In a gloriously muddled performance, Labour minister Phil Woolas managed to both deny and confirm that the government has pledged to keep Britain’s population under 70 million in a radio interview this morning.
In an interview last week with The Times, he said, “This Government isn’t going to allow the population of this country to go up to 70 million.”
Interviewed on the Today program this morning, however, he said, “We don’t think [a numerical cap] is appropriate.” So this extract from the Times interview was quoted back at him, producing this wonderfully bizarre attempt to claim that quoting back to him what he said is wrongly putting words into his mouth:
Q. That [the Times quote] is about as clear an example as it is possible to imagine of a Government pledge. Do you stand by that?
A. Yes…Q. That is a cap isn’t it, if you’re saying that the Government will not allow the population of this country to go up to 70 million? That is a cap.
A. The figure of 70 million is not the figure of my choosing…Q. Isn’t it the case that you can’t actually make that pledge because people can come here under our agreements with Europe freely?
A. That is also the case…Q. So you’ve made a pledge that you can’t keep?
A. Let me just explain the policy. That 70 million figure is not mine, so if people are putting the words into my mouth
Q. [Interrupting] No hang on. People aren’t putting words into your mouth – that’s what you said, “This Government isn’t going to allow the population of this country to go up to 70 million.”. That’s nobody but you.
A. That’s correct and we stand by that…
So in summary:
Phil Woolas did say the Government would not let the population reach 70 million, but if you say he said that then you’re just putting words into his mouth, and when he promised that it wouldn’t let it reach 70 million he also meant that it wasn’t possible to promise this, and anyway a limit of 70 million isn’t the same as a cap of 70 million. All clear? Good.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Northern Ireland debates the future of its railways in 1957
Church Green video
Thinking of standing for election or re-election next year? Helpful questions to consider
Endometriosis and acetylation
Jeff
Nonconformistradical
John Peters
David Raw
Henry
4 Comments
This should be Oldham East in the bag at the next GE
I hope so – our candidate Elwyn Watkins is a good guy – about time slime bag Woolyarse got it – if u get a chance pay a visit to lovely Saddleworth
He was right to raise the issue of population, as national & world overpopulation is a problem that needs to be addressed.
This isn’t necessarily about immigration, as Germany for example has a falling population despite immigration.
We should be promoting education, contraception & secularism & generally doing whatever we can to sort out the problems in the Third World so they live more sustainably. Solving the causes of immigration will reduce immigrant numbers & make the world more liveable in general.
Relying on things like GM food to provide for a rising population is setting ourselves up for a terrible fall. An international solution to the issue would create a better world for us & for others.
Of course, Woolas’ idiocy & hidebound dogmatism stop him doing any of this, but we should have the issue raised & hopefully it will lead to sensible policies being enacted.
I listened to the interview and almost lost the will to live. Woolas’ performance was shameless. As usual with these performances he ignored the questions and just said what he wanted to say no matter how contradictory. Woolas showed complete contempt for the interviewer and for the thinking public in order to ‘send a message’ to an interest group. It is tragic that politics in the UK has descended to this.