UKIP Leader Farage Pledges 90 Percent Immigration Cut

Yahoo! News, March 31, 2015

The head of the UK Independence Party on Tuesday promised to slash net migration into Britain by 90 percent as he unveiled an election poster showing escalators riding up the White Cliffs of Dover.

In a campaign stop at the ferry port city, Nigel Farage accused Prime Minister David Cameron of being “dishonest”, arguing that Britain could not control immigration while staying in the European Union.

Farage said he would cut net migration to around 30,000 people a year from the current level of some 300,000 a year. The Conservatives had promised to reduce the numbers to under 100,000 a year.

“I’m saying a net level of about 30,000 a year is roughly what we had for 50 years from 1950 almost until the turn of the century,” Farage said.

“It was a level at which this country was comfortable and that integration was possible and it didn’t, crucially, compress the wages.”


Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Dave4088

    Net immigration should be zero and the only people allowed should be skilled whites from other white nations or beleaguered whites from Zimbabwe and S. Africa. In addition, they should enact a repatriation policy for all Pakistanis starting with those guilty of raping and pimping young English girls.

    • Sun

      Raping and pimping young English girls shouldn’t get you repatriation but death.

  • John Smith

    It’s a start, but his previously stated preference for Commonwealth countries is too broad and includes the most harmful potential immigrants.

    • corvinus

      Yeah… Pakistan and Nigeria are Commonwealth countries. To heck with that.

  • Charles Martel

    I am pretty sure that the BNP had used the elevator at the dover cliffs in previous elections. Has anyone ever apologized to Nick Griffon for his arrest for saying moslems are raping little white girls?

    • David Ashton

      Certainly not “The Times” when it suited this Murdoch-owned and Jewish-edited daily to have a go at some Muslims – with impunity.

      • LackawannaErie

        Watch out, looks like Abe Foxman has been moderating Amren comments again.

    • Singingbird1

      Nobody will ever apologise to Nick Griffin even though he deserves an apology. For the establishment to apologise to Nick Griffin would bring their whole worlds crashing down on them and then they would probably commit suicide. The establishment just could not handle the psychological consequences of such an action.

    • corvinus

      Remember Rotherham. Griffin was right.

  • Awakened Saxon

    Why stop at 90%? Maybe it’s just politics to avoid scaring off the sheep or maybe he really is committed to immigration. It is no secret that race means nothing to UKIP. I find it hard to trust Farage’s motives on much of anything. Unless the ‘immigrants’ are colonists returning home (e.g., Anglo-Canadians), then there should be no immigration to Britain. It is already overcrowded and its native people are already in serious danger.

    • David Ashton

      Asked by Paxman on TV how many more millions of immigrants could Britain take, Ed Miliband snuffled and gurgled: “I am not going to take a figure out of the air, Jeremy”.

    • LHathaway

      I hope his motives are to get elected, and that this is the only way he can get elected.

  • MekongDelta69

    How about Zero percent?

  • MBlanc46

    That’s 30,000 too many, but it’s a start.

  • LeonNJ

    Hey Nigel, you can take our young Hispanic children that are crossing our border. Don’t be shy, please take them all!

  • Good luck to UKIP, that’s all I can say. They are not nationalists and on many things they are not leaning towards the interests of the genuine British people, but a 90% decrease in numbers would be a godsend.

    All of us here would want it to be zero, but the way things are heading (especially with over 300,000 new immigrant voters arriving every year), we are going to have increasingly less say in our own futures via the ballot box. Immigrants can already “swing” seats.

    It is just a shame that UKIP are not likely to reach a position where they can command it.

    This has to be one of the most boring elections I can remember. I can’t even be bothered listening to any of the main parties drone on in their usual ways.However, I think we are faced with that awful dilemma, as usual, as to whether allow Labour back into office by voting for UKIP.

    I am hoping to break the back of the LIB/LAB/CON and shocking the system with a massive UKIP vote, hopefully sending the Tories into the dustbin of history – but I am mindful that allowing Labour back in would likely be the nail in our coffin.

    Mind you, the Tories have not lifted a finger on immigration (and actually made it worse) – but I have no reason to believe that Labour will be any different.

    • LackawannaErie

      Take some advice from American nationalists — do everything you can to break the Conservatives. The lesser of two evil strategy DOES NOT WORK. It only empowers the traitors on the right. As we know, immigration under Cameron has hit it’s highest level EVER in the UK. Labor is at least claiming to want a reduction in immigration. Labor replacing the Conservatives is good for nationalists. Right wing governments that sell out on immigration must be brought down at any cost. Not doing so ensures that the sell outs on the right have no incentive to change. If Cameron can allow in the most immigrants of any UK government ever, AND STILL WIN, why would he want to change anything?

      • Yeah, I think you’re right. I had already made my mind up on what I was going to do at the polling station. The trouble is what the rest of the country will end up doing.

        There was a little semi-smear article the other day in the Daily Mail (as usual) against UKIP as they unveiled their very good posters for their election campaign (showing three escalators onto the white cliffs of Dover).

        The article listed the UKIP policies and compared them to the other parties when it comes to immigration.

        One thing that struck me the most – but sadly most of the British electorate are perhaps too dense to notice – was that all of UKIP policies were orientated around stopping immigrants from arriving. The majority of the other policies in all the other parties was how to deal with them when they are here (“restricting welfare access until 2 years residency” etc).

        I tried to make a comment on the newspaper site saying this – but, no surprise, it was not allowed through the moderation. No profanity, no venom, just a simple statement of this observation. But that is the Mail for you. Only around 1 in 12 of my comments ever gets through. They seem to want to narrow the debate to either rampant knee-jerk or outraged liberal.

        • David Ashton

          This is bad news because the “Mail” usually had the fairest range of correspondent opinions of all, but it backs Cameron against Miliband, despite a sensible if futile article today (April 2) on the refusal of the “Cons” to face up to public immigration concern. The “Mail” painfully “lives down” its brief ancient Rothermere flirtation with Adolf by constant anti-Nazi articles of little merit, and is notable as a supposedly “right-wing rag” for its continuous attacks on the Royal Family and excessive vilification of Prince Charles.

          • Regarding the endless Nazi stories, they are run pretty much every day, which is one reason I started to call it the Daily Hail.

            The paper is schizophrenic. It will run shock stories about the body image problems of teenagers – whilst to the right hand side of the same page they are dripping it full of celebrities caught bulging out of their bikini tops, or showing the latest washboard stomachs.

            They will have outrage and damnation about Roma sleeping rough on Marble Arch, or some asylum seeking rapist who could not be deported, but as soon as somebody speaks up about it, they turn on them and run smear campaigns.

          • David Ashton

            The paper also caters for females worried about health as well as males who like pictures of sexy legs and skimpy outfits that illustrate denunciations of them – hypochondria, hypocrisy and hyperbole!

    • David Ashton

      Sadly there is a lot of truth in this. It is a “rotation” of the SAME “elites”. Despite the problems with Farage and his party, a big vote for them would send a message at least. “The Spectator” recently published an article suggesting that Cameron had already agreed with Clegg to keep their joint [PC] show on the road, so if we vote “Con” we get back the hated Clegg via “Coalition”. Then, we are told, if we vote UKIP, we put Miliband in by default, and get the SNP in control via a Labour minority-“government”. Meanwhile, the “wagons” roll into Britain which has nearly twice its appropriate population numbers. “We need all of Britain for the British” – Oswald Mosley, 80 years ago!

  • Hilis Hatki

    They think by creating the “qlobal race*, “earth citizen ” that it will usher in a paradise. Instead, this implementation of “oneness” will be hell on earth.

  • very sad how people here are attacking farage…at least it is a step forward…and our politicians are not even close to talking like this…and yet farage is attacked here…for saying he wants to dramatically cut immigration…strange…it’s like the Dissident Right really does not want to change anything

  • David Ashton

    The polyethnic “entertainment” and dance-“music” industry is one major factor in this typical degeneration of attitudes.

  • Northern American-Nationalist

    ā€œIā€™m saying a net level of about 30,000 a year is roughly what we had
    for 50 years from 1950 almost until the turn of the century,ā€ Farage

    That immigration level brought the UK population from 99.99% white to somewhere between 95% and 92.1% white (the census figures for “whites” from the 1991 and 2001 UK censuses respectively) in JUST half a century. That is just a slower, perhaps even more destructive, national suicide; although, I can appreciate the need to play politics given the Overton Window effect.

    Worse still, those numbers don’t take into account the figures for the “white British” population (otherwise known as the indigenous of the British Isles like the English, Scottish, and Welsh) vis-a-vis the “white other” population (like the Polish refugees or “BrItalian” immigrants, who are of course not indigenous either), all of whom are lumped together in, and statistically hidden by, the white census category rightly or wrongly; not to mention, the disproportionate effect on England and London as compared to the rest of the UK.

  • …..