OK England....'Cultural Nationalism'...its a phrase you won't be that familiar with. Its not that PC, its not that liberal...and it will have the multi-culturalists sweating...but as someone one put it, 'its the only nationalism worth having'. You have allowed your culture to be swallowed in the name of economic expansion. The whole country has become Liverpool street station, with hordes of migrants arriving and increasing numbers of dis-illusioned Brits selling up. You have sold your social cohesion, your communities, your Country for a few bob. Great Britain has ceased to exist and been replaced by a United Kingdom. A United Kingdom of every nationality, with split allegiances and disparate desires. As we used to say when we were kids...'every man for himself'!!!!!

Simon, Belfast,

Reza says many national groups band together and do not look beyond their own cultural practices. Are we offering them analternative? If people are encouraged to come here because of an 'ecconomic benefit' and no attempt is made to break down barriers then this ghetto mentality will prevail - read the Cantel report - parrallel lives. There are many ways to prepare a host community from simple questions to services as to how they will cope with different language groups, through to strategic planning. Going out to talk to tennants associations and allowing people from different groups and backgrounds to meet and discuss things. A whole range of approaches can make things better/easier and introduce people into the cultural norms of the UK, because newcomers must change too. In history, what 'wall' was ever constructed, concrete or otherwise, that made things better? There are just too many people in the world to keep them stacked up at the gate and think things will be ok

Ewan Roberts, Liverpool, Merseyside

Reza, I am fairly fed up of someone who is, without being rude, obviously foreign or 2nd or 3rd generation foreign, wanting us to shut our borders. If the last 60 years of immigration had been banned, aside from the ancient mass imigration, neither of us would be here (I am 1/4 Polish from immigration after WWII).

Ben, York,

Tell me Ewan Roberts, what “preparation” would you suggest our “host communities” make to assist “social integration” when “welcoming” those cultural practises such as international arranged marriages?

Even in the second and third generation, a high proportion of immigrants from certain countries enter arranged marriages with spouses from their county of origin. In the 2001 Census nearly ½ of ethnic Indian and 3/4 of ethnic Pakistani and Bangladeshi children aged 0-4 had a mother born in her country of origin. 68% of all children born in Tower Hamlets are born to foreign mothers.

That’s a lot of babies born into households where English is not the first (or even spoken) language. Children with few or no cultural links to their country of birth. According to the BBC we currently have 448 000 children who go to primary school unable to speak English.

Surely ‘fetching-marriages’ and not “the way we introduce and welcome people into our societies” is the main factor in the formation of ghettoes in Britain.

Reza Mirsadeghi, London, UK

Immigration is a force for good. It makes life more interesting and offers everyone more opportunities. The way it is perceived is the problem. Do Spanish communities seeing hundreds of elderly UK ex pats settle in their towns view them as a bonus, or the destruction of a way of life. What attempt is made to welcome these British ecconomic migrants seeking a better way of life - Spanish lessons, cultural evenings out, conversation clubs?
Contrast this with an Asylum Seeker fleeing persecution and rape in the DRC - what are they offered here: poor housing, disbelief. English language teaching is being withdrawn from September. Of these 2 categories who has the most need for integration? They may be at opposite ends of a spectrum, but ultimately it is the preparation of host communities and the way we introduce and welcome people into our societies which determines whether or not social integration takes place and whether we live in well balanced communities, not border controls.

Ewan Roberts, Meols, Merseyside

There are two separate issues here: A) is immigration good or bad? and B) Can we stop it anyway?
A) Immigration is good economically, but may be bad socially. The truth is, the more immigrants differ culturally and religiously from the native population, the harder it is for them to integrate, and the more grief it causes to everyone. The TUC may have been wrong about the Jews, but can we say, hand on heart, that those who warned about muslim immigration were wrong to suggest there'd be trouble? A lot of people are in denial about this. In contrast, I worry far less about the Eastern Europeans. They blend in more easily and many will return home eventually, provided their home countries continue developing. They're similar to Spaniards who emigrated to Germany in the sixties and later all went back home.
B) Maybe it is largely unstoppable, and filtering entrants by religious/cultural compatibility is so politically incorrect it's off the scale.
So integrate, integrate, integrate.

David Pritchard, Madrid, Spain

Perhaps one reason that so many who write in to complain about immigration are located overseas is that they felt obliged to vote with their feet, in part because the chattering classes have ignored the ensuing problems for decades.

This correspondent is located in the UK less than 15 miles from some of the bombers who wreaked carnage on London's transport system. According to the security services another 2,000+ people are suspected of plotting similar activities. They are mostly immigrants, or the children of immigrants.

While accepting that Mr Aaronovitch may have some personal experience of immigration, direct or indirect, he does not seem to have ventured into the Muslim ghettoes and "no-go" areas (for whites) where his liberal stance is viewed with contempt and hatred, like most of western culture.

Immigration is turning a homogenous society into the Balkans. Our children will spend the rest of their lives experiencing the downside of it, unless they emigrate.

Tony G, Harrogate, UK

There are two separate issues here: A) is immigration good or bad? and B) Can we stop it anyway?
A) Immigration is good economically, but may be bad socially. The truth is, the more immigrants differ culturally and religiously from the native population, the harder it is for them to integrate, and the more grief it causes to everyone. The TUC may have been wrong about the Jews, but can we say, hand on heart, that those who warned about muslim immigration were wrong to suggest there'd be trouble? A lot of people are in denial about this. In contrast, I worry far less about the Eastern Europeans. They blend in more easily and many will return home eventually, provided their home countries continue developing. They're similar to Spaniards who emigrated to Germany in the sixties and later all went back home.
B) Maybe it is largely unstoppable, and filtering entrants by religious/cultural compatibility is so politically incorrect it's off the scale.
So: integrate, integrate, integrate.

David Pritchard, Madrid, Spain

The current wave of immigration is unprecedented in size and in cultural separation from the victim country. Working class British communities are being ethnically cleansed by the onslaught. This fact is not obvious to the middle classes, who will only encounter the small minority of well adjusted immigrants in their everyday life, and are easily persuaded that the old British working class was far too vulgar, conservative, and unpleasant to worry about. Since the large ethnic ghettos that now dominate most of our biggest cities tend to foster high feelings of suspicion and hatred of native Britons, I feel that violent and bloody civil war is inescapable with our current policies. I cnnot blame those who leave the country, having realized that.

Rob Spear, London, UK

Ben of London: Perhaps you want to blame immigrants for your lack of ability to articulate your thoughts??? Perhaps you could even blame immigrants for your lack of logic??

Chantel, UK,

You can no more stop immigration than stop the waves landing on a beach.

John, Scotland,

Oh dear, more liberal fundamentalism of 'all cultures are equally virtuous'. They are not. Honour killings are not Religious texts ring fenced from reasoned critical thought are dangerous, especially when containing incitement to violence. Polygamy is bad news for women. Tribalism is not to be encouraged. Head in the sand liberal relativism is fracturing this nation into a jungle of competing groups, armed with set of rights used against each other. The point is not to keep out foreigners so much as to compel incomers to genuinely take up western culture, as an absolute condition of joining. David Willetts would be adopting a far more rational educational policy if he had said Tories would not allow any more faith schools, necessarily fostering apartheid and division. Michele, UK, should go to Somalia, Pakistan, Saudi and enjoy her family life is such cultures there, cheerio Michele!

Canute, Abingdon, UK

Chantel, UK

Perhaps you should stop putting words in my mouth and try to understand my points.

They weren't complicated, but you seem to have misunderstood completely.

Ben, London,

Why is immigration still nationalised?

Let the Government cease to give permission to anyone to enter this country.

Let any 10 citizens be able to get together and sponsor any one person they choose, to enter, live, work, be supported by the state if necessary (with recourse to the sponsors), and ultimately become citizens themselves if they wish.

Everyone who comes in will thus have at least 10 people who care whether they succeed or starve. And given the widespread generosity of the British people, no-one who needs or deserves to come in will be refused.

The bishops can stop campaigning for governments to spend other people's money and start encouraging their flocks to direct, un-State-sponsored, acts of love and charity.

Jamie Bogle, London,

It amazes me how intelligent people like DA seem to have the total abscence of common sense,may I put it to you in simple terms and as I freely admit I am not a Intelligent person as you so If someone is insulting your intelligence as I am please reply on this comment board to tell me where I am wrong,we can all agree that your wish of ever rising immigration as a statistic on a graph is ever rising upward and houses must be built for them,the rescources to supply houses with water,gas,somewhere to bury the rubbish etc,on a graph is going one way downwards and at some point must meet,resulting in the collapse of a law abiding,liberal western democracy,this policy is insane and evil .

sid, ashford,

r , axbridge, england: "Palestine was at one time predominantly Arab with a small Jewish population until Britian decided to give it to the Jews. Now Arabs are foreigners (/20/80) in their own land.Just like Brits in Brixton.That's immigration"

Well, "R" - Britain opted out of voting for the creation of the state of Israel, largely ignoring pogroms inflicted on the Jewish population during its mandate at the behest of the Mufti of Jerusalem, allied with the Third Reich. Today there are 22 Arab countries and one very small Jewish one comprising 1% of the middle east that has to constantly fight for existance. More Jews were cleaned from these 22 countries than Arabs fled Palestine.

The Indian communities in Britain settles in, the Chinese communities in Britain settles in, The Greek communities in Britain settles in. Can you think of a certain minority that don't seem to settle in well, "J"?

I'll give you a clue - It's not Hindus, Jews, Christians, Buddists or Sikhs.

Dan, Hampton, UK

There are many aspects to the issue of immigration but just two points:

"Immigrants are taking jobs that a native Briton could have taken" -- True, but the fact is native Britons did NOT take these jobs. If they 'could have' but didn't do so, why shouldn't anyone else take the post? Why should these jobs be 'reserved' for certain people who wouldn't otherwise make an effort to take them?

"Immigrants claim our benefits" -- Benefits shouldn't be available to the native either. Otherwise the implication is that homegrown sponge is more deserving than those who have immigrated.

Katie, London,

Did you votefor Thatcher?
Do you believe in the Free market?

If you can answer yes to one of them then you are living in the Britain that you want(ed)! Immigration into Britain only works because we are a free market economy, and one that has a long tradition of accepting migrants. If the jobs aren't here then most of the Eastern Europeans would go home. Besides funny how they can find employment when we still have a million on the dole! Why can't we swop one immigrant for one long term unemployed. After all it probably won't matter what daytime telly they watch, just as long as they have one!

John, London,

To S Delaney
You have to know this country well enough to suss how the power structures here operate, whether the political or the economic domain and in the latter, where the ethnic Chinese predominates. If the govt. have not put in place affirmative action policies for the indigenes here, this country would not have attained the progress and peaceful race relations that it now, more or less, enjoys. Here you can hear of stories like how, for eg. when a non-Chinese who is able to speak Mandarin (but not necessarily write) responds to a certain advert for a job in a Chinese-owned firm (and where the advert explicitly states that the ability to speak Mandarin is a requisite for the job) he or she would then be asked at the interview whether they are also able to WRITE Mandarin -- an impossible desideratum to fulfil on the spot! Subtle discrimination? Can discrimination work both ways? Admittedly, it might have been the norm long ago and is now the exception rather than the rule

SD Goh, PJ, MALAYSIA

You can live and work in any other EU country. You wanted a "Free market", you got it. So get used to it and move on. Either compete with China, India and the US or watch a gradual decline in your living standards.

Jon Kingsbury, Southampton, UK

There is already a perfectly good immigration system in place. People can come legally to this country as a spouse of a British citizen (as I have done), on a student visa, on a fiance visa (without rights to work), on an Highly Skilled Migrant Program visa which uses a points based system, as a retired person of independent means, or as an asylum seeker.

As a spouse I have had to prove sufficient funds and income to support myself without recourse to public funds twice. Once for the original visa (valid for 2 years) and again after 2 years for the Indefinite Leave to Remain Visa.

I have paid over £1,000 in fees for my legal entry. I have a passport with this document affixed permanently in it. Why then, should I have to pay for a separate ID card in addition tto this and my British driving license (for which I also had to show proof of legal immigration)?

It's easy to enforce the rules now, just ask to see the passport with valid visa prior to employment, NHS usage, etc.

Laura Middle, Hexham, Northumberland

Idiocy. Unchecked immigration equals Brownian motion of people. Soon enough, everything equalises - income, prospects, cultures... if that's what you want, listen to this journalist. If you want to haev a distinguishable English and/or British (or Scottish, or Welsh) culture, if you want to have a sense of control over your society (whether that be keeping sharia or apartheid out) then ignore the pompous ramblings of this jorunalist. Remember: Aaronovitch has one interest - column inches. Nothing else matters to journalists. Don't be fooled by his pseudo-moralising.

Nick, Rotherham, UK

Personally I wish that the UK would fill up with immigrants almost entirely. Then I wouldn't have to emigrate to live amongst polite, hard working, community spirited individuals.

The true 'ethnic' British folk seem to consist of selfish, rude, drunkards who encourage lazy work shy attitudes and have zero customer facing skills

It is usual in the UK to be ripped off by a Brit and then have them act in a surly manner as if to say that we should be grateful for the experience.

The most benefit scrounging nation in the world is the UK - no wonder they winge about others coming over and trying to get benefits, they are judging them by what they would be doing in their place.

My family will be leaving ASAP and might return when the British 'character' has been well and truly demolished. It might be a fit place for civilized people by then.

Michele, UK,

Immigration is an awfully complex issue but tends to be discussed mainly by people who do not understand it. This needs to change.

First is the manner in which people discuss immigration as an umbrella term to describe anyone coming into the country. The variation in contribution between immigrants to the United Kingdom in any given year is similar to the difference in height between Everest and the Mariana Trench. To group all immigrants together is to begin conversation on the issue in a very foolish manner.

Mr. Aaronovitch is correct in pointing out the hypocrisy of many Brits in complaining about immigration. To complain that immigrants are taking jobs in the UK and then to move to another country and take the jobs there is obviously absurd.

But those who complain are also right. While there is a lot of good immigation (and I have little doubt it is true that the net effect is positive, something many people cannot grasp), there is a lot of bad. That needs to stop

Abioye A Oyetunji, London, UK

To Ben of London: How precisely is any immigrant biting the hand that feeds them, when that hand happens to be the one that works for a living? Your argument is highly illogical as it almost implies that immigrants go about biting their own hands.....If you earn your own money, pay your bills, pay your taxes and abide by the law, how exactly are you biting your own hand by claiming that those who don't work even though they could if they wanted to are lazy? Perhaps you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how one earns a living? Perhaps you think immigrants should bow and scrape as well as paying taxes and contributing to society?

PS Perhaps you should also do some research into the amount of immigrants that own their own companies and create employment in this country?

Chantel, UK,

Just out of interest, would the author of this piece have any probems with a row of Polish girls at a bar who are short, dumpy, dark-haired with acne, with attitude? Is the premise the same in this situation? Does he feel quite so receptive?

C. Murphy, Montreal, Canada

Question for David:

Should Israel open its Borders to all who wish to enter?

I would like an answer please.

Also is there any reason that you can see why the Isle of man should not open its borders to anyone who wishes to arrive there?

Ben, London,

It is in the interest of the middle classes, the rich and business to bring in immigrants. If things go wrong, they can protect themselves. The ordinary people have to stay.
The major consequence of immigration and a sad fact, is that the poor will remain poor because they are being under-cut by immigrants. It keeps them in their place.

These elite people have now introduced a new buzz phrase, I now live in a multi-cultural, multi-lingual society. This means that English does not have to be the language of this country. This is a recipe for social unrest.

Leo, Birmingham, England

Has anyone else noticed how the lefties and many 'immigrants' always refer to the indigenous population as 'LAZY'? Talk about bite the hand that feeds you!!

This attitude is

Insulting and Inflammatory.

Ben, London,

"Governments – except for genocidal ones – can no longer control demographic change. " If by this you mean that governments cannot control immigration, what you you mean is that they lack the will so to do or else they are just incompetent. Both failings probably apply to the British government.

There is an assumption here that all immigrants are the same - an extrapolation of Leftist ideas about equality which is absurd. Given a choice between 1,000 Somali refugees and 1,000 Polish blondes, most British subjects would see that the latter would integrate into British society with a much easier felicity - and facility. Yes, I do live abroad. This does not affect my arguments.

Gervas Douglas, Andorra la Vella,

I'm a 2nd gen Jewish Pole and this country gave people like me( and David) as escape route and I am eternally grateful for that. So it is difficult for me to say - no immigration - yet when I go to London, I know something has to be done about it. It may all shake down when our economic bubble bursts but in the meantime, the infrastructure of this country is in danger. Many East Euros are actively recruited by agencies/companies who do not care who will look after their workers when they are sick. It's not racist to ask questions.

Louise, Manchester,

"My concerns were for the situations these people found themselves in and the knock-on effect on local communities.

DavidBruno, Brussels, "

I lived in Portugal for 15 years until 2005 and believe me there was no knock-on effect on the "local communities" caused by Eastern Europeans. They are friendly and hard-working immigrants who make a valuable contribution to the economy. And no they don't claim benefits and there are no housing shortages. And schools have no problem in absorbing Eastern European children as they are as hard-working as their parents.

danny, Kettering,

Palestine was at one time predominantly Arab with a small Jewish population until Britian decided to give it to the Jews. Now Arabs are foreigners (/20/80) in their own land.Just like Brits in Brixton.That's immigration

r , axbridge, england

David Leslie from Perth – Scotland: You pay tax and get benefits? Well actually no... you pay tax and you receive the services you have PAID for. The NHS, rail service, police and fire service (please note the word 'service') are all things Gino CONTRIBUTES to... they are not benefits, they are services PAID for.

Chantel, UK,

the rich get richer by this cheap labour.meanwhile someone like me who is educated to gcse level only(seven at c or above)find is ever more difficult and i am earning less now than i was ten years ago.the agency i am with at the moment asked what wage i was looking for.when i said six pounds an hour she said this was the top end of the scale and would i take national minimum.those who are in favour of such cheap labour usually have good jobs that will never be threatened by this issue and are just pleased they can get their car cleaned by hand inside and out for £3.00!

nat, leicester, uk

I am told that immigration is good for me.
I am told that the roads are over-crowded and that I must pay to use them, the answer, bring in more immigrants.
I am told there is a water shortage, the answer bring, in more immigrants
I am told that global warming will shrink the land mass, the answer, bring in more immigrants.
I am told….. the answer,, bring in more immigrants.
I am told we have to build more homes, 100,000, the answer, bring in more immigrants.

The latter is interesting, where are all the millions of immigrants we have brought in over the past years living.
Sorry, I forgot, all the immigrants go home each night.

Dave, Manchester, England

I totalli disagree with DA. Unlimited migration might be a solution in truly communist world without ineguality and injustice. In our modern world people earn a few dollars in Africa and of course they want better life in prosperous Europe. If we open our borders, the flow of migrants would shake our main values. Migration of blonde workers from Eastern Europe isn't a problem. The real problem is UK's growing Muslim population. Their negation of our basic values - such as tolerance, freedom of thought, freedom of press and so on - really endangers the very existence of UK. It's just silly to deny it. I told to some Muslim migrants in France, they totally deny basic French and European values, they hate French flag, French traditions, French anthem, they consider all French people as racist colonisators. I think many Muslim migrants in UK share this opinion with their French counterparts.

Ilya, St. Petersburg, Russia

The concept of allowing population to grow exponentially in an already very densely populated island is fundamentally absurd. The debate should not be about xenophobia or protecting our culture (which is always changing anyway), it should be about whether we have the space and resources to build housing, industry and transport infrastructure for an ever expanding population on a finite amount of land. Try buying a decent sized house in the South East or take a commuter train into London ... you know what I'm talking about, we're running out of space and it's making our lives worse.

Stephen Grindle, London, UK

"Better that we know who is in the country."

You think we do?!

Martin , Hereford, England

There is no fear of Stalinism in this country as Machiavellism has always had pride of place. Indeed I assess that as what you seem to be preferring. The recent policy on immigration has been extremely deceitful and deliberately confused for that reason. The angle of political persecution can easily be seen to be just an excuse for something else, because political persecution hasn’t suddenly arisen during the last 10 to 15 years. It’s been around a long time and was arguably far worse 40 years ago. The employment excuse is equally contrived, because you solve that, as has always been the case in the past especially with the Commonwealth, by work permits. Planned immigration by quota is easy and honest, but it does make it difficult to conceal ulterior motives if you have them.

Henry Percy, London, UK

"I wish they could come in greater number and stay longer, maybe then we could re-Europeanize and re-Christianize the UK."

Hear hear!

It is long overdue that we recognised the value of the native culture and religion - and protected them.

Martin , Hereford, England

Surely the fact is that this country is far more densely populated than countries such as France, Germany, Australia etc. Politicians go on about "anthropogenic global warming"; haven't they heard of the biosphere?

Gerry, exeter, england devon

To Mr Goh of Malaysia:

Sir, you are being disingenuous. Malaysia not only strictly protects jobs for the indigenous population (foreigners are only allowed to take jobs that cannot be filled at first by a Malaysian), they are also very careful to ensure that Malays are proportionally represented in the job market, regardless of whether a Chinese or Indian Malaysian is better qualified for a particular position.

People in glass houses.......

S.Delaney, London,

There is no necessary inconsistency between being British - as I am - and living abroad - as I do - and believing in carefully controlled and monitored immigration. When I moved to Portugal in 1989, there was still very careful registration & monitoring of immigrants into Portugal. By the late 1990s, a shortage of construction workers for huge construction projects led the then Socialist government to allow 300,000 construction workers from parts of Eastern Europe (inc some ex-Soviet Republics) to enter the country in one year (note: in a country of 10 million people, this is a 3% increase of the population - the UK equivalent would be just under 2 million people). This resulted in a large pool of exploited labour who - like many immigrants in the British agricultural sector - are paid below the minimum wage in sometimes dangerous conditions. My concerns were for the situations these people found themselves in and the knock-on effect on local communities.

DavidBruno, Brussels,

There indeed is a problem in the UK with uncontrolled immigration, however to single out hard-working Eastern Europeans who are willing to put in long hours and sweat it out is unfair.

I work in Banking and have met many 'native' English business owners (hotels, builders, restaurants etc) who prefer to hire Poles over young locals, simply because their work ethic is so much greater. It has little or nothing to do with paying them less.

What also concerns me is that communities in the UK that have been around for awhile now such as the Hindu and Sikh communities are incredibly successful and hard-working. (Just check out the National Statistics figures for academic achievement) Their parents worked tirelessly in their own businesses and their children are the doctors, dentists, accountants and engineers today. It is sad that they are lumped together under the umbrella term 'Ásians' whenever there is trouble and come under the same suspicion.

Neel , London, UK

Imigration since year dot is what makes Britain GREAT.

Bill Bird, Wallasey, Wirral

"You cannot emigrate to another Western country and claim housing, benefits and free medical care when you get there."

You can claim housing and free medical care (when the country is in the EU). But you do need a job. I can't even go back to my own home country without a job.

Thing is, people who come from the rich European countries have no reason to move here to get benefits. Benefits in their own countries are MUCH higher, so why go to the UK? People who come from the poorer European countries are not entitled to benefits.

In addition, illegal immigrants can't claim benefits.

I'm trying to figure out who these immigrants are that supposedly come to the UK to claim benefits? I can't think of any.

starling, Lancaster,

avid
after Tony Blaire goes you want to put the ration card insated of the ATM and the smart cards that show the if you have HIV.
Tell me why the rationing stroycomes here. Brown was the cashier and tightened the ration. To me all this is magic in the UK. New partynew ratin cards. Strange.

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD , Dar-Es-Salaam, Tanzania

And your point is...? By undermining a distinct British identity and at the same time having no idea how many people come here to settle, Blair has sown the seeds for friction and real trouble. When you talk of Enoch you mention Commonwealth immigration, maybe all your points are disingenuous. Such as, why control how many people are here? Well, sustainability and social pressure are two reasons. The question though is not whether they should be here or not, it is why they come. They come for the welfare benefits the soft headed, no planning left-liberals drench them with on arrival. They are handed a wad of 'rights' by Cherie and co but the balancing responsibilities would be nasty of us to ask for. It is the absence of Leadership under Labour that brings us to this point.

EyeSee, MK,

Between May 2004 and Dec 2006, 600,000 immigrants came into the UK from Eastern Europe. During that period, nearly 600,000 UK nationals became unemployed and unemployment rose by that amount. During the same period, the economy expanded and some 600,000 new jobs were created. So when the natives (UK nationals and especially the 600,000 who were made unemployed) grumble "bleeding foreigners took our jobs" are they right. Go figure.

Peter Jones, London, UK

Hmmm. Problems, problems. I'm an immigrant twice over - half Lithuanian and half Irish, and to cap it all, I was born in Bradford. You can't get more "foreign" than that!

I fully accept the fact, but am mystified by the denial of M. Brent, of Portsmouth, that the English themselves were once immigrants. There is still a district in Germany (roughly equivalent to an English county) called "Sachsen" - i.e. "Saxony" in English. The "Angles" were also German. Dig into the history of the German langauge, and you find that the word means "spearman". Prior to the Norman invasion, the English language itself was a purely Germanic langauge. After the Norman invasion, the "super-structure" of the language became French.

Throw out "immigration" from these islands, and you throw out the English language itself.

Edmund Burke, Kingston upon Thames, England

Common sense as usual from David. How on earth a policy of limiting the numbers coming to Britain to a (presumably) annual quota would actually work in practice, who would explain the situation, and how, to the first people in the queue after the gate was slammed shut for that year, I can't possibly imagine.

Good conduct and no recourse to public funds should be the simple criteria for whether someone from overseas can remain in the country. The price they pay for entry visas should go towards the necessary police/home office checks after a year or two, but we could save a fortune in taxpayers' money by dispensing with the army of petty bureaucrats in embassies and consulates around the world who at present have the power to decide the future of people who have the nerve (as many commentators presumably see it) to want to come to our country.

Barry, Wallington, UK

I seem to remeber something in my history books about the Saxons and the Normans not integrating and playing well with others.

KR, Stockport,

There is only one way to find the answer - let Britain suspend immigration for couple of years and see whether it can do well on its own without skilled migrants. But business houses, unfortunately may have to move their offices to countries where skilled workers are available or outsource. No one employs an alien unless they have no other choice. Who would you chose as an employee ? A native worker who is lazy and pulls a sickie often or a hardworking immigrant who works more that what is required ? The British people are sure greedy to own homes, go to exotic holiday destinations. Where will the jobs and money come from ? From economic growth. Are there enough people here to make that happen ? No. It comes down to money. Would you rather be polite and live alongside immigrants or would you rather lose out to other countries in business ?

Ranjith, Hampshire, UK

I disagree with David that we should not have a points system for incoming workers. Yes, Britain's employers will be better at deciding the needs of the economy but they cannot implement any immigration policy, unless we are going to have open borders? Business will advise the government who in turn will implement.

Vinay Mehra, Purley, U.K.

It is the religious dimension that should cause us the most concern. In this country we have a Christian/Pagan tradition, but we are seeing an influx of people with Judeo/Muslim beliefs. The latter are inherently fundamentalist, aggressively doctrinaire and celebrate their exclusivity. Our traditions are more open and uninhibited. It is hard to see how the two will ever be reconciled.

Liam, London, UK

Irrespective of their nationality, their colour, race , religion or creed, England cannot support a population of 50,000,000!
We cannot cope with over 1000 people per square mile living here!
We are no longer Homo Sapiens; We are Sardines!

windmill, brierley hill, England

I think the point about Doreen from Down Under, And Sid from Sydney, emphasises rather than dilutes the point: thousands are getting out, tired of numerous things of which ethnic ghetto areas is one. And people are right to be concerned because its growing, and especially concerned when it concerns the Moslem contingent , for well known reasons, currently being debated and associated with further reasons hitting front page headlines.

Is it racial disharmony?

Yes.

Potential ethnic conflict?

Yes.

The inability of different cultures to knock along together?

Yes - and it's a particularly Moslem problem, not Chinese, Hindu, or anything else.

People just get very uncomfortable about saying these things. That is itself no reason not to say them.

Joe, Manchester,

David appears to be advocating open borders. I don't understand these people on the left - don't they realise that those who suffer first and worst under mass immigration are the already disadvantaged in our own society? Don't they understand that increasing the supply of labour depresses wages? What is their problem? Is it that old liberal guilt trip about have being an imperial power in the past? In other words, David Aaronovitch is spouting arrant, dangerous nonsense!

Mark, Birmingham, England

I don't mind who comes here, I have just been chatting to Pawel the pole, smashing lad, works hard, always smiling. One day he will go back to Poland - their gain our loss.
The problem is pure arithmatic - GB is full, correction too full! There's not enough space for homes, roads, cars, trains, planes and more importantly food to be grown (never mind biofuel).
Thats why immigration has to be managed and overall population controlled even reduced slightly.

Paul, Leeds, UK

An immigrant myself I say D.A. is way off beam. Of course we need to keep very strict control on immigration and the numbers need to be small.; only an idiot would think otherwise.

Dr J Findlater, carnforth,

Oh, what a nice, easy-going, reasonable, caring-sharing man Mr Aaronovitch is. And how horrible anybody who even wants to think about limiting immigration is! They are obviously all just closet Nazis aren't they??
It's funny though how the caring of the likes of Mr Aaronovitch stops dead as soon as the views of ethnic British are concerned. Somehow they are always unimportant. Don't we have any right to say who comes here or how many? So, if 5 million want to come, that is OK? How about 10 million, or 50? It is obvious that there has to be a limit, it's just a matter of what it is. Taking a look at Britain today and how crowded it is, that limit must be low. Such a limit is perfectly enforceable - what prevents it are the likes of Mr Aaronovitch who constantly campaign against any limits and try to frighten and silence all opposition with cries of Nazi and racist.

Charles, Bath, UK

This article does no more than rehearse tired, recidivist dogma, with sclerotic allusions to "Canute" and "Stalinism", and its numerous logical fallacies would be transparent to a toddler. But then, the cheerleaders of mass immigration are cultural nihilists who have never had any understanding of, or respect for, culture (least of all their own). Their contempt for democracy is shameless, and appears to grow in inverse proportion to the dwindling support for views which, always minoritarian, are now the preserve of the freakish few. Just how few is indicated by Aaronovitch's need to answer his own rhetorical questions - a true sign of desperation. Ultimately all the arguments in favour of mass immigration, cloak them how you will, have one common root: the love of money, the radix malorum.

Stu G, London,

DA's assertion that only 'genocidal' and 'Stalinist' states can halt the flow of migrants is a counsel of despair. There are on the face of this planet 2 billion persons existing on a dollar a day or less. Such poverty is inevitably accompanied by unacceptable life conditions. If DA's nostrom is followed any portion of this vast number can and enventually will make its way here: the only limitation being when life on this already crowded island becomes so ghastly that nobody else wants to come here.
DA & I were both born and raised in the UK; we're both citizens of this state. If we were both to go to Israel and elect to become citizens of that state DA would be welcomed and accepted, for ethnic reasons, while I would not, for the same ethnic reason. While much criticism is leveled at Israel for its treatment of Palestinians it dispossesed 1948 I have not heard any for its 'racist' immigration policy and frankly nor should there be. If its OK for Israel why not the UK.

Patrick Turner, Orpington, UK

As an American living in Texas I am well aware of the disuniting that is cause when illegal immigration occurs. The United States has 11 million + ILLEGAL immigrants residing in our country. This immigrants have no loyalty to the US and oftentimes waive the Mexican flag in protest to any suggested controls of there criminal behavior. Vast amounts of money are spent by citizens of the US to education and provide health care for these people, yet a great amount of the money that they earn in the US is sent back "home" to families there.

Unchecked immigration and the decision by immigrants not to assimulate will cause a great divide any any country.

Regina, Austin, Texas

Jonathan, New York, USA writes:

"You might consider this: the educated, middle-class young people are leaving. Uneducated people from third-world countries are arriving. "

Agree on the leaving part, I'm one of them. And wherever I go the natives complain with a smile about the many English (British) living amongst them. However, disagree on the assessment of the incomers to the UK as I have many more equally educated, equally middle-class French, German, Dutch and Spanish friends in their 20s who live in London. Sarkozy worries about London being the 7th biggest French city while we export our elderly to France and Spain.

It's just the freedom of movement of people across borders. The European Union is happening.

Will I end my days on the sceptered isle, or on the continent or elswhere? Who knows, but a lad from the west-country be I, where I lays me hat's me home.

Matthew, The Hague, Netherlands

Why weren't imigrants' to Britain able to use their hard work, innovation, and entrepreneurship to improve the infrastructure of their own countries?

stephen cass, Mirfield, UK

Cheap workers. That's fine, but you're creating a city where no one will be able to live unless they are highly paid bankers or property speculators. No doctors, police, teachers.

And there are two strands of immigration going on. One, the influx from Eastern Europe. Two, the asylum seekers and refugees from Pakistan, Africa, Indonesia. There's a lot more to it than leggy blondes from Poland. Everyone welcome, as long as they are serving in a restaurant, or working as a nanny or builder. Let's just ignore the less attractive realities.

London is returning to a state of the rich and their servants. Not a positive image.

Sev, London,

"I've always found it amusing when people who support the free movement of goods and capital, free enterprise and all that come over all communist when people want to move about without permission. The extremes of left and right have more in common with each other than they do with the sensible center. Maybe what remains of the UK communist party could join with Civitas in condemming the free movement of people.

John Smallmind, Faversham, UK"

OK, John. So how about if I want to "move about without permission" through your living room. Any objections?

Steve, Birmingham,

I wish the liberal left, who obviously love cheaper nannies and builders, lived not in Hampstead or Islington but white working class estates being destroyed by mass immigration and asylum. If the influx of Poles was made up cheaper lawyers, journalists and other professions of the metropoles they might not be so keen to see their wage (sorry salary) structure destroyed.
The myth that we are an immigrant nation is another myth dreamt up by the left. The basic tenants of Englishness as understood by most people are essentially a predominately white (though not exclusivily), culturally Anglican group of people united by a shared history.
Its bizarre that the left should argue for the reduction of England to a trading post for world labour.
Of course, when it comes to schooling the likes of the writer probably send their own children to private or selective schools leaving inner city schools to immmigrants and poor whites (the one group of people the chattering classes detest)

M. Brent, Portsmouth, Hampshire

The problem faced by those on the Right who all-too-easily decry immigration is simply that their assumptions are all wrong. It's no good whining when this is pointed out by the likes of Mr Aaronovitch.

Too many commenters here lazily assume that immigrants - legal or otherwise - are unemployed, live off benefits, and wander the streets aimlessly at night bringing down the tone of their neighbourhoods.

This is quite wrong. Illegal immigrants cannot claime state benefits, for obvious reasons, and those here legally are too busy working all the hours God sends to be drinking in the streets at midnight (you'llhave to look a little closer to home for the people to blame for that).

In those regards therefore British emigres are no better or worse than immigrants to the UK. Both have similar reasons for upping sticks. Hence the hypocrisy charge sticks.

Ben, Dartford, UK

Ijon and Sarang are living proof that multiculturalism can work.

Ben, York,

Actually Mike, after a fashion yes. Say somebody from Iraq or Darfur had an asylum application turned down and was killed on their return. The blood is on the hands of the government who refused asylum. Everyone originated from East Africa, so why close borders now? We have enough wealth to look after some people, and Eastern Europeans (the target of most anger) contribute to the economy.

Ben, York,

Skilled migrant workers with jobs are good for the economy, unfortunalty what we are often getting is unskilled and unemployed economic or political refugees that are a drain on our economy, it is one thing to import a doctor quite another to import unskilled labour that isnt' paid minimum wage there is another name for such labour it is "slave", why pay a UK national a full wage packet when you can spend half the money or less on a foriegn national, these slaves however aren't the black africans that we have been apologising to, they are white and from the former eastern block. the only reason companies get away with it is that our slave level wages that our nationals wouldn't work for are still better than they would get at home.

mini, gateshead, england

There used to be a natural controlling mechanism on population growth associated with land mass, ability to feed, the dominance of tribes, the ebb and flow of pacts and deals, wars etc. But the greatest control was exercised by the inability of individuals to change country, or at least to do such a thing easily. This is why the movement of Jews around Europe and the Huguenots is a cause celebre, figures so prominently in our history. In fact, in the middle ages, there were laws that restricted the individuals’ ability to move to the next town, after all you had to be able to control such things if you did not want to starve, attract tied serfs fleeing their masters or do anything that would be to the detriment of your community, induce situations you could not plan for. The unrestricted flow of humans around the world is a charter for ecological devastation. This article toys with semantics. We are now experiencing the new slavery, people are leaving their cultures, to do dirty jobs!

Malcolm Turner, Alsager, England

"What is the just position for an Englishman - that is an ethnically English man - to take in respect of mass immigration? " asks "Guessedworker" from Leeds.

If anyone can explain how to determine what an "ethnically English man" is, I would be most interested to hear from them. Generations of residence? Pure descent from ... who? The Prince of Wales is half Greek, isn't he? With a frisson of German...?

Robert, London,

P.S. Having read the rest of the article, I have to say its amazing that DA is now advocating totally free markets in our demographic make up. If an employer wants X for his factory he can have it.

This is actually a fair argument, given that the minimum wage acts as a natural floor below which wage immigration cannot be legally encouraged. However the impacts on society and culture are important and must not be underestimated and cannot (like anything else) be left to an unregulated market.

Kieran, London, UK

Gino, London. You pay tax and you get benefits. Your travel on the underground, bus and surface rail is subsidised by the taxpayer (many of whom have no access to the same things). You have access to the NHS. You are supported (if you need it) by your local council, the police and fire services. There are many other things you can/will get when you are entitled by age or disability. Just because you don't receive unemployment benefit it doesn't mean you don't get anything.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

Who said previous generations of immigrants had integrated? Why are there black and asian ghetto's? Why do tens of indigenout thousands of muslims hate this country. Enoch Powell got it wrong - he said rivers didn't he? I guess we've only had puddles and streams of blood during the races riots over the past 30 years - who said he got it wrong.

I've got nothing against immigration, my problem is with large groups of foreigners who have not the cultural understanding of THIS country or a willingness to integrate into OUR culture. Those people that do have the understanding and do want to live according to British values are most welcome.

Kieran, London, UK

Strangely, many of those complaining about the UK 'ceasing to be British' (the UK-based friends of Ross in Jakarta for example) can't really have and first hand experience of the phenomena they seek to describe.
How many of the 'disgusted of Tunbridge Wells' Mail readers who claim the UK is 'going to the dogs' actually meet any immigrants ever?
Those who can afford to flee the 'foreign influx' to the UK aren't likely to live in the inner city terraces where immigrant populations actually settle. Or do they get all their 'first hand' experience of the 'over-running' of the UK from reactionary newspapers and pub gossip?

Jim, Leeds,

I am Legal Immigrant working in the NHS. I feel really feel; sad when the far right like the BNP say that immigrants are not welcome here. I came here the legal way and I love this country as much as I love the country where I was born , India.
I also understand also why far right does not want immigration. Britain has burnt its fingers with Muslim fundamentalists living in this country and I agree and that if any Muslim person not wanting to obey the law of this country and wanting to wear Hijab, sharia law should go and live in Saudi arabia.
I am a Hindu and , Hindu's are essentialy peace loving. some say that Hinduism is not a religion, but a way of life.
I also want people to know that when they mean asian's they are clubbing Hindu's and Muslims together.
But please remeber in these asian's there are peace loving Hindu's as well.

sarang, Basildon,

Andrew, I'm not so certain other countries where Brits form 'ex-pat' (read immigrant) communities and do not integrate or learn the language would agree.

Chantel, UK,

"Governments – except for genocidal ones – can no longer control demographic change. To act otherwise risks incurring unreasonable cost or causing intolerable hardship. So the job now – the huge job – is to predict such change and manage it. The rest is Stalinism"

So its wave goodbye to England then, is it, otherwise we are all "Stalinists". Pathetic reasoning.

Dontmakemelaugh, London, England

Our immigration policy (or lack of) is environmentally unsustainable, and will increase UK carbon emissions by roughly 50 million tonnes/year by 2040. Population density figures speak for themselves: UK - 240 individuals per square kilometre; China 119, USA 34; Canada 3

Will, Scotland, UK

if unlimited immigration is ok why hs no one else taken it up . The USA, Australia and NZ etc make people jump through hoops to get in and the rest of the EU (apoart from Eire) have put limts on east european migration.

Mass immigration has been encouraged by political reasons rather than one fo the best long term economic /social interests of the resident people in the UK

dave, edinburgh, uk

Thanks Mr Aaronovich. Immigrants ensure that London is the world's largest financial centre again; that UK universities remain in the Times top 200 list by contributing funds (3 times the fees that UK/EU students pay) and cutting edge research to them; many of us pay over 40% of our salaries in taxes, and no, we aren't talking "plumber" salaries but city ones. For all talk of big bonuses, no one mentions how a substantial chunk of those goes to the British exchequer - want to calculate how much of the bonus payments this year went to UK taxman? But never fear, if the attitudes in the UK get worse, immigrants will stop arriving. And besides, once Mumbai/Shanghai are enough of an alternative, all of us city types will leave so the racist anti-immigrant types can be left behind with the "Polish plumbers" and "blonde" waiters! Guess the idea that immigrants build UK economy is too much for the "native" people who spend their welfare checks on beer and Primark!

Anamika, London, UK

. "So the job now – the huge job – is to predict such change and manage it."

What do you mean by managing it if you don't mean controlling numbers David? It seems that your style of managing "it" is to silence anyone who is concerned about the level of immigration by accusing them of being racist.

Tam Earl-Aine, Cheltenham,

Milton Friedman once said (to misquote) “the welfare state is incompatible with open borders”. You do not have to be an economist to understand what he meant – disadvantaged people will always tend to migrate to locations which provide the best health and social security outcomes, especially when free at the point of use. So, Mr Aaronovitch, if we are to have truly open borders, we will have to dismantle the NHS, remove unemployment benefit and social security and charge at point of use for all services. Is this the UK you want?

It really puzzles me why in the UK the left are so in favour of mass immigration, when the result is lower wages and disadvantage for the most vulnerable of our existing citizens.

Richard Marriott, Kidderminster, England

The central tenent of this article is sound. There will always be those in society who are change adverse. Those, that instead of embracing the present and looking to the future with optimism prefer to hark back to some imagined glorious past and bemoaning the present state of things (the English been particularly prone to this). Immigration has been a factor of human existence since the very begining, how did anybody get here (wherever 'here' is) in the first place?

Immigration has been the best thing that has ever happened to Ireland (and not just the good looking women from Polska important and all as that is).

Jason , Cork,

This debate seems dominated by either the 'Yay! Immigration is great and I've got a cheap nanny!' brigade or the 'Enoch was right! Argh! My plumbing business isn't making any money!' legion.

But the fact is that immigration brings both benefits and problems, often at the same time. The real issue is whether the government is managing the issue well - whatever your views on it - and it most plainly is not.

Alexander, Winchester, United Kingdom

From 1067 to 1945, the so called waves of immigration amounted to 100,000s absorbed over hundreds of years. The largeest influxs being the Huguenot and Jewish waves. The scale of influx since the war is far higher which is closer in parallel to the period between 400 and 1066. This wasn't a period noted for peaceful multiculturalism.

There are several examples of multi-ethnic states in the world today. On the one hand we have the USA marked by a clear idea of Americanhood, on the other we have Fiji or the Balkan states or even Northern Island.

Given the potential for disaster, David seems awfully casual about avoiding it. He is too dismissive of people who have a concern.

At least he doesn't call such people racist. That's an advance in this debate.

TDK, Edinburgh, UK

I am an immigrant myself. I came to Britain because at the time there was a lack of specialists with certain skills. eastern europe in most cases had a very good educational system and people from there are very close to Britons mentally. to produce this amount of highly-skilled workforce in Britain would take decades and huge amounts of money. still, many Britons are leaving for better life in Canada or the US. someone has to keep the economy running, by working and paying taxes. the ultimate enemy are the people abusing the welfare system, whatever their ethnic origins are. working with natives makes you integrate very quickly and obey and appreciate local conventions.
saying a complete no to immigration is stupid. inviting everyone, including unskilled people from civilisations hostile and alien to the British is a recipe for disaster. immigration must be managed. putting a welfare heaven to an end is a must, since it is the major cause of non-integration and economic decline.

ijon tichy, edinburgh/st. petersburg, russia

This problem first started when our ancestors walked out of Africa. It was just as much a problem for the Romans as it is for Western countries today. It cannot be solved by threatening to keep people out and building fences along the border as the Americans want to do with Mexico. Many people want a better life and will risk everything to attain it.
Ireland's main export was it's people and they were not always welcomed. The 'trick' is to help improve the economy of some of the less privilaged countries as most people, if given a choice, are content to stay put with their own extended family, friends & culture. Emigration is no longer a problem for Ireland except for the people who now want to run off to Spain, France, Cyprus etc to cash in on their good fortune. The EEC model goes a long way to solving some of these problems as they are not going to go away. Just ask the Romans. They tried to keep the Gothes out and were eventually overwhelmed by them.

John Connor, Burlington,, Ontario, Canada

It is all very well being glib about this issue, but it is a serious one and it is one which is concerning many voters (judging from opinion polls). One of the things David omits to mention is quality of life. Immigration is not just about filling available jobs and keeping wages depressed, there is also the environment to consider. People use resources - that means land, housing and infrastructure in the broadest sense. England is part of a small island and there has to be a limit to the number of people who can live here comfortably, regardless of any ethnic or cultural issues. Another issue David omits to mention is illegal immigration - it is one thing to have an immigration policy, it is another altogether to see it flouted. Any Government worth its salt would take steps to deal with illegal immigration, including summary deportation of those in the UK illegally (needless to say, the present Government has failed lametably in this respect).

Richard Marriott, Kidderminster, England

Whilst working in London, I used to buy the Times and read it on the train in the morning.
Since living in Singapore, my preferred method of reading this paper is to use the internet - overseas subscriptions being an expensive way of reading a paper that's a week out of date.
I would proffer that this applies to many 'ex-pats', and subsequently explains why so many respondents from overseas contribute to your website. Like me, they probably haven't understood that being temporarily non-resident precludes them from expressing an opinion with regard to their country of origin. Thanks for putting us right.

Paul, Singapore,

You cannot emigrate to another Western country and claim housing, benefits and free medical care when you get there.

David Thijm, Stourbridge, UK

I personally will never care what reasons Britain in particular will ever have for wanting to stop immigrants coming here. I will always find them ridiculous. Being originally from Africa my history tells me that the British were at one point all over the world taking land that wasnt theirs and imposing their so called civilisation. Now today everrybody is doing the same and they somehow want to find it shocking and unacceptable.

Guessed worker from Lewes dont you think that England should have been thinking about this morality of man kind having a right to his homeland for all those years that it was colonising other nations?

rene, london, England

Government can no longer control demographic change except by genocide?

Pure far-left propaganda with overtones of the old 'inevitability' argument used by the communists decades ago to defuse dissent.

What about countries like Australia then that have far stricter controls? Is their government genocidal?

There are certainly many lobbies wanting immigration for factional benefit - employers wanting cheap labour, for example, and the left which wants the society destroyed - but to say you can't control immigration by reasonable measures is nonsense.

Mike Newland, LONDON,

"Your criticism of expats is only valid if they refuse to adapt, demand a vote and try to dictate to the locals, as so many upstart immigrants in Britain do...

Ross, Jakarta, Indonesia"

Some British immigrants in Spain have created a political party and have stood for local elections. One was even elected as a councillor which means he is dictating to the locals. Now imagine the outcry if the Spanish, Polish do the same here in the UK.

Danny, Kettering,

It is too simplistic to talk purely in terms of numbers in and out - you have to compare the people.
Most Brits emigrating are skilled, hard working people, they have to be in order to meet the entrance criteria laid down by Australia,etc. Emigrants are not allowed to draw any form of Social Security at all until they have contributed into the pot.
We are unique in that we allow almost anyone to come here, irrespective of their lack of skills - many don't even speak English. Many of these immigrants claim various forms of Social Security, all paid for by the indigenous population - the proof of this is clear in that people often pass through several countries to get to soft touch UK.
We need to think of this in personal terms - a few pounds a month from each taxpayer doesn't really register with people, but try imagining that all the tax you pay personaly is then given to an immigrant claiming one benefit after another and it becomes much more annoying.

tony, birmingham, uk

Read the BBC's Have Your Say forums, David, and weep.

It is quite funny that the emmigrants complain about UK immigrants, though.

And Olga from France, I think I'll skip the values around here. I don't particularly think elbowing someone in the stomach whilst saying "excuse me" is a British custom I want to adopt.

Starling, Blonde, born in Holland, moved to the UK (and trying to get the heck out ASAP)

starling, Lancaster,

The "we are a nation of immigrants" is patent nonsense. Unless, of course, you regard those of us descended from viking invaders over a thousand years ago as "the descendants of immigrants". In that case all individuals are migrants. For there are no people on the face of this globe who have not migrated from somewhere - who have been welded to the same patch of earth since time began. And if we are all immigrants then there can be no such thing as 'culture' or identity - in particular there can be no 'tradition of tolerance' as that implies some cultural consistency which the 'nation of immigrants' denies. In which case multiculturalism is a nonsense....at which point the left disappears up its own oriface.

H, London,

Face it, there are immigrants and there are immigrants, depending on the situation, some more desirable than others. The British government would like to say, “No Muslims”, but that would be discrimination.
I'm an immigrant in Japan, having flown the UK coop for this life. And I venture to say us "English gentlemen" make ideal immigrants. Do we want our own house of worship on every street corner? No way. Do we want the animals we eat slaughtered in a special, borderline illegal, way? Certainly not. Do we insist on wearing 13th century garments that hide our identity? Perish the thought. Do we want to convince Japanese of the dangers and immorality of consuming alcoholic beverages? Hardly. “Mine’s a double Irish with a Guinness chaser.” Do we want to interact in a helpful and supportive manner with the local population? Every time. So if a Japanese asks me if I would be so kind as to help with their English, I'm on the case.

Andrew Milner, Karuizawa, Japan

Aaranovitch has totally missed the point.There are no incongriguities from the likes of Don from Dordogne.The point is that the problem with immigraton is a European wide one,because of the threat posed by the alien culture of fundamentalist Islam ,which does not share Western liberal values.Quite the opposite,as after 20years in the Middle East(earning profits for Britain),I am convinced they wish to introduce medieval Sharia law in Europe.
The ME ,of course controls immigraton well with its work visa system.
Of course ,if the EU would drop the immoral CAP then the THird World could export its agricultural products and would have less need to emigrate to Europe.
Rodney from Antwerp

R G James, Brasschaat, Belgium

If David Aaronovitch could couple his laisser-faire approach gleaned from his Marxist days with a plan for Lebensraum he might have a point. In our Northern mill towns we find it quite claustrophobic and see no end in sight to congestion and the influx. Now if there could be Assisted Passage so we could leave this crowded island and go elsewhere we could repeat the traditional history of this country in being a Land of Emigration.

We need more land....maybe we should recover those parts of France the Plantagenets owned, or even the bits that Mary Tudor lost ?

It is certainly tedious with increasing population density, frequent electricity cuts as infrastructure collapses, and roads choked.as we have the lowest transport public spending in Britain....but then again David Aaronovitch sits at home and emails his "labour" to its customer

ToMTom, Leeds, UK

What is the just position for an Englishman - that is an ethnically English man - to take in respect of mass immigration?

It isn't "panic", of course. But the English do, like any other people, have a moral right to their homeland, and to defend it against aggressors within and without. Ultimately, this right rests on group genetic interests, which far outweigh secondary issues like money-making, being nice to foreigners, obeying convention, etc.

There are various group genetic interests. The greatest is the interest in genetic continuity. Then, any distinctiveness - such as the intelligence of David's Ashkenazim - is something that the possessor group has a natural interest in preserving. Preservation of birthright to land is another important interest, because territory guarantees survival.

Immigration of even similar peoples (like blonde Slavs to England) depletes genetic interests. Any dispossession, any deracination is negative. We have a right to preserve ourselves.

Guessedworker, Lewes, England

If you don't think that mass immigration has a deleterious effect on the indigenous population, go and ask an Amerindian. If you can find one.

Does anyone in favour of mass immigration actually think it's going to stop at any point of its own accord? Why should it? It didn't when the Saxons arrived in Britain, and it didn't when Europeans arrived in the New World and Australasia.

The only way to enrich the third world is for us to invest in it so it can become rich itself. It isn't there to provide cheap labour for western employers and keep goods and services cheap for the western middle classes.

Jane, London, UK

So Aaronovitch apparently believes anyone from the rest of the world should be able to settle in Britain at will. So how many will he personally be accommodating at his house? Also what will be do with his time when he finds that the Times has replaced him with a sharp journalist from Romania or China at a fraction of his salary?

Dave, Chester,

Gentleman, I’m sorry… in your point of view we all foreigners are damaging and abusing Great Britain (at least that’s what its sounds like). I myself an immigrant (Not an illegal immigrant though) I also Pay a nice amount of TAX to the government, but do I get any benefits, the answer is NO. I don’t complain about it. I enjoy leaving in England without the benefits of an English citizen.
Maybe just maybe this whole English of I don’t want to work and I’ll depend on the benefits from the government cause they are lazy or they cont be bothered, maybe those individuals should get up in the morning and say I will get a job today and contribute too, then one less immigrant (the one that everyone is so scared of and we all know that they will bring disaster to this GB) wont be able to fill that position. Just as a mater of fact in 2005/2006 immigrant workers boosted the UK economy by a few hundreds of millions. Is that wrong? Some of those funds go to individuals who claim benefits.

Gino, London,

You make a point but glibly, sure people are on the move globally. But realistically they cant all make their way here, it is rather crowded and housing so expensive it is a scandel. There is also the rather large number of people of British origin, 3-4 million now, not working, living on a raft of benifts in a twilight world. Sorry but on balance some type of controls need to be in place, certainly while government comes up with a plan to deal with global people movement.

Mr Angry , London , UK

So, are you arguing for no immigration controls whatsoever? If so, what social benefits should immigrants be entitled to, and when? If they are not to be entitled to the benefits of UK nationals, you may be condemning many of the immigrants to a twilight world of poverty and exploitation.

If they are so entitled, how are you going to explain to the millions of British workers why their wages are being pushed to the lowest level, why their jobs are being taken, and why they are subsidising with their taxes the social benefits of people who have made no contribution for them. Best of luck!

Bob Doney, Camberley, Outer Poland

As usual those who are in a more privileged position spout nonsense. Talking about past immigration scare stories , i.e Jews ,Hugenots bear no comparison to what is happening now. A few years ago when I spoke to people in my local weekend market about emigrating they meant Spain, France etc when they retired. They intended to leave for a life of let us say a greater and cheaper standard of living in mainly France, Spain.They would take their money with them and put that into the local economy with in general no recourse to local benefits . But now the people I speak to are much younger with young children and comprise people with a trade or in some cases a nursing qualification.They are heading for Australia, Canada, New Zealand .The complaint I hear is that there is no future for us here,the housing ladder is too expensive,poor schools etc. So we drain the country of well qualified middle class youngsters. In exchange we get illiterate mothers of 16 from some parts of Europe.

george, Exeter,

The whole point about immigration is that newcomers should always: i) learn and speak their new country's language; ii) follow their new country's culture (not to be confused with religion, which is personal); iii) support their new country's values. Past waves of immigrants to the UK have, by and large, followed this code, i.e. those from the West Indies in the '50s, and have settled in well. Recent troubles have stemmed from new groups elevating their religion above their new country's culture and not following the above three guidelines (which I personally am following to the best of my ability in my new country).

Olga, Tarn et Garonne, France

“[T]he UK has no policy on controlling the size of its population”.

I just wonder when densely populated countries will have to start coming up with just such a policy. How many people can our island support? 60 million, as now? 600 million? 6 billion? At what point does population density start to become intolerable? When the country has been completely Tarmacked?

Stewart Ware, London,

A useful way of viewing population mobility is as a fast track route to a smorgasbord of ready made political solutions to go, without the hassle of voting for what’s on offer locally, and waiting for possible implementation. If we don’t fancy the existing local politics and setup, why not up sticks and move someplace else where our preferences are better met?

The magic of free markets should ensure that such feet-voting eventually feeds back to better provision of what’s wanted in places with indigenous depopulation. The risk is that unless there’s moderate discouragement to freeloaders and those with little to contribute in any way, some places could be swamped with incoming undesirables. Some countries have realistic requirements with some regulation. If the need arises, their systems can be copied.

Those benefiting from available inexpensive labour have no cause for concern at present. But the situation may need later review if local infrastructures become challenged.

dr venables preller, Warminster, UK

It is a complete mystery why the traditional left abhors the unfettered operation of market forces in all areas but one: housing and immigration. Its absolutely amazing.

If the operation of market driven individual choices lead to the inhabitants of (say) Burnley being displaced by whoever, and finding themselves in a minority and their children in schools where English is rarely spoken, tough. If the population of the UK were to rise by millions because billions of third world people are in the grip of what, in the financial markets, would be called a bubble and irrational exuberance, fine, live with it. Live with the exodus after the collapse, also.

The fact is, any reasonable person agrees now that some markets need some regulation. We cannot allow monopoly suppliers of basic services to do as they wish, we cannot leave the stock markets to evolve as they wish. Communities and national population are similar.

What is it that the old left cannot see here?

George Johnson, London, England

This is an article based on dogma, not on cold reason and analysis. In so writing, he has missed, or casually dismissed, the problems of mass immigrtion.

First, it is something this country has never done before, at least, not when it was so densely populated. This means that there can be consequences that no one has anticipated.

Second, we know that there are problems with some groups, due to the cullture they bring with them. We need time, quite a lot of it, to sort those out. David dismisses the Civitas pamphlet with the same contempt that he accuses the pamphlet of.

Third, even those nice Polish waitresses are displacing jobs that someone already here could have taken. This leaves the growing underclass problem that socialism has no answer to, and wantonly sweeps under the carpet.

France's problem is with excluded immigrants, ours is becoming excluded naturals. They are created by welfare dependency, poor schooling and a mindset like this article shows.

Richard Dell, Preston, UK

David posits that "Governments can no longer control demographic change". That will come as a surprise to many civilised western democracies. For example Japan has virtually no immigration to speak of; Denmark has much less than Sweden. These are government controls. In both France and Singapore, the government provides a "Baby Bonus" which has a marked effect on demographics. Across the world, female participation in the workforce is correlated with decreasing numbers of children, and female emancipation is largely under the control of governments. In short, David's argument is refuted.

As for the points about ethnic conflict, I refer David to last week's Panorama featuring ethnically and religiously divided schools in the north-west. We have had ethnic conflict in Northern Ireland; it is reckless to ignore the possibility of the same in England.

Reasons to limit immigration: housing shortage, road/train/tube congestion, water shortages; all most acute in the southeast.

Andrew Montgomery, Oxford, England

How is Britain overcrowded? It is certainly a more densely populated country than the US or France (especially the south-east of England) but it is hardly overcrowded. There are over 30 sovereign states with a higher population density than the United Kingdom (source: Wikipedia, List of countries by population density, from UN data; look it up!)

In fact, our birth rate is so low that if there were no immigration, our population would be falling before long. Britain's rate of population growth is one of the world's lowest (less than 0.3% per annum, source: Wikipedia, List of countries by population growth rate). Add to that the fact that our population is rapidly ageing, and I think that you will conclude that the immigration we have (which, relative to our population, is less than France, Germany, Spain and the US) is no bad thing.

In any case, just try stopping immigration. If people can not come here legally, they will come illegally. Better that we know who is in the country.

lb, southport,

I couldn't possibly agree more with Mr Aaronovitch. Indeed, his critique of the Tories' dramatic economic planning is a piece of which Hayek himself would be proud.

The diversity and cultural additions that come from immigration are terrific. Indeed, that diversity is something that makes me very proud to be British. We are a nation of immigrants and should be proud of our history of tolerance. We should embrace the new ideas and perspectives that we have, for so long, imported.

The anti-immigration lobby talks a lot of nonsense. "Great and real harm to the native" or perhaps "indigenous" population seems, to me, a myth. That said, we immigrants were frightfully mean to the real indigenous population, the Welsh and the Cornish.

The culture I fight for is the one that says "I am an Englishman, and that means that while I may disagree with you, I will fight to the death for your right to differ." This applies as much to immigration as it does to free speech.

James Torrance, Beijing, China

Mr Aaronovitch and/or his antecedents may know something about immigration, but one suspects that he does not live in the Muslim ghettoes that have been created in many parts of England. They have no cultural links with, and some appear to despise, other sections of the population.

The histories of Europe and the Indian sub-continent are redolent with the consequences of cultural and religious fracturing in societies. Even if Mr Aaronovitch was too young to witness the Final Solution or the partition of India, does he not remember Kosovo?

Immigration into the UK is at a levels unprecedented in the last 1000 years. Yesterday the local authorities in England were reported to have complained to Westminster about their lack of resources to cope with the human tidal wave.

To let the "free market" experiment continue is irresponsible. To claim that an island cannot control its borders is rubbish. All that is required is the responsibility to think about our childrens' futures.

Tony G, Harrogate, UK

"We have a duty to protect the jobs and culture of the indigenous population..." , says Martin of Hereford.
For your information, my dear Martin, let me enlighten you a bit on the subject of employment of foreigners.
If you are not already aware, the Malaysian Philharmonic Orchestra (a misnomer really, considering that all but a handful of its players are "bleeding foreigners", as a BNP acolyte would crudely put it -- but so what, I say, as good music knows no borders!) has for its Principal Conductor a Swiss; its Conductor Laureate is literally a Flying Dutchman, a Brit for its Associate Conductor post, and yet another Brit as Resident organist and programme notes writer, a Yank as a its former librarian and to top it all, a Canadian as its former General Manager, and again
recently, but rather short-lived, yet another Brit appointed as successor to the latter!

SD Goh, PJ, MALAYSIA

Actually, David, there is nothing at all unreasonable or surprising about the fact that many critics of the UK's out of control immigration policy live abroad. They tend to be the ones who were hardest hit by the effects of mass immigration, such as house unaffordability and wage reductions. 'Go figure', as the Americans say!

It is also less than fair to suggest that their criticism of immigration to the UK is hypocritcial. After all, the overwhelming majority of Britons who migrate do so legally, have good skills and/or money, and move to areas such as Australia, the US and Europe, where their children easily assimilate.

Generally speaking, their objections to those arriving in the UK are solely to those who come illegally, are poorly educated, live on welfare payments, work so cheaply they force wages down, break the law or come from cultures that seem incapable of assimilation.

Janet Davis, Sydney, Australia

So if the majority of these 600,000 people are under 24 and with take their monet back out of the country, what taxes are they paying exactly? Council tax? Car tax? TV licences?Thought not. But they're using this infrastructure presumably? If business "needs" them it is to drive wage costs down. They're useful to banks to pay BTL mortgage rents. What strikes me when I visit London is what a godforsaken hole it has become with its incessant "growth". It is indeed another country, and not a better one. The TUC and Enoch were right.

john smith, manchester, uk

Hmm. Population control is very very difficult to do - if not impossible - so hey, let's just anticipate it as best we can. What a really lazy and ill conceived bit of journalism. There are thousands of Poles and Lithuanians working in bars and building sites around the UK that could have written a more thought provoking piece than this. But then again they're not eroding your earnings, or threatening your contract with The Times are they? So sleep soundly and scribe sloppy from time to time, it'll be alright.

Roy, London, UK

The thing that puzzles me is how over the last few years whichever restaurant or hotel I go in is now staffed almost wholly by people from FSU countries. Why is that? Are they cheaper? More industrious? Prettier?

If all these people can arrive in a strange town and a strange country and find work why is it that our unemployment count (which is no longer widely published) remains high. Have we created people who cannot be bothered to work or are simply incapable of holding down a job after 13 years of educashun.

Mike Doy, Bristol,

1905 .. TUC .. Jewish immigration? I don't think many people, nowadays, will know what you are talking about here. And this is a problem. I would suggest that your attitude to immigration is based on a Jewish 'folklore' perspective (Russia, East-End, boxing, kosher, tailoring, Golders Green, etc) which is in no way relevant to where we are today.

Charles, London, England

Allowing immigrants into your country is like allowing people into your house. They are welcome as long as they make an effort to integrate and obey the house rules, and there aren't too many of them. As a doctor who carries out the stringent medical examinations for potential immigrants to Australia and New Zealand, my main objection to unrestricted and uncontrolled immigration to the UK is that no effort seems to be made to carry out any form of health screening prior to their arrival in this country. With the NHS in the state that it is, this seems to be governmental irresponsibility of a high order.

Dr.Nicholas Lee, Windsor, UK

To Edward Andrew Green: I am faced with a charge of £395 for a years extension to my Ancestral visa, £750 for indefinite leave to remain and then approximately £500 for citizenship. On top of that, I pay NIC, a rather high rate of personal income tax & PAYE and lets not forget the £165 a month on Council tax; VAT from the business I own, corporation tax and company NIC contributions. Added to this, it clearly states on my visa: "No access to public funds", so unlike you, I don't have a safety net if things don't work out. What more would you like me to contribute.... pray, do tell???

Chantel, UK,

I have no problem with Europeans coming in,as they'll eventually assimilate and integrate.What I do not want, those who themselves come from a very racist backgrounds and who refuse the presence of any Westerners on their soil and who reject the human rights of the minorities in their midst yet demand everything when they settle in the Western world and eventually aspire turning the West into an extention of their backward countries and force their religion on us.Interfere in our domestic and foreign affairs to the benefit of their motherlands.

K.S., Derby, UK

Definitely David. Right on point. When the English (White) leave these shores, they are referred to as "expatriates" , people coming here are referred to as immigrants/asylum seekers. We all try to make a better life for ourselves, regardless of where we were born. And Janet from London, I don't know a single Afro-Caribbean plumber, but I know quite a few who are barristers and doctors. Does that count?

Wanjiru, London,

Immigration alone does not rupture national identity —just look at surging America-- but history does. Take, for example, British identity. It was originally constructed on three pillars: Empire, hostility to Catholic Europe and Protestantism. History gave its verdicts on all three, leaving Britain with just territory, but no cohesive identity.

New Labour could have re-constructed British identity based on Britain’s Judaeo-Christian heritage, but it chose not to. Instead it left the field wide open to diehard
multiculturalists, religious segregationists and jihadi freaks.

Randhir Singh Bains, Gants Hill, UK

Those opposed to immigration should ask themselves one thing. If I were a small business owner, who would I rather employ, a surly, ASBOd youth who every week disappears to sign on still, or a keen, probably highly educated, immigrant who has fought tooth and nail to drag themselves across the world for that job?

The minimum wage applies to Poles too, it's just that we British are too arrogant to work for it.

James Torrance, Beijing, China

Your criticism of expats is only valid if they refuse to adapt, demand a vote and try to dictate to the locals, as so many upstart immigrants in Britain do... living in Jakarta, one is appalled by what goes on but accepts that comment is as far as intervention can go.
Incidentally, most of my friends nearing retirement age are aiming to leave the UK, largely because of its ceasing to be British.

Ross, Jakarta, Indonesia

No government has ever been able to stop people from moving away from want and depravation when they have a hope of a better life beyond their present borders. Whether the movement of populations is done in an orderly manner or by illegal means is largely immaterial. It will happen regardless of any racially intolerant argument masked as protective of a 'present way of life'. Unless you are a pure child descended of a Native Nation, your objections are hollow lies and based on prejudice.

Son of Immigrant Parents and proud of my Heritage.

Jon Takseraas, Darien, CT, USA

The left loved to condemn Mrs Thatchers "no such thing as society", but with continuing waves of immigration, there will soon not be much left of society, just a country which resembles an international airport. Lots of different people, all getting on with their business and not really mixing. It may be difficult to stop it, but it should be possible to have more controls otherwise we risk many more problems

Adrian, London,

Totalitarian is to deny European peoples their right to decide how much and what kind of immigration they take in their countries.

Bruno, Barcelona / Shrewsbury, Europe

I couldn't agree more.

For example, recent legislation means that non-UK doctors are essentially now unemployable in the NHS, regardless of their skills.

If you were a patient, wouldn't you rather be treated by the doctor who was best qualified, rather than automatically preferencing a UK trained doctor simply by the virtue of an accident of UK citizenship?

We should be employing the best people for any given job, and government should stop meddling.

B E, London,

Sir, you are missing the point. When we speak of immigrants we are talking about people that segregate thenselfs for been unwilling and/or incapable to integrate in an "alien" culture, not about Eastern Europeans that are temporarely here. I wish they could come in greater number and stay longer, maybe then we could re-Europeanize and re-Christianize the UK. You don't see "Mike's", "Gwen's" and "Don's" typing from Bangalore, do you? I am pround for been a Western person, I like my heritage and I know my History. I don't want to lose it, I don't want to swap it for other culture. That's why I live in a Western Country, or do I...? This will never be posted.

Fabio C, London,

Perhaps when journalist jobs such as Mr. Aaronovitch's are sent to India and he is 'surplus to requirements' or asked to reaply for his job at a new rate of £7 per hour he might change his mind.

In the meantime, his lack of patriotism shows why we should halt immigration as it takes several generations to become naturalised to the point where the well being of the country comes first in ones list of loyalties.

jane, London, England

I've always found it amusing when people who support the free movement of goods and capital, free enterprise and all that come over all communist when people want to move about without permission. The extremes of left and right have more in common with each other than they do with the sensible center. Maybe what remains of the UK communist party could join with Civitas in condemming the free movement of people.

John Small, Faversham, UK

It's not the Poles that cause the concern - their culture fits in perfectly, in fact it compliments, indigenous UK Culture.
The widely felt concerns about Immigration have been based on the five-fold increase of non-european migration that has occured under this government.
As can clearly be seen with recent history, not all cultures feel wholly positive about Britain, and the children of migrants don't necessarily feel British because they were born here.

Andy, London, UK

Mr Aaronovitch manages to mention Jews twice in an article about immigration, and then seems to equate those concerned about immigration into the UK with Von Papen, Hitler, Stalin and Mao. He then admits to having been a fan of Stalinist style planning - even 30 years ago it took less than half a brain to see the failure of central planning! Are we now expected to see him as a rational and reasonable commentator on this issue, or on any issue? Surely UK citizens have a right to voice their opinions on such a fundamental area without being denigrated by association with a man whose policies Mr Aaronovitch once supported.

Patrick, Perth,

Ha! Love your comments about ex-pats commenting on the immigration 'problem' that the UK has. I work as an immigration agent in Australia and continually deal with UK citizens seeking to move to Australia and who justify their decision to migrate by moaning about how the UK is being ruined by immigration. Ironic? Not much!

Sid, Sydney, Australia

Wrong as ever, David. Several governments in the world do control demographic change - and have done quite successfully for some time.

As one of the "seeker(s) after a better life", Britain's lack of pride in itself, coupled with its "for heaven's sake let's not be beastly" attitude to immigration are significant reasons why I stay abroad - in a country that has enough pride in itself to at least to control demographic change. (And please, do note the difference between "control demographic change" and "eliminate demographic change".

John A Blackley, Austin, TX, USA

David you have illuminated the problem.
Your reasoning is logically sound and the conclusion is accurate.
However, when your income is reduced because your expertise is obtainable from "immigrants" at a cheaper cost,even you may question the `open door policy`.
Remember "There is no such thing as a free lunch" not even for the chattering classes.

Peter Bolt, Redditch, UK

If you talk confidentially to many expats they will tell you that one of them main reasons they left was the breakdown of their communities due to the influx of large alien cutlures into their midst leading to a diminution in identity and sense of belonging.

The ties that previously bound people together of a shared heritage are now viewed as predjuditial racism or fascism. Their heritage and the country their parent built, merely the undeserved spoils of exploitative oppression. Many of those people would return if the community they sprang from was valued and nurtured.

Bifocal, Oldham,

My goodness Mr Aaronovitch, I think you're really misunderstanding the association between the locations and the comments. Read "I think the country is in a terrible state, immigration being one of the problems and it's so bad I'd rather live somewhere else". Also, did I not read in these very pages some weeks ago about the very worrying trend of ordinary citizens to court the BNP, so disallusioned are by the common line on immigration amonst other things?

Richard, Dallas, USA

The point "Mike from Sydney" (ie me) was making is that the Aaranovitch/Parris exchange on Blair made no reference to a major issue in the UK - viz: immigration. A major oversight, in an otherwise amusing piece, but wich was worryingly inward-looking. I made that point, because although I emigrated from England, I still have relatives in there and know what troubles them, and take an interest in what goes on. And second, because it is an issue which I have witnessed first hand can be resolved - ie in Australia. So rather than be patronising about "Mike from Sydney" commenting on UK affairs, you would do better to think before hitting the keys.

Mike, Sydney, Australia

When this country is eventually engaged in communal disturbances and riots involving the various so-called 'communities' and the indigenous population I know it will be reassuring to have Mr Aaronovitch on hand to explain that it is only a little local difficulty that is part of the rich tapestry of life in England.

Anthony Back, Wellington, Telford, England

What surprises me is the high number of second/third generation immigrants who are unemployed. It seems we have to have another wave of immigrants to do the jobs that earlier immigrants do not wish to do. I am a Londoner and have yet to meet an Afro Caribbean plumber. Why is that? It's skilled, fairly well-paid and offers independence. Perhaps we need to overhaul the education system and give people already here a proper chance rather than going for the cheapest foreign option. This call for a "let 'em all in" free-for-all is a recipe for trouble.

Janet, London,

You can't compare Britain's shambolic approach to immigration to anything else more rational (say for example Canada, or Australia). Britain has failed its duty to its own citizens and to those new migrants by shrugging away its responsibility to fund this properly. Britains who go overseas mainly are net investors to where they go; today's immigrants are net takers (of either jobs or benefits). That is a difference. We have gone down the road of the failed US immigration of non-policy. And in the US this is having disasterous social effects. No, it is time to clearly call this something worse than what we saw in the past and that it requires more than an arrogant, knowing shrug from Britain's elite.

Bob Macdonald, London,

This country is too small and over crowded to accomodate those who wish to live here for some reason or another.
This was reconised in the fifties when the population was much smaller.
Then we encourage Britains to emigrate to such places in the commonwealth such as Canada, Australian.

Countries which are still under developed.

Bernard , GUILDFORD,

Your argument seems to be that population levels are like water and will find a natural equilibrium. This may be true - in which case immigration can continue until the UK has a comparable living standard to, for example, Angola or Zimbabwe. This may be an equitable state of living globally, but I pay rather a lot of tax to ensure that I don't have to live in a third world country and I expect my government to fulfill its half of the bargin.

Zac Smith, London, UK

The country of origin of the world’s largest source of illegal immigrants is?

The UK/England!

We have regularly failed to seek permission from the native rulers before we have moved into their lands. Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, the USA, Canada, India, Pakistan, Burma/Myanmar, Malaysia, etc, etc. We’ve also tended to get pretty violent with the native population if they have objected.

Richard (English and white), Cambridge, UK

Simon from London says;

'Suddenly everything is coming into focus, Mr. Aaronovitch. I see your standpoint.'

David's standpoint came into focus for myself several articles previous when he told us of his plastic revolutonary days trying to bring down African governments by the aid of meeting terrorists there.

Remember that one?

Jez Walton, Leeds, England

I love the UK, but left home because it is so crowded. Large scale immigration will only make the problem worse. The population is already increasing at a fast enough rate without it - too many people in a small space. Ever driven up the M1 on a saturday morning recently? It's like rush hour traffic from a few years ago.

Baz, The moon,

You might consider this: the educated, middle-class young people are leaving. Uneducated people from third-world countries are arriving.

While individuals in both cases see a benefit for themselves, the same thing may not be true for countries.

Jonathan, New York, USA

Suddenly everything is coming into focus, Mr. Aaronovitch. I see your standpoint.

Simon, London, England

I am myself a type of imigrant albit from another part of the UK,namely NI.Therefore I can sympathise with the notion of correctly counting the actual number of immigrants and providing the necessary funds to the councils to absorb the extra load.Ofset against this is the other benifits of a young economically active workforce,paying taxes,and contributing to the GDP.Anyone who travels around London must notice the building boom,the regeneration and the extra housing both social and private.You would have to be blind and deaf not to work out that most of this workforce is made up of the new migrant population.I just hope that some of them go onto stay to help with the predicted shortfall in workers to cope with the ageing population.By managing the immigrant population we are more likely to retain them than and help them adjust.Anyway haven't they a legal right to travel from other parts of europe seeking work,otherwise how can we justify the 750000 "older" brits who have gone abroad?

damien vaugh, London, uk

"Governments – except for genocidal ones – can no longer control demographic change. To act otherwise risks incurring unreasonable cost or causing intolerable hardship."

A country which has no land borders except with Eire should be quite capable of stopping immigration and it is an indictment of the incompetence of our authorities that there is any suggestion that it cannot.

The "hardship" which would be caused is not our concern. We have a duty to protect the jobs and culture of the indigenous population, and if that means controlling strictly those who come into the country, so be it.

Martin , Hereford, England

The problem with immigration on the scale that the UK is experiencing is that it does great and real harm to the native population, as both Switzerland and the channel islands have found, a rational government would introduce some form of charging - whether for work or residential permits for non-natives, or a property tax, or a combination of these. The revenue would both compensate the native population and provide evidence to them that the immigrants contribute the wider society rather than just keeping the cost of labour down and the price of property up.

Modifications to such charges could be made to encourage integration and smooth the acceptance of incomers further.

Edward Andrew Green, Upminster, England

Thats fine mate.
Meanwhile us sensible ones will go somewhere where a house can still be afforded and social cohesion means something more than just soundbites from Blair and his lackeys.
This article shows the liberal elite love their cheap workers and will be darned if they are going to pay the minimum wage for their fruit pickers...

o bown, newcastle, nsw