Where you introduce multi-cultures to an insular population, then if you don’t want a racism problem, you have to educate and reassure the indiginous population, especially those who it might most affect, and those who are least educated and have the fewest resources. Responsible leadership, and respect for all involved - it’s not rocket science.

On top of the basic prejudice issue, there is also the point that where resources are already overstretched, then the need for a sensitive immigration policy is all the greater. In the absence of such a thing, then you can’t really complain or be surprised when people’s fears and ignorance get the better of them.

IMO, Britain is dramatically worse in many respects, including but not only due to the increase in population, coupled with the long-term effects on the infrastructure of 18 years of Tory rule.

On top of this, I think there is a point that doesn’t tend to get heard for fear of accusations of racism, which is that immigration does need to be managed in a way which is sensitive to the indiginous population. In Powell’s era, I do not believe this was the case - hence the terrible racism that was subsequently observed.

Have to say he’s probably right about popular opinion in the black country, it is in the midlands after all.

Seriously I think the idea that immigration is an all good/all bad thing has stifled debate on what is an important social issue, whether some points of the political spectrum want it to be or not. It’s a false dichotomy, the most reasonable position is to accept that there are both good AND bad things about immigration, and to be honest about the motivations for it (mostly economic) rather than pretending it’s some kind of socially enhancing national experiment in multi cultural group hugging. One of the reasons for the current backlash agaisnt the liberal left is their refusal to honestly discuss, let alone accept that there is any downside to immigration.