Understatement of the Month,- Theresa May on Immigration.

It is "unlikely" that David Cameron's unwise and almost certainly unresearched 2010 General Election promise that immigration would be brought down to 10,000 a year will be met. So said the new Iron Lady, the formidable Theresa May.

It was never remotely possible, EU or no EU. Mouth engaged before brain when Dave said it,- and not for the only time.

Now the man himself has followed up with an immigration speech designed to UKIP-proof his Party. He'd probably do better to leave the issue alone and concentrate on more positive things.

One nonsense in the immigration figures is the Conservative Party's absurd insistance that students are included in the total. They are not immigrants.They are coming here to spend a lot of money buying a British education.They will also buy accomodation, food, entertainment, transport and a host of other things while they are here as will any friends and family who come to visit them. With luck, unless they are made to feel unwelcome and received with hostility, they will become lifelong friends of Britain and continue to spend money here and on British goods throughout their lives. Most will then go away again. Those who rise to positions of power or influence in their home counties may also be able to influence all kinds of decisons in Britain's favour or at least give the UK a headstart. Those who do eventually stay on and apply for residence would mainly also be assets to Britain's talent base as well as contributors to its exchequer. OK, there are some who try to abuse the system by signing up for, shall we say less reputable schools or "colleges", but there is no reason why those should not be robustly dealt with and escorted to the airport for their flight home regardless of protests on their behalf by sundry activists.

Another problem Britain has with immigration is that it has no idea who has left the country. John Major abolished the outward bound passport check as an economy measure . Since then the UK, probably uniquely in the world, has no idea who has outstayed their visa unless they pop up on the radar for some other reason. Even then they know that their chances of deportation are minimal. The 1997-2010 Labour government encouraged mass immigration because it knew that the bulk of recent immigrants tend to vote Labour and the current Tory/LibDem coalition hasn't got to grips with it, partly because EU-wise it can't and non-EU wise the multiple appeals system makes rapid removal of those who should not be in the country almost impossible.

It's a mess and no political party, least of all UKIP, seems to be able to think straight about it. 

An American Twiga's view of the Mid Terms.

Our American Twiga (giraffe) has been in an excellent position to look down upon the Mid Term elections. He would shake his head if he could but that's not so easy at the top end of a long neck. Rolling the eyes will have to do instead.

Firstly though let's just consider the strange world of the American democratic process. The President is elected for a four year term and, all going less than disastrously,- can expect two terms. That's a total of eight years. After that it's game over.  He or she may not stand again. So far so good .The British experience is that towards the end of two terms, ten years here, the incumbent really should take a long holiday anyway. More than that is dangerous from almost everybody's point of view. Exhaustion or hubris have taken their toll and there is no gratitude from the waving crowds who cheered victory on Day 1. They've gone, moved on.

In the USA, even if the new President steps into the White house with a majority in both Houses, he or she has got just two years ,- that's eighteen months max before campaigning begins once more,- to make a favourable impact and get the important stuff done. After that come the mid terms at two years from "Go". Once those are over there is the risk of the President losing their majority in both Houses twice more before the end of the 8 years. Life is tough if one of them goes to the opposition and potentially dreadful if both do. That's what happened last week. President Obama, not looking as youthful as he did six years ago, has lost both Houses. Inevitably the label "Lame duck President" is stuck on him at every opportunity by a hostile and frequently gloating media. He can't feel wonderful about that.

So how does American Twiga see it? He says.

Ludicrous is the word for what is happening. Unfortunately the order of priority for pretty well all American politicians is first and foremost to get re-elected 2-4 years down the track. Way behind that comes supporting the base of the party and almost out of sight behind that there comes the idea of doing something for the country.

(That's not only true across the Atlantic is it?)

Some say we shouldn't blame the politicians. Blame the Voters. There's some truth in that. The USA has become more polarised than ever .Election strategies are no longer about persuading voters to switch allegiances but more about getting your own supporters to come out and vote and those of the other party to stay at home. That looks like the rationale behind the new laws requiring a photo-ID in some states. The poorer people don't have driving licences so need to go and get an official one. That costs $75 and they may have to travel 30 miles to get it, so they don't bother. These laws have been pushed forward in spite of the fact that there have only been a handful of cases of proven voter fraud in the past 50 years. No surprise that voter turnout was only 37% and down to 13% for the under 30s. Obama was on a hiding to nothing and yet these same people who hung him and his party out to dry by not turning out to vote are the ones who complain that the Republicans have prevented him from implimenting policies which would have helped them. Politics is a hard game that usually ends in tears. There is no gratitude to Obama for having at last brought in health care for millions of the previously excluded and having extricated most American troops and military expenditure from the disaster of Afghanistan. He promised those things and they were very much part of the wave of enthusiasm that swept him into the White House six years ago. He's gone almost white haired in delivering them and how is he rewarded ? The loss of both Houses for the final two years of his Presidency. One could forgive him for saying " ---- this for a game of soldiers,- I'm off". But he can't. Not audiably or visibly anyway.

It's hard to say what will happen now. Democrats in the Senate can still stop anything from passing by using filibusters, just as the Republicans have been doing very effectively. Or Obama can just veto anything he considers too drastic. Among those will be the sorts of things the Tea Party might push. The repeal of Obamacare would be the highest profile and designed to deprive him of any kind of legacy so he's not likely to sign that one. Unless therefore the Republicans decide to adopt a statesmanlike cooperative approach in the interests of showing the electorate that they are positive people who can get things done, expect more gridlock,and name calling inside Congress. Outside just rising disgust with Washington and politicians of all hues. The outcome of the 2016 elections may depend on which side makes the least errors of judgment. Again, some similarities with the eastern side of the Atlantic.