AN angry anti-immigrant tirade by an audience member on Question Time has sparked a backlash on social media.
The woman called for the UK to close its borders “completely” as she ranted for more than a minute and 20 seconds.
She said: "At what stage does the panel and people think that this country has had enough? That we should close the borders, completely close the borders.
“Because it’s got to the stage now … there's no education, schooling, infrastructure … we’re sinking, surely someone’s got to see common sense and say enough is enough.
"You’ve got people flooding into this country who can't speak English.”
She went on to question the cost of interpreters and signs in different languages in NHS facilities, while not acknowledging the contribution of immigrant workers in the health service.
The woman, from London, added: “What sort of country is allowing this tourism to come in? You arrive on a plane, get free service, can have your babies. You can carry on having it all for free.”
“We should completely close the borders … enough is enough”
— BBC Question Time (@bbcquestiontime) February 20, 2020
This audience member says the number of people ’flooding in’ to the UK is costing public services too much. #bbcqt pic.twitter.com/T5EshhWqQu
READ MORE: QUIZ: Can you score enough points to secure a post-Brexit working visa?
However, journalist Ash Sarkar, a lecturer at the Sandberg Institute in Amsterdam, countered the anti-immigrant claims.
She pointed out that migrants contribute more in tax than other citizens, something which is becoming increasingly important as the UK’s population ages.
Responding to cries of “rubbish” from the audience member who made the initial comments, she added: “It’s a fact – facts don’t care about your feelings.”
Watch her full response here.
“Migrants to this country bring more and contribute more in tax than they take out”@AyoCaesar says there is a ‘human case’ in support of immigration to Britain. #bbcqt pic.twitter.com/mWrvxu7ceA
— BBC Question Time (@bbcquestiontime) February 20, 2020
READ MORE: Scottish Tories 'livid' about Boris Johnson’s immigration proposals
The woman's claims were quickly rebuffed by Twitter users.
Bella Caledonia commented: “Enough is indeed enough. This didn’t appear out of nowhere. We are tethered to a country where this has been normalised and apologised for. Dystopian England.”
Journalist Peter Geoghegan added: “This is the problem with media as 'just reporting what people say' writ large. Important part of job of journalism is to contextualise statements. This isn't contextualised *at all*, indeed the line about immigrants costing public services too much looks like a statement of fact.”
This is the problem with media as 'just reporting what people say' writ large. Important part of job of journalism is to contextualise statements. This isn't contextualised *at all*, indeed the line about immigrants costing public services too much looks like a statement of fact https://t.co/4F9liXVxsO
— Peter Geoghegan (@PeterKGeoghegan) February 21, 2020
Commentator Owen Jones posted: “This is how racism and far right extremism is normalised and legitimised. This is a vile, unhinged rant, packed full of lies and hate, and the BBC decide to uncritically clip it so it can be easily shared across social media.”
Others pointed towards the origin of anti-immigrant sentiment.
I have absolutely no idea where she gets her opinions from. https://t.co/mwplzm9vYq pic.twitter.com/dP0OwrxQX7
— James Melville (@JamesMelville) February 21, 2020
One Twitter user added: “Let's do it. Let's completely close the borders. Supermarkets would run out of food, petrol stations would run out of petrol. But at least this woman would be stopped from ever going on holiday again and might learn something. Or doesn't she think she'd be affected?”
A Question Time spokesperson said: "Last night’s Question Time included a debate about immigration which featured a broad range of views from the audience members and panellists.
"We posted five clips of people expressing their different views on the issue, including a panellist responding directly to the views of an audience member."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel