Seek hypocrisy across Channel

IF only critics of populist politics would pay more attention to detail they might come up with a few pertinent facts from time to time. David Taylor-Gooby’s latest opinion piece (last Monday) is a case in point.

Suella Braverman’s approach to immigration, he contends, represents the “height of hypocrisy”. He goes on to claim that the daughter of migrants to this country demands “we must prevent immigration”.

An open and shut case. Except that she has argued for no such thing. And neither have any of the other mainstream populists that I’ve come across. Braverman supports manageable levels of legal migration. Ideally, levels similar to those we used to enjoy back in the days when her parents came to this country looking for a better life.

Very much in keeping with the feelings of many voters. It’s inflammatory to equate this consistent, realistic approach to migration with “preventing immigration”. It’s insulting to brand it hypocritical.

If you’re seeking hypocrisy it might be instructive to look across the Channel. The same people responsible for the introduction of the EU’s Schengen “open borders” system are all of a sudden coming up with anti-immigrant deals with neighbouring countries. Just listen to the screeching of brakes as they rush to repair the damage caused by their utopian experiment. It’s embarrassing!

Finally, it would be remiss of me to fail to challenge Taylor-Gooby’s habitual side swipe at Brexit which was “supposed to solve our problems and has in fact only made them worse”. Really ... a democratic deficit corrected ... new legislative freedoms. Nobody ever pretended it would solve our problems without the active involvement of competent politicians.

John Hodgkins, Seaton Sluice