What Sir Andrew fails to acknowledge is the fact that the new comers are probably potential Labour voters. Labour really are disreputable. For years they have supported the British worker, encouraging his strikes, enforcing laws that enable non-compliance, joining the picket lines to demonstrate solidarity, anything to turn a free man into a dependent body. And then, at a whim, they abandon them, vilify them, fail to support him against undercutting, cite their inability to change, their abhorrence of the menial, label them 'benefits slugs' for their feasting on Government handouts. But what is worse they praise the foreign influx to a man, see nothing but good about the unknowable and uncountable. They damn their own with feint praise. If there is a credit crunch then is the indigenous poor that are going suffer because they have commitments here. The immigrant can always go leak back to the support of their families; our natives will just have to suffer, there is nowhere to go for them.

Malcolm Turner, Alsager, England

Andrew Green is right to state that non-EU immigration is the main problem. However I see "culture" rather then "economics" as the main cause of future problems. Non-EU immigration is by and large, of people whose culture and religion is so far distant from that of the UK, that it will lead to discord in the future.

For a nation to exist into the future, it must have a shared stake in that future, based on common aspirations, values and dreams. "Diversity" is thus the most idiotic concept to celebrate, for we are in essence, celebrating the death of our nation. We can see this destruction happening right before our eyes.

DaveP, Beverley, UK

I have applied to join the National Trust today and will give them donations to help them buy up land and prevent the Uk being concreted over to provide houses for the millions of immigrants New Labour are allowing in unchecked.

I agree, leave the EU it was supposed to be about trade, not millions of immigrants coming into the UK. The comment about the Human Rights act is spot on - it only applies to immigrants and crimminals, not UK citizens.

P Lee, Jersey,

You have completely missed the point - Europe is now a common market with labour mobility. I have friends, relatives who live and work in other EU countries. I am sorry but you are so incapable of living in the 21st century - your narrow view of Europe is quite simply breathtaking - believe it or not this is the largest economy in the world!!

Jon Kingsbury, Southampton, UK

An annual limit is not enough, Mr Green.

The great question for all Europe's native peoples is: do we have the right to exist as peoples, a right guaranteed through possession of own homelands? Or must we collectively submit to the slow, irrevocable processes of local displacement and deracination, and a future as atomised individuals?

If we have the right to be, then post- war immigration has been wrong in principle. If we have that right, then there are higher interests than economism. If we have that right, then liberalism itself is our mortal foe, and must be reformed.

(Post-war) immigration is part of a much larger existential question only addressed among the internet's radical-right thinkers and activists, with whom I associate myself. We attempt to formulate a basis on which European Man may survive into the future.

I thank Mr Green for his skill in operating in the manstream. But an immigration limit now will not give life in perpetuity to the English.

Guessedworker, Lewes, England

The fact is that the ambiguous British immigration system led to this shambles. Lack of swift action is the culture of this government, coupled with the judiciary system’s Judges who often derail removals and slow down the operational work. We have thousands of foreign prisoners, and failed asylum seekers, it costs huge resources to keep them here. Politicians cannot present a clear policy, but manipulating the 'immigration' for party political scoring.

It is too true that we cannot escape the massive human Tsunami of EU migrants. But we have never voted on this issue. There must be some strict criteria, otherwise tension and pressure will severely harm our race relation.

H Marph , London ,

Sir Andrew is, as is usual, right on target. Signing up to the Social Chapter and the associated Human Rights legislation , then gold plating its implementation has landed us in this mess.
The U.K is a small country, our infrastructure cannot cope with those already here. Clearly we need to restrict immigration. Unfettered immigration is just another component of Blairs legacy.
We also need to change the hopeless tax credits system to favour work and smaller families. (If someone wants to have more than two children - that is their choice and at their, or their sponsors, expense).
Has anyone calculated the economic, social and cultural cost of those native-borne citizens of the U.K who , as a result of these policies and consequent pressures, have thrown in the towel and emigrated?

Tim Black

TMJ Black, Southampton, U.K.

Sir Andrew talks sense as always, but he does not go far enough. I never thought I would advocate leaving the EU, but can see that is our only option when it comes to regaining control of our borders. We also need to scrap the crazy and damaging Human Rights Act, which seems to confer more rights on foreign criminals than on our own citizens and we need to withdraw from the Geneva Convention on Refugees, which is well past its sell-by date and has become a vehicle for would be economic migrants. This country is in desperate peril and only desperate measures will do!

Richard, Worcester, England

I back Eddie' s (Bristol) comments. Let the impact of mass immigration be felt by all, especially those who espouse it. A couple I know moved house recently to secure a place in a good primary school for their son. When I asked about it, they said that the schools in our London neighbourhood are full of kids who don't speak English and they didn't think their son would have a decent education. Of course, they said this in the nicest possible way, because they are nice middle class, liberally-inclined people. Exactly the kind of people who welcome unchecked immigration. Well, I say to all those who want unfettered immigration, put your money where your mouth is. Come and live in my area, where you never hear English on the streets, in the shops or in the schools, where services are dangerously overstretched and where there is no binding sense of community, just various highly segregated and inward-looking communities, none of which appear to feel any alleigance to the UK.

LJ, London,

Altogether, there are about 192,000,000 people of British and Irish descent living throughout the world. Of these only 29%, or around 55,000,000 people to be exact, live in the British Isles and the Republic of Ireland. If there is a centre of the anglo-celtic world, then it is North America. Strange then that we so hastily forget we are a nation of emigrants and immigrants when debating this issue. If our island race had not left its shores and headed off in search of a better place then the world would look a hell of a lot different.

Humphrey Clarke esq, London, England

The government has failed yet again in one of the most important areas - it has failed to protect our borders. It has allowed hordes of illegal imigrants, not to say the legal ones into our country. For once we want an 'initiatve' from these bufoons that will not be merely self serving publicity.

Diddly Do, Liverpool,

It is worse than Sir Andrew fears. As the eastern European countries run short of labour, they take in immigrants from outside the EU, thus keeping wages low and encouraging their own citizens to move to countries like Britain. Then there are countries like Spain granting amnesties for illegal immigrants, so even more can come here.

The only answer is for Britain to regain control of its borders. That means leaving the EU. We cannot go on concreting over the countryside indefinitely.

John , Norwich, England

Sir Andrew, with all due respect and given due credit for your sterling work in migration matters, you may well be missing the point by as much as our esteemed government.

The point of the immigration debate is not that our government has made a mess of the numbers. Did they perceive it to be in their economic interests, a Tory government would do precisely the same thing. Nor is the point some inflamatory statistic about foreigners taking jobs in Britain versus Britons taking jobs in Britain.

The point of the immigration debate is a political class that regards the society it is supposed to serve as nothing more than tax donkeys - beasts of burden who can be flogged to work ever harder to finance grand political plans completely disassociated from the needs of British citizens.

Until Britons get off their behinds and show the British political class more repercussions than a low turnout at elections, there is little hope for Britain to regain any responsive government.

John Blackley, Austin, TX, USA

There should be a moratorium on ALL immigration for at least five years to allow time to determine just who is presently in country then to formulate a sensible policy regarding future admittance numbers and desired qualifications and skills.
This should include fair processes to identify true asylum seekers from otherwise economic migrants.

Stan(expat), Texas, USA

The apparatchiks of this government—its MPs, the BBC and liberal press—and the wealthy business bosses, who profit from Britain’s global sweatshop of imported cheap labour, must be the ones are made responsible for mass immigration. Instead of building more houses, our first priority should be to divide up the homes of the wealthiest and make room for the added population. Maximum capacity per household should be based on an average household space of the working majority. Those with second homes should have these divided up (John Prescott, the Royal Family, Tony Blair, for example). Hence, the effects of mass immigration would be much more fairly distributed and the benefits of multiculturalism would be brought much closer to the rich and powerful—rather than just being enjoyed by the working classes.

Eddie Pratt, Bristol, UK