Thursday 26th June 2025
Blog Page 1561

Review: This is 40

0

40? Sadly not: this is 140 minutes of monotony. I wish I could defend the king of the Frat Pack, but director Judd Apatow has offered audiences a self-indulgent mess with little to laugh about. Perhaps I’m too young to appreciate all of its
humour, but, at its core, This is 40 is too meandering and dull to be even entertaining, let alone funny. This comedy-cum-autobiography traces the foibles of a Los Angeles couple, Debbie and Pete, approaching their 40th birthdays. Starring Apatow’s wife, Leslie Mann, and his pet collaborator, Paul Rudd, This is
40 takes us through a fraying marriage and the neuroses of hitting middle age.

In an effort to make the best of what they have, Debbie and Paul vow to exercise more frequently, eat healthily, and improve their relations with their two daughters, Sadie and Charlotte, played by Apatow’s off-screen daughters (shocker!).Although the film deals with sitcom staples – a moody teen, a sex-starved couple – Apatow fails to deliver the laughs.
This is 40 plays on a flurry of ‘firstworld problems’ and consumer habits, but instead of making light of banal difficulties it offers up screaming matches. At one point Pete and a fellow husband begin to discuss how wonderful widowhood might be and it all gets decidedly gloomy. Two terrible fathersin-law, an estranged John Lithgow and freeloader Albert Brooks, are thrown into the mix to make matters even more depressing.

For those familiar with Apatow’s 2007 hit, Knocked Up, the characters Debbie and Pete might ring a bell. Their marriage formed the sub-plot to Katherine Heigl and Seth Rogen’s refracted boy meets girl set-up. As a sequel, This is 40 aims to bring our attention back to Debbie and Pete with more laughs and awkwardness. However, as a main storyline, it’s really difficult to care about their lives.

This is 40 plays out like a series of unwitty anecdotes. It’s not so much the directionless plot that’s bothersome, but the missed opportunities. Much more could have been made, for instance, about growing older in LA, where ageing naturally is almost taboo. It’s also unfortunate that some of the best comedic talents of recent decades – Jason Segel, Chris O’Dowd, and Melissa

McCarthy – have just bit parts. The cast itself is like an Apatow fan club. Yet, they’re missing his schoolboy humour to play with. If you don’t manage to drift off towards the end of This is 40, there’s no reward. You’re simply left with the realisation that this film, from the producer of the hilarious Superbad, is a drawn-out, humourless, mess of a comedy.

If you liked… Star of Love by Crystal Fighters

0

In mid-October 2010, as the UK geared up for the country’s coldest December in over 100 years, an English/Spanish band burst onto the scene with a Star of Love, a folktronica album guaranteed to put the feeling back in the British public’s toes. With joyful, upbeat vocals and fantastically energetic synth, tracks like ‘In the Summer’, ‘Plage’ and ‘I Love London’ evoked the atmosphere of the Spanish summer in an English context. Traditional Basque instruments surged through the electronic sounds to forge a wonder-filled unstoppable force of pure happiness. Despite the ice on the roads and the chill in the air, Crystal Fighters were delighted to invite the whole of the UK to “come to the plage with me”. The album encouraged listeners to maintain their optimism in the face of the weather, and thousands of fans braved the cold to get to the band’s sold-out headline tour of the UK.

They may be French instead of Spanish, and owe their sound more to Phoenix’s guitars than Crystal Fighters’ txalaparta (a wooden xylophone-like percussion instrument played by two people standing face-to-face), but Concrete Knives’ newly-released debut album, Be Your Own King, is guaranteed to make the sun rise in your soul. Just look how blue the sky is on that album cover! Oxford’s a cold place this time of year (and most times of year as far as I can tell as a first-year) and there are few better ways of warming up than turning up the central heating, wrapping yourself in a rug and dancing around your room to this friendly bunch of Frenchmen.

Opening track ‘Bornholmer’ sets the tone with frantic use of bouncy electronic melodies and a desperately infectious beat accompanied by earnest and optimistic vocals. Even without lyrics ‘Roller Boogie’ is the most unstoppably summery song on the album, veering at will between sleepy tunes which conjure up images of sunbathing in the back garden to delightfully energetic electro riffs which will instantly transport you forward to that festival you’re so looking forward to. Yes, there’s not a whole lot of variation – most of the songs are quite simply fun beats leading inevitably to a hook-heavy chorus – but the album is full of enough relentless energy to sustain it through to the end. Just. Musically it’s not a particularly thoughtful album, but it’s just what you need to break the wintry apathy and get that smile back on your face.

Going Underground

0

This year the London Underground celebrates 150 years since its first line, the Metropolitan Railway, was opened in 1863. Turner Prize winner Mark Wallinger has joined a long line of artists such as Tracey Emin, Henry Moore and Man Ray who have contributed their work to the tube platforms. The London stations have helped to inspire a vast range of art, design, literature, film and music, from Javier Bardem’s Bond villain being chased through a train by Daniel Craig in Skyfall to Gerry Rafferty’s classic 1970’s song ‘Baker Street’.

Mark Wallinger’s Labyrinth is the tube’s largest ever art commission and forms part of the on-going Art on the Underground program. The project involves the installation of 270 black enamel works, one for each station, which are made of enamel and similar in appearance to tube signs. Each tube stop will have its own unique labyrinth design and the entire process will be complete by September.

For Wallinger, this is an unprecedented opportunity for a huge number of people to appreciate his work. Four million people pass through the Underground every day and about a billion people use it each year. The trains also travel the equivalent of 90 round trips to the moon every year. It is quite a different undertaking to his previous projects, which included wandering around in a bear suit in Berlin for ten days and his Turner Prize winning ‘State Britain’ which reconstructed the peace protester Brian Haw’s Parliament Square tent.

Part of the aim of Wallinger’s project is to create order out of the confusion of the tube. He explains that the labyrinth design echoes the daily journeys that commuters make; despite the chaos of the rush hour, almost everyone is following a prescribed route.

The designs also share a resemblance to brains, which Wallinger suggests reflects the state of mind of people travelling on the tube. He has praised the fact that people feel comfortable enough to fall asleep on strangers and evokes an environment of goodwill amongst the passengers.

The works are intended to be unobtrusive, something for people to glance at as they make their way to their destination. From the positive reception so far, it seems as if the project will be a success for the London Underground; the main problem that Wallinger may encounter is indifference, despite the number of people who will be passing by his work.

The Evening Standard newspaper recently conducted an experiment where the famous violinist Thomas Gould spent an hour busking in Westminster station, and only 35 out of 2000 people actually stopped to listen to him play.

However, hopefully the scale of the project will encourage more passengers to appreciate art, even if only for a brief moment on their stressful and cramped commute home.

Review: Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds – Push the Sky Away

0

★★★★★
Five Stars

Cave, having reached his fifty-fifth birthday, may be considered part of ‘rock royalty’ to use clichéd term, an ‘elder statesman’ if you like, but this is definitely not reflected in his own musical creativity, even if he may be showing a few more wrinkles on the cover of the Seeds’ latest release than the bands debut From Her To Eternity in 1984.

In the album’s press release Cave notes that “if I were to use that threadbare metaphor of albums being like children, then Push The Sky Away is the ghost-baby in the incubator and Warren’s loops are its tiny, trembling heartbeat.” It appears that Cave’s phrasing is as evocative as ever, both in a lyrical and musical sense, and his subject matter is as relevant as ever.

From the opening notes of ‘We No Who U R,’ supported by the bass of Adamson, gliding effortlessly below the expansive texture, Push the Sky Away is presented as an epic, which is entirely accurate. The sonorous quality of
Cave’s voice reminds me of Leonard Cohen, even Jonny Cash in ‘Jubilee Street’, released as a single last year. As with Cohen and Cash, the maturity in Cave’s voice suggests experience, a man who has lived life and has a story to tell. This is successfully achieved without becoming preachy.

Whilst these references may suggest an album that is out of touch with the modern era, the songwriting remains free, rhythmic and melodious throughout, comparable to Alt-J, Dry the River and similar newcomers. Here,
Cave employs a developed style whilst maintaining a modern edge. It is almost social and cultural suicide to criticise Cave, his albums have consistently attained five star reviews, but this album is genuinely listenable throughout. The tension created by Cave is met by frequent moments of relief, such as in my personal favourite track ‘Mermaids’, with the refrain of “all the ones that come, all the ones that go”, hopefully Cave is here to stay.

Review: Foals – Holy Fire

0

★★★★☆
Four Stars

Foals’ third studio album sees the five-piece embrace an altogether poppier and more epic sound than their previous two outings, helped along the way by veteran producers Flood and Alan Moulder. The fact that the duo have worked with acts such as U2 and Foo Fighters gives us a clear indication of the anthemic, arena-filling sound that Foals have set out to achieve in Holy Fire.

And boy do they achieve it, as emphatically exemplified by the album’s second track and lead single ‘Inhaler’. The slow build-up acts as a smokescreen, causing the listener to be completely unprepared for what follows. Yannis Philippakis’ vocals transform from a delicate falsetto at the beginning of the song into a roar as the song explodes into a frenzy of Pendulum-esque proportions. It seems funny to think that such a colossal song was borne out
of a dainty jam played by the band in between songs at gigs, which is testament to both the producers’ and Foals’ scope for imagination.

The next track ‘My Number’ is equally catchy, aided by its wonderfully simple lyrics – “You don’t have my number, we don’t need each other now” – and while it’s true that the album doesn’t regain the same heights of hysteria as
‘Inhaler’, this is not to say that it diminishes in quality or listenability. ‘Everytime’ continues in the same vein as ‘My Number’ with its instant hook and memory-friendly lyrics, while ‘Late Night’ and ‘Out of the Woods’ are altogether more downbeat affairs, yet majestic nonetheless, and perhaps serve as Holy Fire’s two most heartfelt moments. Moreover, the intricate blend of gentle guitars and strings in ‘Milk & Black Spiders’, coupled with emotive, sing-along lyrics will make it a sure-fire crowd favourite, as will the fast-paced ‘Providence’.

Though the album does tail off somewhat at the end Holy Fire is on the whole a very enjoyable, listenable and well-produced album, and certainly more grandiose than their previous two albums. With Holy Fire, Foals are staking their claim to be a credible player in the big league of indie rock. On this basis, it would be foolish to dismiss them.

Interview: Stornoway

0

I arrived at Oxford Town Hall to be met by Stornoway’s lead singer Brian Biggs, who I would later chat to, carrying two guitars in his left hand and a keyboard stand in his right. Stornoway have now cemented themselves into the hearts and minds of the people of Oxford whilst also succeeding further afield with the success of their infectious first single ‘Zorbing’, the first, and only, performance of an unsigned band on Later with Jools Holland, and a hotly anticipated second album in the pipeline (due March 11th). They appeared roadie-less for the second of two sell-out nights playing to a home crowd. This sort of authentic attitude, often attributed in clichéd terms to many new and trendy bands, is evident throughout the whole afternoon and into their second gig in as many nights at the impressive Town Hall.

Briggs and I fell into the interview, making chitchat about the conservation of ducks, the subject of his PhD from Oxford. There he met Jonathan Quin, the band’s keyboard player and co-songwriter. Although Briggs tells of his “love of Cowley” where he and the band still live, he’s apparently “never settled” and has a love of things more “naturally dramatic.”

This seems to be a constant backdrop to the life of Briggs, one which “works its way into the songs as nature, the weather and seasons which act as a backdrop for the stories.” This, he says, is a key part of the anticipated second album Tales of Terra Firma, which conjures up images of a “new explorer” for him personally, and deals with “more weighty experiences through a bigger sound.” It’s been three years since the band’s debut album, Beachcomber’s Windowsill, in which time they’ve been “getting to grips with being a grown up”, but with these weightier experiences the band seemed to have now settled into their Oxford life beyond academia.

The band’s attitude to their success is nonchalant. I ask Briggs what he thinks of the mainstream folk revival and being compared to bands such as Mumford and Noah and the Whale. The genre’s re-emergence “has definitely been a helping hand”, but he admits they feel no pressure to emulate others – “if those bands didn’t exist, we’d be doing exactly the same thing.” Once the first album’s promotional tour was over, Briggs was thankful to be able to “leave the public eye”, to return to Cowley with “no pressure to write poptastic hits and be able to continue with what we wanted to do.”

This low-key approach was later shown in the second of the band’s gigs at the Town Hall that was simply brilliant. The general buzz of the venue suggested a yearning for Oxford’s own, with a sense of exclusivity at what would undoubtedly be a gig to remember. This was reinforced by the band’s choice of venue, something Briggs had earlier said was a deliberate choice as it is a “beautiful building creating a great atmosphere.” Although the band love playing to a home crowd they admit to an added sense of pressure. “Even though they’re onside, they’re our longest serving fans and we want them to like the new songs.”

If this pressure was still felt, it definitely wasn’t shown as they stepped on the stage to rapturous applause. Throughout their set, their sense of individuality and creative independence shone through with weird and whacky instrument choices such as a saw and spoons. The insertion of ‘November Song’, a short acoustic number, was stunning earlier in the set and, as they neared the encore, similar expectations begin to surface which were definitely met, by the band rushing offstage only to re-appear behind the audience in the gallery, this time in four-part harmony. They then rushed back onstage for Quin to play the mighty town hall organ.

Then followed departure into a prog-rock, Emerson, Lake and Palmer style, epic with a certain element of irony beaten only by Briggs’ rendition of The Proclaimers ‘500 Miles’ in the sound check earlier on. This segued into ‘I Saw You Blink’ and ‘Watching Birds’ to end. Over in a flash, this was a gig to remember and one I definitely will. Briggs appeared both quick-witted and contemplative throughout the set.

I’d asked him for some advice and about what Stornoway had in store for the future. His answer now seemed particularly appropriate:

“Don’t send anything out until you’re completely happy with it, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of second chances in music. And yeah, I want to be massive in Liechtenstein”.

No doubt they will.

Interview: Rich Peppiatt

0

What do you ask the journalist who undermines journalism? A man whose frustration at the industry led him to turn both in on it, and it into comedy? Rich Peppiatt is such a man: previously a journalist at the Daily Star, Peppiatt was uncomfortable with the way the paper went about its journalism, especially with much of the allegedly Islamophobic coverage that the paper put out in 2012. So he decided to quit.

Yet being unhappy isn’t enough to quit a job, let alone to leak it to the national press. “It got to the point where I felt that what I was doing was a complete betrayal of my own principals,” Peppiatt says. “I wanted to draw attention to it if I possibly could.”

In early March 2012 Peppiatt leaked his letter of resignation from the Daily Star to the Guardian website, an action which provoked a subsequent storm on Twitter, and several threatening text messages. “I didn’t realise it was going to blow up as it did! But I think that everyone at some point has that fantasy of writing a letter to their boss, and storming out giving them the middle finger.”

However, Peppiatt’s blaze of glory didn’t end here. Fortuitously, the Leveson Inquiry took off about six months later, and Peppiatt had a forum for his frustration. When I ask him about his role in the Leveson he remains indignant, citing a recent issue of the Sun that had several bikini pictures of Reeva Steenkamp, Oscar Pistorius’ murdered girlfriend, plastered all over it. “The media hasn’t really changed. There was certainly a quiet period while the inquiry was going on but it does seem that editors are winning the battle to get the regulation that they want rather that the regulation they deserve”.

When I ask about what the future holds, Peppiatt is not optimistic: “I don’t think you are going to eradicate things like the invasion of privacy. The point is, “What is the right and ethical thing to do?” A lot of what I did at the Daily Star wasn’t even journalism!” He laughs that what most tabloid writers do is finding bikini pictures of celebrities and dotting a few words around them. Peppiatt is serious again though, and claims that a few months on from the Leveson Inquiry little progress has been made, in spite of Lord Leveson’s efforts. “The whole discussion of a free press is rather outdated. Newspapers are businesses; their aim is to make money. Capitalism is based on self-interest, but journalism is based on public interest. Putting the two together is an awkward coupling and self-interest in journalism often tramples public interest.”

It was at this point that Peppiatt turned to comedy. His show, ‘One Rogue Reporter’ is an attempt to counteract some of theaggression that the tabloids have exhibited. In Peppiatt’s own words it is also a reaction to the refusal by those who have brought the industry to the cliff face – the tabloid executives themselves – to play a serious part in the public dialogue over where the line should lie between public interest, privacy, and freedom of speech. ‘One Rogue Reporter’ is clever, then: a mixed media stand up comedy show with a serious political and journalistic message. “People like Paul Baker didn’t like me trying to doorstep them. I hated the hypocrisy of these people; it underpins so much of the industry. I’m proud my show reflects that as I think it’s well overdue”.

So a sort of self-referential political satire, then. Peppiatt laughs and waves away my persistent categorisation: “The show is more than a stand up comedy show. What I wanted it to be about was that, watching the Leveson Inquiry, some of the editors were allowed to get away with these grand proclamations about private interest and freedom of expression when I knew that in real life they didn’t believe them”.

‘One Rogue Reporter’ has toured Edinburgh and is currently touring the country. Peppiatt performed at Hertford College on Sunday, which, when I speak to him, he is apprehensive about. “I’ve never done comedy in the day time before! Normally I have a few pints first.”

The idea of turning a political inquiry about media ethics into a stand up comedy show is quirky, and Rich Peppiatt deals with the concept brilliantly. His topic is niche and personal, he has the self-interest of experience, and the public interest of his highly topical, journalistic theme to his great advantage. Will he ever go back to journalism and writing again? It is unlikely. He hasn’t so much closed doors as slammed them. And rightly so.

Making a case for the earth

0

“Guilty.”

It was a unanimous verdict by the jury of a ground-breaking mock-trial in September 2011. The Athabasca Oil Sands Project had been found to constitute ‘ecocide’, instated in this scenario as an international crime. The prosecuted CEOs of companies operating in the Tar Sands, played by actors, squirmed as the ruling was read out. This was a test run, but if the proposed Ecocide Act becomes reality, bona fide CEOs will find themselves in the firing line.

Ecocide is defined as ‘the extensive damage to, destruction of or loss of ecosystem(s) of a given territory, whether by human agency or by other causes, to such an extent that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of that territory has been or will be severely diminished.’

International barrister, Polly Higgins, is working to make this a crime punishable by international law. As a corporate lawyer, Higgins found herself asking, “Why is it that I’m representing people in court, who I get on with very well, who think it’s normal to make money out of mass damage and destructions?” Whilst the law mandates that CEOs produce the best return for shareholders, it does not force them to act in an environmentally-responsible way.

But Higgins is careful not to lay the blame with abstract concepts like individual greed or corporate irresponsibility. “The law was basically determining that we weren’t looking to the consequences,” she explains. “So the law has caused the problems in a lot of ways.”

In 2006, Higgins became a lawyer for the earth itself, a client which had thoroughly inadequate protection under the law. “There are over 500 pieces of international legislation to do with protecting the environment and they’re clearly not fit for purpose. You just have to look at the Amazon,” she says, with a note of exasperation.

Not content to let this stand, it seemed to Higgins “that it was about fundamentally changing what kind of law we were applying, it’s about changing the rules of the game.” Existing environmental laws are premised on permits and fines (“catch-me-if-you-can laws”), which do not encourage prevention of environmental damage. Higgins believes they must start from the Hippocratic principle, “First, do no harm.”

“We need to apply the same care as the medical profession to the earth.”

But these changes do not come easily, and Higgins’ initial submission of a proposal to the UN in 2010 was unsuccessful. “They did nothing,” she laughs, “They didn’t respond to me.” Undeterred, Higgins kept working to build support. “Now there’s huge international engagement in this… the international legal community really get it, they see this as progress towards where the law needs to go.”

Higgins was clear that the Ecocide Act needed to have the force of international law, so “being a good lawyer I went back to first principles to look at what international laws we have.” These were the Four Crimes Against Peace (genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression) incorporated in the Rome Statute, the founding Treaty of the International Criminal Court (born in 2002). “They’re the crimes of most serious concern to civilization as a whole,” says Higgins. “Hence the need to include Ecocide.”

And precedent for such an inclusion does exist. Higgins recently discovered that a 1985 precursor to the Rome Statute, the draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind, had included Ecocide right up until 1996. “It just goes to show you can’t keep a good idea down,” says a delighted Higgins, who was “absolutely over the moon” about the new information. “It was a recognition that at the international level the legal community had very seriously engaged with this… it wasn’t a radical idea. We’re just reinstating what should have been put in place.”

The aim of Ecocide legislation is to change the behaviour of governments and global business, with one of the most important tenets of Higgins’ act being ‘superior responsibility’. This principle means that CEOs will be held personally responsible for environmental damage done by their company’s actions (plus, the ICC can only try individuals). “It’s actually about ensuring that those who hold the power of decision making at the top end, who hold power over many millions of people below, are held accountable.”

Higgins thinks these changes will have a “huge”, but positive, effect on the future economy. “This is about building resilient economies, about getting away from a boom-and-bust cycle.” She sees it as “incentivizing technologies that will have long term effects for future generations.”

Economic realignments were continually highlighted by speakers at Oxford’s Climate Forum a few weeks ago, identified as one of the keys to combatting dangerous future weather change. In a keynote speech, physicist Professor Myles Allan even suggested that a feasible solution would be to mandate fossil fuel extractors to use carbon capture storage to bury the equivalent amount of carbon they are releasing.

So whilst legal and technological solutions appear to be available, political will for change has been lacking. “I think politicians, like big business, have been bound by law that puts profit first,” says Higgins, generously. “It’s a mixed bag. Some countries have fantastic legislation… but nobody comes to the table with clean hands here, especially because of environmental legislation not being good enough to tackle this until just now.”

But Dapo Akande, who is University Lecturer in Public International Law and Yamani Fellow at St. Peter’s College, Oxford, says that the ICC is subject to major limitations. “The ICC actually can’t do a lot. The fact that it has a global reach shouldn’t induce us to think it can do a lot of things.” Realistically, “it can only undertake a small number of prosecutions of symbolic value.”

And as an organ of international justice, the ICC is powerless to make a difference to the activities of several major global players. The USA has an uneven affiliation with the ICC, and India and China have not even ratified the Rome Statute.

But despite these drawbacks, “it’s worth starting somewhere,” says Akande. “The reach of the court is actually wider than might appear at first sight,” he adds, pointing out that the court can try any national of the states who are party to the Rome Statute, even if they have acted on territory of a state which is not party, and vice versa. 

However, another potential stumbling-block for Higgins’ law is that alterations to the Rome Statute must be approved by two-thirds of the 121 states that have signed and ratified it. 81 heads of state must be persuaded that consciously protecting the environment is in their interest. How is Higgins planning to convince them?

“I’m not going to do that, you are, and many, many millions of people,” she laughs, “This is about calling for bold, moral and courageous leadership as citizens and those who have more public platforms.” Higgins may be a successful negotiator, but “this is not something I can do alone.”

Akande is not so optimistic about the Act’s chance of making it to the ICC agenda. “A number of other crimes are competing to be on the list (for consideration),” including acts against terrorism, corruption, and drugs trafficking. “I suspect people will be afraid to put anything else on the table.”

However, Akande agrees with Higgins that the power for change rests with the public. “It is not widely appreciated how influential civil society can be in making changes. Talking to people in government I’m often impressed that they do take the views of civil society seriously.” If the general sentiment swings towards better environmental legal protection, the law is much more likely to follow.

On 21 January, Higgins’ call for citizens to speak out against Ecocide was answered. A European Citizens’ Initiative was launched to make Ecocide a crime under EU law. One million signatures are now required to force the European Commission to consider the proposed legislation (one month later they had 9,165 signatures). Higgins is confident that the number will be reached thanks to an “appetite for change”: “Oh it’ll happen, absolutely, not a problem.”

Higgins has called her work, “my quest.” When I ask if she sees herself as a knight for nature, she laughs merrily (as she has done throughout the interview). “There’s something that happens when you stand up and speak out about something you care about. When you shine your own light you give people permission to shine theirs,” she muses, referencing Martin Luther King. “God knows when I stand up on platforms I do that every time. More and more people do that and the message spreads. It’s not just my quest, it’s other people’s quest.”

“I think it’s the challenge of our times,” Higgins says soberly. “A most unique time for the whole history of civilization. If we don’t resolve this we won’t be around for much longer.”

 

 

Time to dispel the immigration myth

0

If you’ve ever opened a tabloid newspaper for the purpose of instruction, you would have encountered a battery of home truths about immigration. You usually hear these views bleated by the more moronic members of the audience on Question Time, but in such cash-strapped times they are becoming more commonly held.

Immigrants both scrounge for benefits and steal jobs. They hoard social housing and also build houses. They both erode communities and furnish our dinner tables with their food. They spread disease and form our army of nurses and overnight doctors.

The latest furore is over the accession of Romania and Bulgaria to the European Union on 1st January 2014. Transitional controls will be lifted, emancipating the Slavic masses to scramble for the English Channel like sperm to an egg. As the argument goes: unless we batten down the hatches, our social infrastructure will implode.

Never mind same-sex hospital wards – it’ll soon be three to a bed. We’d have to start cling- ing onto the trains as they do in India. We’ll be- come sardines packed in tins, like it is for the British ex-pats choosing to live in those ghastly monolithic skyscrapers along the Benidorm coastline.

Importantly, government research finds that migrants have a much lower uptake of both in-work and out-of-work benefits than the national average. They take home lower wages and are under-represented in social housing.

In 2008, a House of Lords Select Committee reported that immigration overall had a net benefit to national income, which in theory means there should be no strain on resources.

Yet immigration does have acutely negative effects for some groups in society, particularly those in low-paid and unskilled occupations.

We should not handicap ourselves in the name of protecting this group. It is much better to understand, improve and harness the qualities they have. Immigrants should not be their easy scapegoat.

The surplus generated by immigration needs to be invested to build the social infra- structure for a larger population. That means more houses, trains, schools and hospital beds.

It may well be the case that we are reaching the optimum population for a country of our size and resources. The government is therefore right to focus on the fewer but more skilled people who want to come to Britain.

However, another argument for entirely pulling up the drawbridge centres on the cul- tural impact of immigration. Integration is a legitimate concern associated with the effects of rapid mass migration. It is somewhat natu- ral for new citizens in a country to coalesce in areas populated with people of similar origin: Poles in East Anglia; Bangladeshis in Tower Hamlets; Britons in Alicante.

This is problematic. While these areas are the gratifying wellsprings of multicultural- ism, they can isolate those who lived in these communities before, prompting the stock cliché that they “feel like a foreigner in my own country.” It is an issue to the extent that communities feel divided along linguistic and cul- tural lines. As the natives flee, ghettos and polarisation result, leading to the palpable sense of disunity that you see in many areas of the country today.

If we can consciously build a parasol of strong values under which the individual cultures of local communities reside then we have the basis for a strong nation in the 21st century.

The Olympics were important and timely for the country in this regard. Many were euphoric when Mo Farah, a Somali refugee, won two long-distance golds. He embodied the common, somewhat Protestant, values of hard work, dedication, kindness and respect for others. Hostilities rightfully crumble when people realise their shared values and discount their ephemeral differences.

We devour Indian cuisine and imbibe Russian alcohols; we embrace mass-produced Chinese tat and Swedish flatpack furniture. Being a small wet rock surrounded by the Atlantic Ocean has made it expedient to be open to trade – and by extension different cultures, ideas and dispositions – right through the ages.

There are few more open-minded, tolerant and civilised nations on Earth than Britain. But we’re also a nostalgic people, one that looks proudly on its past achievements: industry, language, our rule of law, not to mention codifying most of the world’s important sports whilst being hopeless at them. Rapid change and scapegoating fuelled by a populist media can lead to hostility and escapism, which are not natural to the British character.

We’re a country equipped for the future, with a people that can speak most of the world’s languages. Britain is expected to be Europe’s largest economy in 2050 mostly because of population growth from immigration.

From someone who has Nordic, African and Spanish heritage, I hope the national debate starts to trumpet the good aspects of immigration, places its many challenges in a more realistic context and remembers that homo sapiens are a nomadic species with no natural monopoly on any part of the world’s land.