheld” information about Axel Rudakubana’s terrorist links but denied being part of a cover-up.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Axel RudakubanaAxel Rudakubana pleaded guilty to murdering three young girls in the Southport knife attack in July 2024PA

Speaking at an emergency press conference, he acknowledged being “kept up to date with the facts” by police and prosecutors.

The Prime Minister insisted revealing crucial details about the killer’s fascination with terrorism could have prejudiced his trial.

“It was not my personal decision to withhold this information. That is the law of the land and it is in place to protect the integrity of the system,” Starmer said.

Advertisement

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper backed this position, saying ministers could not ignore legal advice about contempt of court.

u200bLee Anderson spoke on GB News

Lee Anderson spoke on GB News

GB NEWS

Advertisement

The Crime Reporters Association (CRA) has complained to the Director of Public Prosecutions about the Crown Prosecution Service attempting to “gag” Merseyside Police.

The CRA said officers were instructed to “stay silent” about the case as riots broke out last summer.

According to the association, the CPS tried to prevent officers from revealing details about Rudakubana’s background, which might have prevented false rumours fuelling unrest.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said the failure to be transparent created a vacuum where dangerous misinformation took hold online.

Advertisement

“There could have been more openness and transparency … without prejudicing the trial,” Philp said.

Anderson drew direct comparisons to previous terror incidents, claiming there was a double standard in how information was handled.

“Jo Cox we had that instant and PC Palmer. These were all incidents that were stated as terror-related within 24 hours and it didn’t influence proceedings,” he told GB News.

The Reform UK MP accused Westminster politicians of hypocrisy in their approach to the Southport case.

Advertisement

His comments came as Starmer warned that Britain now faces new threats from “loners and misfits” radicalised by online violence, different from traditional organised terrorist groups.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Britain now faces a ‘ticking time bomb,’ experts warn

Published

on

2025 is Britain’s last chance to avoid a long-term migration catastrophe of Boris Johnson’s making, a leading think tank has warned.

Back in March 2021, Boris Johnson’s Home Secretary Priti Patel introduced the “New Plan for Immigration” to the Commons.


A few months later, the Office for National Statistics announced that 332,000 non-EU migrants had arrived in Britain between June 2020 and June of that year.

A few years later, 1,034,000 non-EU migrants arrived in Britain over the same June-to-June period. A more than 200 per cent increase.

Advertisement
Boriswave data

Damning data shows a sharp spike in non-EU migration immediately after Johnson and Patel’s ‘new plan’

UK GOVERNMENT

Patel had hailed what she called a “significant overhaul of our asylum system”. It was “new, comprehensive, fair, but firm”.

Advertisement

She had promised “new rules to stop unscrupulous people posing as children”, a beefed-up Border Force, and “rapid removals” of “those with no right to be here in the UK”.

With Brexit having been delivered, and EU free movement no longer foisted upon the UK, Westminster could now look further afield. At the time, that was Hong Kong, as dissidents to Xi Jinping’s regime found themselves unexpectedly crushed under China’s boot in the former British dependent territory.

Leaving the EU would let Britain be “immigration liberals”, wrote James Forsythe, future Political Secretary to future Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, with Hongkongers in mind.

He had written that the issue on the minds of many Brexit-backers “was control, not immigration levels, per se”.

Advertisement

READ MORE ON BRITAIN’S MIGRATION CHAOS:

James Forsythe

Leaving the EU would let Britain be ‘immigration liberals’, wrote James Forsythe

GETTY/THE TIMES

Advertisement

Then, in May 2022 – and midway through an unprecedented surge in arrivals from outside the EU – the Johnson Government’s interpretation of the Australian ‘points-based system’ was accused of having “significantly weakened control” over Britain’s borders.

Those numbers would keep climbing until 2024, the ONS says, and they’re now expected to drop.

That surge has been branded by some as the “Boriswave” – a term which found its origins on social media, and has since made its way to think tanks and political parties alike. On December 29, Reform UK officially adopted the term in a scathing attack on Johnson’s non-European migration surge.

Proponents of the term will argue Johnson and his Government directly oversaw – and allowed the conditions for – millions of non-EU nationals to come to Britain.

Advertisement

And now, with Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) open to most of those who arrived via the Work or Family visa route after five years, Britain faces a “ticking clock“.

That’s the warning of Sam Bidwell, of the Adam Smith Institute, who calls for an immediate reform of ILR rules to “limit the long-term harms of the so-called ‘Boriswave’”, which will start being handed ILR for life from early 2026.

Boris Johnson and Priti Patel

The surge in non-EU migration has been branded by some as the ‘Boriswave’

Advertisement

PA

That will give the “Boriswave” the right to taxpayer-funded state benefits, the ability to use the NHS free-of-charge, and the chance to bring in family members – a “cascade of dependents”, as Bidwell put it.

Britain’s system “was not designed to cope with long-term settlement at such scale and pace,” he warns.

Even if Labour manages to deliver 1.5 million new homes between now and 2029, the scale of the non-EU migration wave is such that that tally could be wiped out entirely.

Advertisement

If such a large amount of people are, in fact, here to stay, the consequences could be dire.

Bidwell himself butted heads with ex-Spectator editor Fraser Nelson just days ago after the latter penned an article in The Telegraph headlined: “Britain’s integration miracle is a beacon of hope amid instability.”

Nelson had argued that Britishness – part of which the “Boriswave” could soon comprise – is “a set of values that anyone can adopt”.

But under Johnson and Patel’s “new plan”, the UK has imported millions of people who, as Bidwell says, are “less culturally compatible” than the EU migrants who came before.

Advertisement

He points to damning statistics on integration, like how 52 per cent of British Muslims would support making it illegal to depict the Prophet Mohammed, or how Pakistanis and Bangladeshis in the UK are less employed and take up more social housing than national averages.

Bidwell also casts off “oft-cited figures about Indian high-earners” as a “misrepresentative statistical fudge” directly due to the “Boriswave”.

Thanks to the recent influx of Indian nationals (240,000 in the last year alone, according to the ONS), the median Indian (aged 22-40) now earns less than the national average.

The difficulty of integration may not be so obvious to “the Westminster bubble”, as Reform UK MP Rupert Lowe pointed out on social media.

Advertisement

For them, “integration means cheap labour and exotic food”, but “out in proper Britain, integration has largely not worked”, he says.

“On such a vast scale, it has been an undeniable failure.”

Bidwell’s ILR plans were written before the reemergence of Britain’s grooming gangs scandal – which has thrust mass migration into the spotlight once again.

Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick warned that some of those who have migrated to the UK in recent years have “backward, frankly medieval attitudes to women” – adding that “we have to be very careful about who is coming into this country”.

Advertisement
Rupert Lowe

‘Integration has largely not worked… it has been an undeniable failure,’ Rupert Lowe has warned

GETTY

But Jenrick was Rishi Sunak’s Immigration Minister for more than a year – and oversaw part of the “Boriswave”.

The Tory leadership runner-up shifted from campaigning for Remain in 2016 to his new role as a migration hardliner – which one former Minister blamed on his stint in the Home Office.

Before that, “he was seen as sensible, pragmatic and fairly centrist,” a former Minister told the i last summer.

Advertisement

“He was very good as the Communities Secretary, but he seems to have been radicalised by his time in the Home Office,” they added.

That’s the same Home Office which Sam Bidwell has previously accused of falling victim to “performative empathy“.

Jenrick has been vocal on mass immigration post-leadership bid – sparking fury from ex-Johnson adviser Samuel Kasumu, who claimed to the BBC that he could be “the most divisive person in our political history” and “has the potential to incite hatred in ways that I have never seen”.

But he issued a stark warning last November. “Some parts of our country are unrecognisable from 30 years ago,” Jenrick said.

Advertisement

And, of course, there’s the fiscal impact too.

Robert Jenrick

Robert Jenrick was ‘radicalised by his time in the Home Office’, one former Minister told the i

PA

“According to figures produced by the OBR, the average ‘low-wage migrant worker’ will cost the British taxpayer £465,000 by the time they reach 81 years of age,” Bidwell’s policy recommendation warns.

“According to analysis conducted by Karl Williams, from the Centre for Policy Studies, just 5 per cent of all visas in 2022-23 were given to high-skilled migrants who are likely to be net contributors,” he adds.

Advertisement

Pockets of social media aside, Johnson has largely evaded criticism for overseeing the introduction of so many fiscally harmful and culturally “incompatible” migrants to Britain.

Asked why, Bidwell told GB News: “He still carries a lot of capital with a certain sort of Brexit voter… because he was the face of Vote Leave.

“He has managed to escape scrutiny because many of those voters – particularly older voters in that cohort – will see him as the man who got Brexit done.”

Boris Johnson

Johnson has escaped scrutiny because voters ‘see him as the man who got Brexit done’

Advertisement

PA

The former PM now “enjoys a kind of comfortable martyrdom” despite the “Boriswave” because “one might argue that he was arguing for an anti-immigration cause”, he added.

Integrating the “wave” will be “a lengthy and difficult process”, Bidwell says.

Advertisement

The solution? Triple the ILR threshold to 15 years.

Britain should put safeguards in place to ensure that “high-quality, compatible” migrants from countries such as the US, Australia, and Canada continue coming to Britain.

And if Labour doesn’t have the mettle, a future Government could one day revoke ILR status from existing holders by amending Section 76 of the Nationality, Immigration, and Asylum Act 2002.

Such a move would doubtless prove unpalatable to the current Government, despite its promises to stem the flow of migration – and even then, only illegal migration.

Advertisement

As Bidwell says, “it seems unlikely” that Labour would do such a thing.

“However”, he adds, “this fact alone does not mean that the British people need to live with the mistakes of the past few years for decades to come”.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

‘We can do it the easy way or the hard way!’

Published

on

Donald Trump has issued a fresh ultimatum to Vladimir Putin today in a bid to bring the Ukraine war to a close.

The new US President, in a direct warning to his Russian counterpart, said if a deal couldn’t be reached over the “ridiculous” invasion of Ukraine, he would be left with “no choice” but to slap Russia with a series of “taxes, tariffs and sanctions”.


Writing on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump said: “I’m not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin – and this despite the Radical left’s Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX.

“We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process.

Advertisement
Trump and Putin

Donald Trump has issued a fresh ultimatum to Vladimir Putin over the Ukraine war

REUTERS

“All of that being said, I’m going to do Russia – whose economy is failing – and president Putin, a very big favour.

Advertisement

“Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous war! IT’S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE.

“If we don’t make a ‘deal’, and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of taxes, tariffs, and sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries.

“Let’s get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with!

LATEST ON DONALD TRUMP AND VLADIMIR PUTIN:

Advertisement
Putin

‘Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous war! IT’S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE,’ Trump warned

REUTERS

“We can do it the easy way, or the hard way – and the easy way is always better.

Advertisement

“It’s time to ‘MAKE A DEAL’. NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!”

In response to the President-elect’s ultimatum, Russia’s deputy envoy to the United Nations Dmitry Polyanskiy said it was “not merely a question of ending the war”, rather “the question of addressing root causes of the Ukrainian crisis”.

In a swipe at Barack Obama, he added: “So we have to see what does the ‘deal’ mean in President Trump’s understanding.

“He is not responsible for what the US has been doing in Ukraine since 2014, making it ‘anti-Russia’ and preparing for the war with us, but it is in his power now to stop this malicious policy.”

Advertisement
Trump

In the run-up to his historic return to the White House, Trump had pledged to bring the war to a swift end

REUTERS

In the run-up to his historic return to the White House, Trump had pledged to bring the war to a swift end – in 2023, he told CNN: “If I’m president, I will have that war settled in one day… 24 hours.”

And on the campaign trail, he had suggested he could bring about peace in the interim period between winning re-election and officially returning to office.

“That is a war that’s dying to be settled. I will get it settled before I even become President.

Advertisement

“If I win, when I’m President-elect, and what I’ll do is I’ll speak to one, I’ll speak to the other, I’ll get them together,” he vowed in a debate with Kamala Harris.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025 WordupNews