Blog

Conservative MPs slug it out at ‘rag, tag, and bobtail’ Westminster Hall debate

Pete Wishart, the Scottish National Party (SNP) MP, mocked the Conservative leadership by demanding an urgent statement on European Union (EU) membership and immigration at the House of Commons Dispatch Box from Nigel Farage, the man “pulling the strings of the Conservative party”. He scorned Andrew Lansley a couple of hours before an acrimonious debate in Westminster Hall saw Conservative MPs fiercely debating these issues.

Lansley objected to Wishart’s claims saying the SNP MP lived “in some kind of fantasy world” and Farage “is not pulling strings”. These knockabout gibes were staged to set the scene for the upcoming debate in Westminster Hall on potential immigration from Romania and Bulgaria. With 16 backbench Conservative MPs, 2 from Labour, and virtually none from any other party, the debate was often lopsided, and the Immigration Minister Mark Harper MP had to joust with his own very angry MPs.

Nigel Mills MP, the lead for the debate who is also responsible for stalling the government’s Immigration Bill, launched into a speech blaming his ministerial colleagues for not giving him the opportunity to debate his amendment to the Immigration Bill. He added that immigration continues to grow and it would be unlikely that the government would meet its net migration target if Bulgarian and Romanian migrants are allowed to come here en masse, which his amendment would have put to a stop to.

Much of the debate centred on the disparities of wealth between existing EU states and new accession states, in particular, migrants from Eastern European countries who would earn more money in the UK. The government’s proposed crack-down on benefit tourism was dismissed as “too little, too late” by Tory MP John Baron who added that:

The vast majority come here to work, and they work hard. They come not because of the benefits, but because the average salary here is so much higher than in their home country.

Philip Hollobone and others mentioned the potential for criminality, going as far as to claim “we are importing a wave of crime from Romania and Bulgaria” and Christopher Chope MP adding that certain groups of Romanians have a propensity to “engage in low-level crime”.

Migration Watch UK was mentioned a number of times as providing a helpful figure on the likely number of Bulgarian and Romanian migrants to enter the UK. Tobias Ellwood, Conservative MP for Bournemouth, dismissed the Migration Watch UK estimates as “disingenuous” and “slightly misleading” because they compare “the Polish numbers then with Romanian and Bulgarian numbers now”. He was admonished by Hollobone for not reading “Migration Watch’s report more closely”.

Tobias Ellwood MP

Ellwood was the only voice in the sea of hostility to “add some facts and figures, and indeed corrections, to some of the quite barmy assumptions” in Westminster Hall and the wider media debate. Mark Reckless MP, another Tory and a member of the Home Affairs Select Committee, accused Ellwood of being narcissistic as he painted the immigration debate as a battle between “little Englanders... versus the multicultural open-door approach”.

Ellwood added that Bournemouth was heavily reliant on overseas workers and international investment and leaving the EU “will damage or possibly kill off genuine international interest in inward-investment opportunities, as well as export prospects and British influence abroad.”

The parliamentary debate about EU migration and immigration in general is becoming contested and bitter. While the government’s mantra of inviting the ‘best and the brightest’ to come to the UK and simultaneously creating a ‘hostile environment’ for irregular migrants continues to reduce net migration, Conservative backbenchers are openly saying they’d prefer if other countries’ brightest individuals stayed at home and kept their low skilled migrants there too.

Mark Harper is now under intense pressure to deliver the government’s first Immigration Bill in a timely fashion while fending off angry Tory MPs demanding not only more draconian cuts to migration but using EU migration as a shadow boxing exercise for the looming great debate on the European Union. The minister could use more support from the likes of Ellwood and Brooks Newmark MP. 

Other users went on to read:


Comments

One thing you can be sure about in immigration debates is that there will be plenty of lies, exaggerations and anti foreigner sentiment , especially from the NASTY party, but rarely any facts or honesty .

Fighting like the rabid dogs they are. But the bitch wasn't there. She let her poodle bark for her. Pete Wishart is a scrapper like his style. Pity he's just SNP. Maybe time to become a Scot?

A note on commenting

Due to recent increased commenting activity we have taken the decision to disable commenting on old blogs. As we are a small office it is simply impossible to fight spam and keep removing comments that don’t comply with our house rules on what is now an archive of over 800 pieces.

We have also decided to take a more proactive role in enforcing our blog house rules on the blogs where comments are open. The rules are there for a good reason and we want to make sure we are consistent and apply them across the board. 

This is not in any shape or form meant to stifle debate, but to make sure that it remains civil and on topic.

Thanks and best regards,

--MRN Team

http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/about/blog-rules

MRN blogging and comments – Policy and House Rules

Your comments

1. Please be civil– we will remove anything that:

  • Is considered likely to provoke, attack or offend others
  • Is racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable
  • Contains swear words or other language likely to offend
  • Breaks the law, condones or encourage unlawful activity or which could endanger the safety or well-being of others
  • Impersonates someone else
  • advertises products or services

2. Comments that could damage the reputation of a person or organisation, that risk prejudicing on-going or forthcoming court proceedings or that could place MRN in contravention of its legal and/or regulatory obligations will be removed.

3. Please make comments relevant to the subject of the article. We may remove comments that we consider to be spam or which are unrelated to the article content against which they are posted.

4. Please keep the number of comments you make on a topic reasonable. Too many posts from an individual or small group can discourage other readers from joining the conversation.

5. In exceptional cases we may get a high volume of similar comments on a post. In these cases we may close comments for that post, adding a note letting you know that further comments will not be published.

6. By submitting comments to this site, you warrant that such comments are not defamatory nor infringe any law. You agree to indemnify MRN against all legal fees, damages and other expenses that may be incurred by MRN as a result of your breach of the above warranty.