Populist soundbite, fantasy politics, or sheer unadulterated hypocrisy? No, it's a truth that must be spoken

DAVID CAMERON today risked the wrath of the liberal left, the BBC's Facebook crew, and the so-called thinkers who make up The Guardian's editorial staff, by raising the risky subject of immigration.

The Tory leader warned that the current rate of arrivals was placing an "unsustainable" pressure on the country's public services and infrastructure.

Mr Cameron has broken what appeared to be a consensus among the political parties not to rock the boat on immigration. It's a sign of Cameron's confidence that he has struck out on his own, and will further allienate, among others, the centre-right grouping in the European Parliament.

The Tory right will love it. More importantly, so will many ordinary citizens who - rightly or wrongly - think the UK is being swamped with social security scroungers from central Europe.

He said a future Tory government would set annual limits on economic migration from outside the EU which would be substantially lower than the current rate, set up a border police force with powers to track down and remove illegal migrants, and impose transitional controls on the right of nationals of new EU states to work in the UK.

He was speaking against a background of unprecedented migration into the UK, brought about by the 2004 and 2007 admissions to the EU of 12 Mediterranean and former Communist bloc nations, most notably Poland.

Latest figures from the Office for National Statistics suggest that, on current trends, the UK's population will rise from 60.6 million today to more than 71 million by 2031, increasing pressure on housing, healthcare, schools, the transport system, energy and water supplies.

"Immigration is too high," he said, accusing the Government of failing to develop a population strategy. It was time for a "grown-up conversation'' on what level of population was right for the country. This could best be done by cutting levels of economic immigration from outside the EU.

Lambasting Cameron, immigration minister Liam Byrne said: "We are introducing a new Australian style points-based system of immigration to ensure only those who benefit Britain can come here, while measures such as ID cards for foreign nationals will help us safeguard access to work and benefits.

"Labour's approach to immigration is based on firm, fair and serious policies - that is what the British public want, not populist soundbites."

Up popped would-be Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg to accuse Cameron of indulging in "fantasy politics," adding: "He tries to appear reasonable while pandering to the right wing in his own party, and claims that immigration numbers should be cut without having the faintest clue as to how that would happen."

And naturally: "Only the Liberal Democrats have a grown-up approach to immigration based on effective administration, including a properly resourced national border force and giving local authorities the ability to plan for population changes. Integration should be encouraged by promoting English amongst all newcomers, as well as getting long-term irregular residents out of the hands of criminals and into law-abiding, taxpaying existence."

Fearful that some of his thunder was at risk from the Cameron onslaught, UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage accused him of "sheer unadulterated hypocrisy''.

"When these issues were being voted on in the European Parliament, British Conservatives were the greatest enthusiasts of open borders to Eastern Europe, which is where the huge rise in immigration has come from," said Farage, who will be in Suffolk at the weekend, speaking to UKIP members at a Woodbridge immigration conference.

No doubt the Cameron speech will be portrayed as extremist by Labour. However, if the Government was so sure of itself, why has it not encouraged a debate instead of sitting back and let the Tories make all the running?

But of course, the same argument also applies to Labour's total failure to make the case for Britain's membership of the EU?

This "say nothing in the hope the voters won't notice" approach is no substitute for engaging with the British people.