UKIP’s Nigel Farage has proven his shamelessness once again for all to see with his attempt to steal the British National Party’s thunder over the “free trade agreement” with India — even though the BNP raised this issue some three months ago in the European Parliament.
Mr Farage has now jumped onto the so-called Mode 4 issue, which is an agreement between the European Union and India which will allow Indian nationals to bypass all individual EU member states immigration controls.
However, BNP MEP Nick Griffin raised this issue in the European Parliament three months ago, and Mr Farage was either (as usual) not present, asleep or had gone fishing when this crucial issue first came to the fore.
Furthermore, observers will recall that on 4th May 2010, Mr Farage told the BBC’s Daily Politics' “Immigration Debate” that Britain would “would need a minimum of a quarter million work permits annually" to meet labour demands — with emphasis on the word “minimum.”
For Mr Farage to now feign indignation at the EU’s Mode 4 agreement is past hypocrisy. It borders on an outright lie and wilful deception of the public.
On 7 July 2010, Mr Griffin submitted a written question on the issue to the European Commission (EC) asking, inter alia, the following questions:
“With regard to the EU/India trade discussions and all trade agreements under discussion could the Commission clarify:
- The current status of discussions on Mode 4 between the EU and India?
- The reason for the secrecy in respect of those discussions?
- How many people the Commission expects to enter the EU in connection with cross-border activities for the supply of services in the first five years of implementation of Mode 4?
- Clearly, the mass movement of labour across borders will create dire downward pressure on middle- and high-income wage earners in the relevant service industries. It will also create a significant new wave of potential immigration, as a proportion of the new workforce will seek permanent entry and the inclusion of dependents.
Are these negative social and labour consequences the reason why the Commission has kept these matters away from the realm of public debate, public information and consultation? If not, why are these issues not being debated and brought to the notice of the public?
- Does the Commission accept that Mode 4 enables corporations to import cheap labour and capitalise on the wage differential between developed and developing countries?
- Will the Commission acknowledge that once migration of labour moves to corporations, then governments lose the ability to oversee their borders and determine immigration policy?”
The EC’s answers, evasive as they were, provided an insight into the nature of the beast.
First, the EC denied that there was any “particular secrecy” surrounding the Mode 4 discussions, despite the fact that news of it only recently emerged and after discussions with India were completed.
The EC also admitted that it had no idea how many Indians would be involved, saying that it “does not have a final estimation as yet.”
Furthermore, the EC said, “service suppliers entering under the terms of the EU Mode 4 commitments need to comply with the EU or national requirements on employment, work and social security, including practices concerning minimum wages and with collective wage agreements.”
In a further set of questions, Mr Griffin pointed out that “Indian services companies wish their staff to work and move freely across the EU, using mutual recognition agreements and relaxed visa policies” and that EU-based trade unions have stated that this “will work to the detriment of workers and communities in the countries of origin and of destination, undermining workers' conditions, severely reducing labour standards and with FTA-migrant workers holding fewer rights than their domestic colleagues.”
In addition, Mr Griffin asked why “has the Commission not begun to consider the numbers involved, which some estimate predict could reach tens of millions from India and elsewhere?
“Why, in view of the above, has the Commission furnished me with a disingenuous response? The Commission knows very well that negotiations include bypassing the labour markets of member states.”
Mr Griffin has therefore been doggedly pursuing this issue, which directly affects the rights of British workers, for at least 12 weeks or more.
For Mr Farage to now pretend to be the champion of British workers’ interests is therefore laughable, if it were not so embarrassing.
Unfortunately for the fake UKIP Tory puppet party, the public records are available and show exactly how disgracefully that party has behaved.
British workers can be thankful that there are BNP MEPs who are the only ones looking out for their interests.
* Mr Farage’s earlier statement that Britain needed a “minimum” of a quarter of a million work permits every year, actually puts him and UKIP to the left of even the lying Tories, who promised to reduce immigration to a “few hundred thousand.”
Of course, the Tories have no intention of sticking to their promise either, but that is another matter.
