I see no reason to add to this non-beneficial members from other countries. As for those in the country who increase,
I would say that EU migrants are most certainly useful. Since they fill jobs that otherwise wouldn't be filled.
The agency supplying this farm with labour has had hundreds of Eastern Europeans pass through its doors in the last two years - and all of three English people.
But there's little appetite for taking one of those vegetable-picking jobs of up to £7-an-hour. One group of lads:
"No mate I'd prefer to sign-on than do that."
"I don't want to work in like no cornfield."
"I don't want to work with a load of foreigners."
All right? Did I not just say that immigration should be mutually beneficial? This is an example of that.
Yeah, but "UKIP loses 8% of support" would be just as true and in tune with the anti UKIP feel of a section of our media. Instead even the outlets that hate UKIP are calling it some kind of new era.
I for one do not welcome our slightly racist, hypocritical, xenophobic middle Englander overlords.
Good news: Democracy means the chance of overlords is nearly nil. Unless, of course, you wish to elect them as overlords
Anyway, to sum and end this argument on UKIP, such an arrangement should benefit both parties. There are a number who come in and don't help towards anything. There are criminal aspects who come in. There are those who come in with the intention of working with the country, of being a member of the country, and who are not criminal. Of these, I think I know which group should be chosen for. So, to say again, such a policy isn't racist; just common sense.