Monday, June 10, 2013

Sunday Globe Special: British Immigration

Same problem as you have, Americans, proving this is indeed a globalist plan.

"British employers see value in continentwide labor pool" by Stephen Castle |  New York Times, June 09, 2013

LONDON — With several big construction projects underway in Britain, the multinational company CH2M Hill searched in vain for six months for a qualified tunneling engineer.

What are they teaching in English schools then?

Only a few weeks ago the company found a candidate, in Portugal. CH2M Hill quickly made plans to bring him north — no visa or work permits were required, thanks to a European Union policy that allows the free flow of labor across the borders of the 27-country bloc.

With signs that Britain might seek an exit from the European Union, businesses like CH2M Hill are starting to focus on what they might lose in the labor force if it does leave.

For non-Europeans, securing a work permit can take three months, so the European Union’s labor law is a huge help, said Michael I. Glenn, CH2M Hill’s director of international operations.

Continental Europe provides a nearby pool of potential employees with the experience, skills, and engineering qualifications needed to work in Britain, added Andrea Laws, the company’s director of international recruitment.

Britain, with 61.9 million people, has an estimated 40.6 million people of working age. But together, the 27 countries in the European Union, population 494.9 million, represent a much vaster labor pool, about 329.7 million strong. (Only citizens of Romania and Bulgaria are restricted from working freely in Britain, and they will gain that right in January when temporary restrictions imposed by Britain must lapse.)

Despite Britain’s unemployment rate of 7.8 percent, many businesses say that without access to the European Union’s labor pool, they would have trouble filling all sorts of jobs, whether because they cannot find enough people with the right skills in Britain or because there are some jobs that Britons are reluctant to do.

That's the same bull they shovel at us to justify the insourcing of cheap foreign labor.

A report this month from the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry, a business lobbying group, concluded that Britain’s leaving the European Union would “have a direct impact on firms’ ability to do business,” on “their access to skills,” and, therefore, on the British government’s tax revenue.

The report also said the 2.2 million European Union immigrants were “much more likely” to be employed and less likely to be reliant on public welfare benefits than British citizens or immigrants from outside the European Union.

But migrant labor remains a contentious issue here. Britain’s growing populist force, the UK Independence Party, blames the European Union for allowing hundreds of thousands of workers from outside the country to settle here.

No worry about terrorists, 'eh?

“The business perspective, broadly speaking, clashes with the number one concern about the EU from the public,” said Mats Persson, director of Open Europe, a research institute that favors a looser relationship between Britain and the European Union.

That's why I call it bu$ine$$.

His solution would be to restrict welfare benefits for migrants rather than their right to work in Britain.

Big British employers of foreign labor include service businesses like hotels because, the report said, “part of the problem with sectors like retail, leisure, and hospitality is their poor image and the belief that they do not offer career progression opportunities.”

--more--"

Related:

"As drafted, the legislation also creates a low-skilled guest-worker program, expands the number of visas available for high-tech workers, and de-emphasizes family ties in the system for legal immigration that has been in place for decades."

Also see: Where New England's Senators Stand on Immigration

Related:

"Governor Christie sets October vote for open seat" June 05, 2013

NEW YORK — In a decision fraught with political implications, Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey said Tuesday that he would schedule a special election in October for the Senate seat left vacant by the death of Frank R. Lautenberg on Monday.

The move was expected to draw criticism from Democrats in the state, arguing that such a move by Christie, a Republican, would amount to squandering taxpayer money to protect his own political ambitions. Scheduling a special election rather than adding the vote for the Senate seat to the November ballot would cost millions of dollars.

A special Oct. 16 ballot means the choice of a new senator will not overshadow the race for governor, which will now remain at the top of statewide ballots in November.

How much is that going to cost taxpayers?

Republicans in the state are counting on Christie, who has been hoping that a landslide reelection victory will help propel a possible run for president in 2016, to draw his supporters to the polls, helping Republican candidates for the state Legislature and for many local offices.

Republicans nationally were pressing him to opt for an interpretation that would allow him to delay an election until November 2014. That would have allowed Christie’s choice of an interim senator, presumably from his own party, to give Republicans in the Senate the gift of an extra votecomplicating efforts by the White House and congressional Democrats to advance their agenda, including overhauling immigration laws and pushing through presidential nominations.

Just as important, it would let a Republican enjoy a year and a half of incumbency — perhaps enough to counteract Democrats’ natural advantages in a state where they outnumber Republicans by 700,000 registered voters and where Republican have not won a Senate election in 41 years.

Democrats, meanwhile, were pressing Christie to add the Senate contest to the state ballot in November. But Republican insiders said Christie and others in his party were leery of drawing Democrats to the polls excited about the Senate contest.

A primary election will be held in August, Christie said, allowing voters rather than party leaders to select the candidates for the seats.

--more--"

MORE:

"Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey, who announced a special election in October so voters can choose a replacement, was there, as were several former governors, including Jon S. Corzine, James J. Florio, and James E. McGreevey. 

Related:

McGREEVEY SEX SCANDAL WAS ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE OPERATION

MoFo Global 

They are not proud of that crew, are they?

Near Christie, a Republican, were several lawmakers lobbying to be appointed by him to fill Lautenberg’s seat, as well as Mayor Cory A. Booker of Newark, whom Democrats consider their best bet to hold the seat and who has proclaimed his intention to run for the Senate."

See: Throwing the Booker at Obama Over Bain 

He's their best bet?

RelatedChristie taps colleague for vacant US Senate seat

Who? 

Also see: Christie Christens Boardwalk

"House votes to resume deporting immigrants"  June 07, 2013

WASHINGTON — The House voted Thursday to resume the deportation of hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought illegally to the United States as children, a largely symbolic move in the first immigration-related vote in either chamber of Congress this year and a measure of the daunting challenge facing supporters of a sweeping overhaul of existing law on the subject.

The party-line vote was aimed at blocking implementation of President Obama’s 2012 election-year order to stop deportations of many so-called Dream Act individuals. Democrats on the House floor reacted with boos when the provision was added to a routine spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security.

The administration has threatened to veto the overall legislation on budgetary grounds. But today’s vote nevertheless stood as a stark warning from conservatives who dominate the ranks of the Republican House majority about attempts in the Senate to grant a chance at citizenship to an estimated 11 million immigrants residing in the country illegally.

They are our only chance at killing that bill meant to replace American workers. How sad is that?

And the White House reacted sharply, saying the measure would affect people who are ‘‘productive members of society who were brought here as young children, grew up in our communities, and became American in every way but on paper.’’

And if you sign up for the service they will give you citizenship!

--more--"

Another current Sunday Globe Special:

"Britain’s David Cameron runs into party backlash" by Anthony Faiola |  Washington Post, June 02, 2013

LONDON — US Republicans weighing a shift to the center ahead of the next presidential race will find a cautionary tale on this side of the Atlantic, where British Prime Minister David Cameron is paying the price for his foray outside of strictly conservative territory....

He went out on a political limb — embracing social causes such as gay marriage and the fight against climate change.

That limb is dangerously cracking, with Cameron now mired in one of the deepest crises of his tenure. Cameron is coping with the fallout of the recent cleaver attack by Islamist extremists that left a British soldier dead and put the nation on edge.

Related: British Butcher Produces Belly Laugh 

I stopped laughing a while ago.

But far more important to his political future, a long-simmering rebellion from the right flank of his Conservative Party has boiled over in recent weeks, sparking what some grass-roots campaigners here are openly calling a conservative ‘‘civil war’’ that underscores the risk for any politician challenging his party’s base.

In the latest evidence of the kind of internal revolt that ultimately forced Margaret Thatcher from office in 1989, a powerful group of conservative legislators recently sought to sabotage one of the main pillars of Cameron’s plan to broaden his party’s appeal — gay marriage.... 

See: Thatcher's Patch

The right-wing mutiny is also unfolding on multiple other fronts, from Britain’s role in European affairs to government support for alternative energies.

A gifted verbal jouster and Oxford man, Cameron, 46, led the Conservatives in 2010 to their best electoral performance since the early 1990s — a feat his supporters say could never have happened had he not embraced issues like gay marriage that now enjoy overwhelming support in Britain.

But a growing number of Conservatives are questioning whether Cameron’s shift to the center has truly worked in the party’s favor.

Recent polls for instance, suggest the prime minister has had very limited success at winning over non-Conservative voters despite his centrist approach. Once loyal Conservatives, meanwhile, are defecting en masse.

Many are heading into the open arms of the newly strengthened United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), a nationalist political force with a platform that now stands significantly to the right of the Conservative Party....

See: Britain's Tea Party

The inner party struggle is weakening Cameron’s government, distracting Washington’s staunchest ally from a host of international issues, including the ongoing crisis in Syria.

To quell the chorus, Cameron has already given in to at least one major demand by his right wing. In January, he pledged to hold a historic referendum by 2017 on whether Britain should break away from the European Union, an institution reviled by many on the right.

He is now under pressure by Conservative rebels to go even further, either moving up the timing of the vote or passing legislation that would set such a referendum in stone.

The referendum is opposed by the Obama administration, which fears a British exit from the E.U. could diminish the voice of its strongest ally in Europe. It is only part of a bigger Conservative uprising.

In the House of Lords — Britain’s upper chamber, which hears the measure next — more conservatives are vowing to break with Cameron and oppose the gay marriage bill when it lands there. Cameron is also weathering scathing criticism from Conservatives deeply opposed to government support for onshore wind farms.

Stoking the fires further were recent allegations that a close aide to the prime minister had described angry grass-roots Conservatives as ‘‘swivel-eyed loons.’’

Although the comment was denied by Cameron’s camp, it nevertheless highlighted the very real sense among rank-and-file Conservatives that their leader is an elitist, disconnected from the party’s base....

Aren't they all?

Analysts say Cameron is not in immediate jeopardy of being ousted by his own party a la Thatcher. His potential rivals are facing almost as many problems as Cameron himself. But there are dangerous months ahead.

That nearly calls for a false flag terror attack. Guess it will be a hot summer in Britain despite the cold temperatures.

--more--"

"Cameron survives vote" May 16, 2013

LONDON — Prime Minister David Cameron survived a potentially humiliating challenge to his policies toward the European Union on Wednesday by a closer margin in Parliament than forecast, illuminating the depth of dissent within his party over an issue that has divided it for decades.

In a parliamentary ballot, 130 lawmakers, most from Cameron’s Conservative Party, voted in favor of a resolution criticizing his handling of a burgeoning crisis over whether Britain should leave the 27-nation European bloc tseen as a cornerstone of the economic and political architecture.

British analysts had forecast that about 80 legislators would support the resolution....

Cameron was winding up a three-day visit to the United States....

The rebellion nonetheless highlighted the party’s vulnerability to decades of corrosive debate about its ties to a European bloc that skeptics depict as a monstrous superstate ­devouring British sovereignty.

--more--"