Leading the Church of England demands moral gymnastics that would equip archbishops for starring roles with the Cirque du Soleil. On gays, women priests, abortion, war and poverty, successive primates have demonstrated a genius for contortionism.
There is scarcely a great issue of the day which our religious leaders fail to dodge, swinging nimbly from trapeze to trapeze. This helps explain why the poor old C of E is in such bad shape.
If a sect appears neither to hold nor to demand from its followers clear beliefs, it is hardly surprising that trade falls off.
As Archbishop of Canterbury from 1991 to 2002, George Carey was the embodiment of decency and ineffectuality, the wets' wet. Churchill described prime minister Ramsay Macdonald as The Boneless Wonder. He would have been lost for an epithet if confronted with George Carey.
Yet suddenly, and as so often happens after a man retires, Lord Carey has found a voice. Speaking on Radio 4's Sunday programme, he urged Gordon Brown as Prime Minister to restrict immigration.
Immigration control
The Government's projection is that immigrants will account for 83 per cent of our future population growth
"The issue will not go away," he said. "I hope he will impose stricter controls on those entering the United Kingdom."
Amen, most of his listeners will have muttered, after themselves sounding the same alarm for years. Many, I suspect, also said to each other: "Why couldn't he have said that while he was Archbishop?"
Why not, indeed? Yet we welcome the sinner that repenteth, and we know the answer. Churchmen want to be seen to adopt "Christian" attitudes.
Forgetting all the bloodcurdling policy statements in the Bible, they identify Christianity with reflex liberalism. The liberal establishment thinks that it is a sin against God and man to close Britain's doors in the face of outsiders, and especially against the poor and oppressed.
Lord Carey was at pains on Sunday to qualify his remarks about immigration by calling for clemency towards asylum-seekers.
He wants it both ways: to reflect the views of most of his British flock, who know that further curbs are essential; and to add a "compassionate" footnote, to avoid falling out with his friends.
Yet there is no case for weasel words. The reality facing this country is simply stated. An almost unlimited number of people from poor countries, and from societies where they are oppressed and threatened, want to come to Britain.
At present, they are arriving in numbers which threaten our social stability and the capacity of communities to absorb them, and indeed promise to change the character of this country.
George Carey
The former Archbishop of Canterbury said he hoped the new PM will impose stricter controls on those entering the UK
By the Government's own projections, immigrants will account for 83 per cent of our future population growth, and will require us to build more than 200 houses a day for the next 20 years to provide them with roofs.
Most native Britons fiercely resist and resent the influx, and feel betrayed by the entire political class which is allowing it to happen.
The Government professes to believe in restricting entry, but refuses to enforce effective controls. It is unnecessary to be a conspiracy theorist to believe that many Labour ministers and MPs simply do not mind.
They told us in 1997 that they intended to bring about "an irreversible change in the nature of British society". Wholesale immigration contributes mightily to this process, as few newcomers vote Tory.
As Home Secretary, John Reid has belatedly talked and acted more toughly. Reid realises the immense strains and passions generated by immigration in Labour's urban heartlands, especially in the North of England. But Reid is about to quit office. We have no idea what his successor will do.
The Government still rejects the only convincing means of checking the flow: an absolute limit on numbers, which should be set not only far below the current 300,000 a year, but also down from the Government's future projection of 145,000.
After a decade in which Britain's population has increased by 1.6 million according to official figures - many more if an unknown number of illegals is added - the Government has the effrontery to claim that it now operates "tight" rules.
This causes Sir Andrew Green of Migration Watch to say: "If the present system amounts to 'tight controls', I dread to think what loose ones might mean."
Whitehall's efforts to stem the huge traffic in arranged marriages, notably from Pakistan, are feeble. The Government is least uncomfortable when quoting our net population figure, because this deducts the 100,000 British people who quit this country every year.
Immigration
Lord Carey has urged Gordon Brown as Prime Minister to restrict immigration
While almost all emigrants are, of course, professed Christians, a huge number of those who come in are Muslims.
And there's the rub. Since so many have no desire to adopt the values and customs of our society, their presence has drastically altered the appearance and character of Britain's inner cities.
Lord Carey said on Sunday that he hopes Gordon Brown "will not forget the importance of Christian identity at the heart of being a part of the United Kingdom". It seems fanciful to suppose that his wish will be fulfilled.
For the new Prime Minister to act convincingly on immigration will require a huge investment of political capital, and a row with the liberal establishment which it is doubtful Brown has the stomach for.
He also needs to believe that failure to act will cost him votes. This is unlikely, as long as the Conservative Party maintains its current low profile on the issue.
I am an admirer of Tory leader David Cameron. But it seems extraordinary that he scarcely opens his mouth about a subject which alarms most British people vastly more than Iraq, the environment or Europe.
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis makes some fierce noises. The Conservatives have produced policy documents calling for a much firmer line on the entry of dependants, and for an overall upper limit.
But the leader himself, even in a big speech such as the one he made in Tooting, South London, last week, seems determined to stay off this dangerous turf.
Cameron is scarred by the memory of the Tories' fate at the 2005 election, after Michael Howard talked tough about immigration. I do not believe that had anything to do with Howard's defeat, but the Cameron camp think they did.
They are bent upon shaking off their old image as the "nasty" party. They are surely correct: a Right-wing Tory leader cannot win a General Election in today's social democratic Britain.
But immigration should not be an issue of Right versus Left. It is about the future of this country, and everybody who cares should have a voice.
Today, as a result of the Tories' near-silence, more than a few of their natural supporters seep away to lunatic fringe groups.
The worst thing Enoch Powell did to British politics was to make it so hard to argue rationally about immigration. Ever since Powell, who was indeed pretty mad, it has been thought somehow unclean and not for polite society to say that we do not need or want millions of foreign migrants.
Stifling this debate is wrong and dangerous. It denies the British people a political voice on something they care deeply about.
Lord Carey's remarks on Sunday should achieve one important purpose. They show that it is not extremist, or fascist, or even illiberal to demand vastly more stringent immigration controls. It is vital common sense.
It will be welcome if David Cameron learns the lesson. And even more so if Gordon Brown does.
Up to three in four marriages revealed as 'sham' as immigration rules are tightened
No comments:
Post a Comment