A TALE OF TWO QUANGOS
by Christopher Marlowe

Two Government-backed quangos are engaged in a ‘race relations’ slanging match over which is best equipped to make UK Muslims feel more accepted by society at large and to reduce or remove the UK – wide mental association – prevalent, also, at government level – of phrases like ‘preventing violent extremism’ with the UK Muslim community.

The organisations involved in the row are Prevent, a government-backed agency established in 2006 with a £45 million budget and tasked with, among other goals, engaging with the Muslim community and ‘preventing violent extremism’ at a local level and its fiercest critic, another government-backed quango,  the newly-launched National Local Government Network (NLGN).

Prevent, which has 94 local councils on its list, roars the NLGN should not be focusing chiefly on the Muslim community as a likely source of ‘violent extremism’, a catch-phrase also used by Prevent’s various municipal clients, but should also be highlighting the alleged threat posed by, for example, so-called ‘Far Right’ parties like the BNP and the National Front. While Prevent has had a few successes its wider strategies and approaches to ethnic minority communities threaten, says the NLGN, to alienate some of these communities, especially Muslim communities.

Prevent, says the NLGN, should simply be scrapped and its large budget employed more wisely and more effectively.

The NF wholeheartedly agrees but unlike the NLGN, however, the NF wants both of the above bodies shut down and their combined finances put to far better uses, such as building new schools, youth and community facilities and Police stations in and providing better health care and public transport facilities for our nation’s run-down and unemployment blighted urban estates and rural communities.

We want all such bodies dismantled and their headquarters, regional and local offices and depots, along with all related vehicles and computer systems transferred, with suitable budgets for their upkeep, to needy local authority bodies so that the latter can get on with their primary roles of building and maintaining decent standard housing, generating and sustaining effective public services and creating education, training and employment opportunities for our country’s rebelling and bewildered youth.

We also want a realistic percentage of such sequestered monies allocated (a) to our rural communities, with grants available to rural Councils, struggling farmers and smaller landowners and means-tested but generous where available grants and low interest loans to larger, better off landowners. The NF would, in power, of course centralise all food and other agricultural production under the aegis of respectively a national Farmers’ Union and a Landowners’ Association and (b) to our coastal and, especially, our fishing communities. For far too long our coastal communities and fishing fleets have been sidelined and their potential income drastically slashed by European Parliament laws and regulations. Too many have become ghost towns and unemployment blackspots where drug dealers and loan sharks rule the streets with violence and fear.

The NF wants to see a radical shake-up of central government investment and job creation efforts in both our rural and our coastal communities. One way of doing so is, as above, to tear down the ‘Race Relations’ industry’s numerous costly and wasteful quangos and local / regional structures and to reallocate their funding and practical resources.

Meanwhile, the Prevent – NLGN dispute continues unabated.

In a recent NLGN report author Anna Turley ripped into Prevent saying: “Prevent is too prescriptive from the centre, undermines broader community cohesion objectives and lacks sufficient integration with Police and the security services at local and national level. Concern has also been acknowledged over the agenda’s impact on relations with Muslim communities and whether it unfairly stigmatises an entire community.

(NF comment: If only there existed cash-cow government agencies solely devoted to the social inclusion, Police and security services protection and spiritual well-being of Britain’s indigenous native White population).

Somewhat cheekily, for a new organisation, the NLGN has also urged Communities and Local Government Secretary John Denham to allow a permanent representative of that department – ideally an expert on domestic UK extremism - to join the seven departmental representatives already. on the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC).

Mr. Denham’s response to the JIC suggestion is not known but he has agreed to explore ways of reforming Prevent’s outlook upon and its promotion of its ‘preventing violent extremism’ motto.

It is, for example, known that government officials, under mounting pressure from UK Muslim leaders, have written to all 94 of Prevent’s local authority clients urging them to cease using the phrase ‘preventing violent extremism’ and to broaden out the definition of ‘violent extremism’ to include the UK ‘Far Right’.

Over at the Immigration ministry Minister of State Phil Woolas has left readers of one widely read UK Muslim newspaper in no doubt about LIEbour’s long-term commitment to future migration to Britain.

In a personal article about Marxist New Labour’s Australian-style immigration point’s scheme and, also, about Labour’s interpretation of citizenship, Mr. Woolas wrote: “There is no question that migration has brought enormous benefits to the UK. Many of those who come here plug hard-to-fill jobs gaps, playing a key role in running public services, especially in health and education.” Detailing his and Labour’s views on citizenship and different forms of citizenship for foreign migrants, Mr. Woolas also wrote: ‘I am committed to ensuring that migration benefits the UK. Moreover, I am also aware of the responsibilities that brings – and it must not have a negative impact on the developing world.’

The National Front marvels at Mr. Woolas’s calm avoidance of the fact that there are tens of thousands of foreign visitors ( illegally staying on past their visa expiry dates), failed asylum seekers and refugees and other illegals roaming these isles and giving two fingers to the UK Border Agency and Immigration authorities; that the government has publicly admitted that it does not know where many of these illegals are, that many have resorted to a life of crime and illegal drug usage and importation and that once such illegals are apprehended and placed in supposedly secure detention centres many remain in such centres for months or years rather than being sent back either to their country of origin or to the country from which they traveled to the UK.

Mr Woolas also failed to say what any ordinary citizen can see with his or her own eyes:

·         that the mass immigration policies employed over several decades by successive Labour and Conservative governments have created, in a number of British towns and cities, serious overcrowding of parts of these towns and cities with ghetto-style communities which have, in certain towns and cities, already begun to outnumber the indigenous native population

·         that by the middle of this century the above outnumbering of indigenous Native Britons will have become a national phenomenon

·         that ‘multi-culturalism’ simply doesn’t work and

·         Transforming the UK’s indigenous native folk into second-class citizens in their own land is a recipe for current, deeply felt, resentment and frustration and a guaranteed springboard to future social unrest. 

In his above article, Mr. Woolas confirmed the launch of a consultancy exercise designed to test the government’s points- based Immigration and Earned / Probationary Citizenship system.

Saying that a British passport is ‘a privilege that must be earned’ and that ‘citizenship is a privilege not a right’, he wrote that before incoming migrants achieve full citizenship and the right to settle here permanently they must first complete a phase of Probationary Citizenship. This process will begin with successful completion of the new migrants’ questionnaire or, as he put it, ‘test’. The test, Mr. Woolas believes, ‘will allow the government to have more control over the number of people allowed to settle here permanently, and allow us to raise or lower the bar depending on the needs of the country and the economy.’

Points – the earning and scoring values of which and questions relating to migrants’ suitability for entry are a central element of the above consultancy research - could be earned by migrants via: ‘economic contributions, qualifications, skills and English language proficiency.’ Officials are also broadening out the definition of and scope for points’ earning of the existing pre-requisite that a migrant be of sound, good, character

On the subject of English language proficiency, Mr. Woolas wrote: ‘ We believe that migrants who want to make Britain their long-term home should speak English, and do their best to integrate into British society.’

While having slipped in the reference to integration Mr. Woolas also revealed the government’s willing to maintain a revolving door policy for migrants who during the early years of their application process. In recent years, we in the UK have witnessed how many Polish and Baltic States workers in the UK would (a) routinely send home portions of their wages to help relatives in Poland and (b) work for up to 9 months of the tax year then return to Poland, so as to avoid income tax, for up to 3 months before again coming to work in the UK.

In his article, Mr. Woolas wrote how ‘while Britain is benefiting, it is important that we do not deprive other countries of the skilled people they need most. It’s in our long-term interest that they have the doctors, nurses and teachers who are so crucial to their development. Those that do come to the UK must be given the opportunity to help their country and invest their new-found skills. But we need to get the balance right. This is not just about money. It’s also about the skills these workers can provide. We also want to do more to facilitate ‘circular’ rather than one-way immigration – enabling people to come here to train, learn their trade and then use their skills back home in the developing world.’

‘Migrants could also ‘pause’ their UK immigration status to allow them to go home for longer without having to re-apply when they return to the UK. And those seeking to become British citizens might bolster their application by returning to their home country to help in its development.’

On the subject of UK migrants’ homeward-sent earnings, Mr. Woolas gave as an example of this the money sent home by the overseas Filipino community.

‘According to research, the Philippines received $7 billion in global remittance in 2002 alone. That represents almost 9 per cent of its gross national product and it was a first source of income for some 2.6 million families.’ Writing of foreign workers in Britain in general, he added: ‘To deny these workers the chance to come to Britain and send money home would have a terribly detrimental effect on these countries’.

It is well seen, Mr Woolas, that you were writing for a UK Asian newspaper and not for the mainstream UK Press. The NF has no monopoly on opposition to your government’s policies on immigration but having been around for over 40 years the NF can claim to have witnessed all of the various stages in the growth of the immigration and ‘multi-cultural’ industries. We have, as a party, witnessed the savage undermining of traditional British culture and society at the hands of successive waves of politicians and civil servants – with each successive wave of Immigration ministers and mandarins we have seen the immigration tidal wave grow bigger ad we have seen successive departmental ploys claim to be socially engineering immigration so that we, the thinking public, need not worry,. That all is under control.

Four decades later, the horse has bolted and the stable door is falling off of its hinges. The tidal waves of immigrants which have hit our shores have so transformed the face of British society that it is today unrecognisable. Within one or two generations we, the UK’s native Britons will have been out-bred by alien communities to whom our ancient and once proud history and heritage have little or no meaning.

So, we ask, Mr. Woolas, that you forgive us our skepticism, our disbelief and our outright shock to have learned via your article of yet more devious spinning of policies, of which the average British citizen likely has not heard, would not understand and will be adversely affected by.

SO WHAT if a UK government with balls and chutzpah were to decide that British citizenship for foreign migrants also meant, if only for the first few years, visibly saving and spending the majority of their income in the UK? SO WHAT if, as a result, the Philippines loses a few million dollars from Filipinos resident in the UK? TOUGH LUCK. By allowing such extensive repatriation of earnings by tens of thousands of foreign workers Whitehall is effectively indulging in foreign aid by another name.

The NF strongly opposes and would, in power, cancel both the Lib-Lab-Con style of immigration management and, as above, the hemorrhaging from Britain’s Treasury and economy of any form of direct or indirect foreign aid.

To end as we began…Again, the National Local Government Network wants Prevent, an agency responsible for ‘preventing violent extremism’ at a local level, to be scrapped and its funds diverted to a more manageable…no doubt to the coffers of the NLGN.

The NF says.. scrap ALL such agencies and allocate their funds and other resources to local Councils and regional government, with a sizeable chunk of such investments being spent in the countryside and on Britain’s coastal communities

The NF says...abolish the entire ‘multi-cultural’ industry and put those wider funds to similar but more varied usage...especially to the provision of better wages, equipment, accommodation and leisure facilities for our hard-pressed Armed Forces personnel and, also, to the restoration or creation of canteens in every Police station and the standardisation and up-grading of personal protection and riot clothing for our under-manned and chaotically funded Police forces.

Abolish the heinous Race Acts, reform the Border Agency, the Immigration Service and those sections of HM Customs and Revenue who work hand in hand with the above fellow agencies in the battle against illegal immigration and keep our borders tightly shut against all unwanted aliens.