In his article "Let everyone in is a dangerous immigration policy" Andrew Green asserts that migration should be monitored seriously in Britain because it will result in overcrowding and loss of national identity. According to the public opinion poll, 56 percent of people mentioned it as an issue of concern. Additionally, the population of Britain is rising for the first time because the number of those who stay minus those who leave is positive and the trend is going to continue. Green claims that Britain already has "a severe congestion" (1). because the density of population is higher than in India and in some places outmeasures the Netherlands. Moreover, the system of immigration is hugger-mugger by letting in all the kinsfolk and "quadruple[icating] the number of works permits" (Green 2). According to him migration has no limits and "the character of our society, and especially our cities, is being radically alerted."
(2). Green also mentions that immigrants have been seeking to influence Britain's political parties; consequently Government should use severe policies to curb migration.
Although Green is right worrying about the loss of national identity he overlooks very important facts as to why the migration is useful to Britain. The migration has always existed and will exist and "in both directions is natural and welcome" (Green 1). The fear to lose national identity is somewhat worth considering, but it depends on citizens themselves if they want to uphold the traditional country's values. Great Britain was the only country, which didn't impose any restrictions for the new EU members and it now is clearly seen that it has been the opportune policy. However, in this case the world-wide migration will not be considered because migration between European Union countries is more appealing to us as the competent citizens.
One of the...