Immigration Policy Backtrackers

Andrew Neather and a few commentators are hastily trying to backtrack on the admission that part of Labour's immigration policy was politically-motivated.

Though Cowards Flinch reckons "Andrew Neather didn’t really mean what he said"(!), which is an odd thing to say about a professional speechwriter.

Over at The Spectator's Coffeehouse blog, Peter Hoskin is rather too relaxed and lenient:

Like Neather, I'm uncomfortable with the idea that the government so readily seized on the political angle to this. But it seems to me that there's something different between a) having solely political motivations for a policy, and b) recognising (welcoming, even) the political implications of a policy. Neather appears only to be claiming b) – which is far from edifying, but still a less controversial point that a).

Strictly speaking, this doesn't necessarily mean that Labour's immigration policy wasn't a politically-motivated ruse. The question which may follow from Neather's claims is whether "subsidiary" goals can distort "primary goals" – or whether he's got the set of goals the wrong way around. But this isn't, by itself, the definitive confirmation which some people have been looking for.

I think it's obvious what's been going on - and you don't need to be a right-wing troll to realise it.