A Quote by Chuka Umunna

Leaving the single market, making communities poorer and more alienated, is not the way to deal with public concerns about immigration, most of which comes from outside the E.U.
I completely understand why people are concerned about immigration. There's no silver bullet, no one thing you can do to suddenly deal with all the problems and concerns with immigration, and that includes leaving the E.U.
We cannot allow voters to fall for the spin that a vote to leave is the only way to deal with concerns about immigration. We can do far more to address both the level and impact of immigration while remaining in the E.U.
I have been very clear for years - leaving the E.U. means leaving the single market, leaving the customs union, taking back control of our money, border, and laws.
I wanted my art to deal with very formal concerns and to deal with very material concerns, and to deal with antecedents and art history, which for me go very far beyond just the influence of African-American artists.
To see off Corbyn's Labour, we need to start the debate as to how and why a market economy is the way to deliver prosperity, social mobility, fully funded public services, and the means to address their concerns about the environment and social justice.
In the transfer society, the general public is not only poorer but also less contented, less autonomous, more rancorous, and more politicized. Individuals take part less often in voluntary community activities and more often in belligerent political contests. Genuine communities cannot breathe in the poisonous atmosphere of redistributional politics.
The public has moved beyond politicians. For example, I'm not worried about them repealing protections for the LGBT community, because the public is beyond that. I'm not worried about them being able to change the way in which we have reached out and provided many more opportunities for women. And I - but here's what does concern me. What concerns me is that they will make some judgments in the foreign policy area, without having thought it through that may cause a lot of problems.
When you stop to think about it, so many films today where we don't have that kind of contact are films about alienation. About alienated feelings. We are much more alienated from our colleagues nowadays.
We want to limit the exploitation of the fiscal capacity of the richer regions by keeping down the rate of immigration to a level that would be meaningful and efficient. One way to do that is to have a scheme of equalization which essential bribes people to stay in the poorer regions.
In many inner cities, there are issues of less economic stability, poorer education, community centers being stripped away, arts being removed from the school system leaving many children imbalanced, isolated from their most powerful self... the independent thinker, the creator, the dreamer often leaving children more susceptible to other harmful things out of boredom or feelings of rejection.
Industrial agriculture characteristically proceeds by single solutions to single problems: If you want the most money from your land this year, grow the crops for which the market price is highest.
In the end, all new schools, public or private, snobby or not, add value to the education market, making it bigger and more efficient, in the same way that Zuckerberg added wealth to the economy even for non-Facebook fans.
We must continue to liberalise the single market, cut red tape and basically create a digital single market. We have not completed the single market yet, there is not sufficient free movement of goods, labour, services and money. We have to keep on working at that against all the protectionist tendencies that we have right now.
Remember Graham Green's dictum that childhood is the bank balance of the writer? I think that all writers feel alienated. Most of us go back to an alienated childhood in some way or another. I know that I do.
We have to educate our communities about the immigration system and dispel the myths that have been fed to us. Immigration isn't going to go away. A wall isn't going to 'solve' the issue.
The Open Market Committee, as presently established, is plainly not in the public interest. This committee must be operated by purely public servants, representatives of the people as a whole and not any single interest group. The Open Market Committee should be abolished, and its powers transferred to the Federal Reserve Board - the present public members of the committee, with reasonably short terms of office.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!