Here’s an oldie-but-goodie from the BBC, c. 2012:
By Brian Wheeler
Political reporter, BBC News
21 June 2012
The EU should “do its best to undermine” the “homogeneity” of its member states, the UN’s special representative for migration has said.
Peter Sutherland told peers the future prosperity of many EU states depended on them becoming multicultural.
He also suggested the UK government’s immigration policy had no basis in international law.
He was being quizzed by the Lords EU home affairs sub-committee which is investigating global migration.
Mr Sutherland, who is non-executive chairman of Goldman Sachs International and a former chairman of oil giant BP, heads the Global Forum on Migration and Development, which brings together representatives of 160 nations to share policy ideas.
He told the House of Lords committee migration was a “crucial dynamic for economic growth” in some EU nations “however difficult it may be to explain this to the citizens of those states”.
Those moron citizens keep responding to our inarguable assertions with “facts” and “logic” instead of just admitting we’re smarter than them.
An ageing or declining native population in countries like Germany or southern EU states was the “key argument and, I hesitate to the use word because people have attacked it, for the development of multicultural states”, he added.
“It’s impossible to consider that the degree of homogeneity which is implied by the other argument can survive because states have to become more open states, in terms of the people who inhabit them. Just as the United Kingdom has demonstrated.”
The UN special representative on migration was also quizzed about what the EU should do about evidence from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that employment rates among migrants were higher in the US and Australia than EU countries.
He told the committee: “The United States, or Australia and New Zealand, are migrant societies and therefore they accommodate more readily those from other backgrounds than we do ourselves, who still nurse a sense of our homogeneity and difference from others.
“And that’s precisely what the European Union, in my view, should be doing its best to undermine.”
Mr Sutherland recently argued, in a lecture to the London School of Economics, of which he is chairman, that there was a “shift from states selecting migrants to migrants selecting states” and the EU’s ability to compete at a “global level” was at risk.
… Mr Sutherland, a former Attorney General of Ireland, agreed, saying: “Absolutely not. it provides absolutely no justification at all for the position they are talking about.”
He said the policy risked Britain’s traditional status as “tolerant, open society” and would be “massively damaging” to its higher education sector both financially and intellectually.
“It’s very important that we should not send a signal from this country, either to potential students of the highest quality, or to academic staff, that this is in some way an unsympathetic environment in which to seek visas or whatever other permissions are required… and I would be fearful that that could be a signal.”
Mr Sutherland, who has attended meetings of The Bilderberg Group , a top level international networking organisation often criticised for its alleged secrecy, called on EU states to stop targeting “highly skilled” migrants, arguing that “at the most basic level individuals should have a freedom of choice” about whether to come and study or work in another country.
Mr Sutherland also briefed the peers on plans for the Global Migration and Development Forum’s next annual conference in Mauritius in November, adding: “The UK has been very constructively engaged in this whole process from the beginning and very supportive of me personally.”
Who is Peter Sutherland? Here’s a 2012 column in The Daily Mail by the somewhat improbably named Sebastian Shakespeare:
The questions Peter Sutherland, the globe’s grandee, was NOT asked by the Lords EU sub-committee
PUBLISHED: 15:01 EST, 27 June 2012
How perfect it is when principle and profit coincide. How convenient when your cherished beliefs slot in smoothly with the Zeitgeist, and you can simultaneously top up your self-esteem and your bank balance with a completely clear conscience. How agreeable to have powerful friends, to be powerful oneself, and all this in the name of the un-powerful – to be a Gracchus for the globe, beloved by the people – and safely distant from them.
On 21 June Peter Sutherland, KCMG, SC, UN Special Representative on Migration, sat massively opposite a House of Lords EU affairs sub-committee, a soft-faced man who has done very well indeed out of the culture wars. His erstwhile rugby-playing physique may be collapsing in on itself, but still he faced forward, safe in an armature of absolute self-belief and the certainty that he is on the side of History.
But then why shouldn’t he be certain? His dazzling trajectory, his gilt-edged address book, his multiple doctorates and directorships, and the seriousness with which his opinions are invariably greeted all attest to a life shrewdly spent – 66 years of weighing down the Western boat without ever rocking it.
Sutherland, a former Attorney General of Ireland, former or present director of blue-chip companies and permanent member of international think-tanks, is like an ungainly piece of inherited furniture, a teak-oiled trophy cabinet full of meretricious treasures. He holds in his stubby hands an honorary British knighthood – the European Parliament’s Gold Medal – the Grand Cross of Civil Merit (Spain) – the Grand Cross of King Leopold II (Belgium) – Grand Cross of the Order of Infante Dom Henrique (Portugal) – the Legion d’Honneur – the Brazilian Order of Rio Branco – and yet more others, a glinting cascade of gold-coloured base-metal tributes. …
His has been the life of a man of parts, one who walks and talks with the great, reminiscent of one of Holbein’s Ambassadors, surrounded by measuring instruments and all the external signs of extreme cultivation, peering down on human affairs from a great height. Yet Mr. Sutherland’s manicured machinations could prove calamitous for what remains of the West – just as Holbein includes a distorted skull to remind the viewer that all rational hopes are in vain. …
Born in Dublin in 1946, he was educated at the Jesuit-run Gonzaga College – named after a 16th century Italian nobleman canonized for giving up his life to minister to plague victims, a sacrifice luckily not demanded of the bright and ambitious pupil. He studied law at University College Dublin, the Catholic intellectual riposte to the traditionally Protestant Trinity College. He practiced at the Irish Bar between 1969 and 1980, toiling in the Georgian magnificence of Dublin’s King’s Inns.
He simultaneously became involved with Fine Gael (‘Tribe of the Gaels’), one of Ireland’s Buggin’s Turn parties of state, and although the highest vote he ever obtained in any election was a lowly 6.2%, he made it up to the disappointed voters by becoming Ireland’s youngest ever Attorney General in 1981.
Tiring of law at last, he joined the board of Allied Irish Bank, rising to chairman. Although he has more recently described himself as ‘passionately Irish’, in the Eighties he was apparently not content to ‘fumble in a greasy till / And add the halfpence to the pence’ (W. B. Yeats, September 1913) on behalf of the tribe of the Gaels.
His sights were set instead on the purlieus of la Belge, and in 1984 he became the youngest ever European Commissioner, one of those bland mini-potentates whose precise purpose is so mysterious that their appointment cannot be entrusted to ignorant voters. Here he greased the gears of the incipient European single market and made useful (if perhaps not very interesting) friends, who assisted him to become Director General first of GATT and then the World Trade Organisation. A starstruck Michael Kantor would later dub him ‘the father of globalization’.
Central to his grand schemes were, and are, international finance, air and oil – and as good luck would have it, he was soon invited to join the boards of Delta Airlines, BP and Goldman Sachs. His insights were soon being sought by, and all too often delivered to, a plethora of organizations feared by conspiracists – Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group, Council on Foreign Relations, World Economic Forum, Pilgrims Society – although perhaps such groups should be feared more for their narcoleptic than their necromantic powers. …
Whilst Chairman, BP signed a £545m oil deal with Libya, and he was present on the notorious 2007 occasion when Tony Blair was photographed embracing Colonel Gaddafi. …
His reserve was not resented by the Gaddafi family, because subsequently the Colonel’s son graciously accepted a PhD from the London School of Economics (Chair of Council: P. Sutherland) and gave the School £1.5m. A £2.2m government contract with the LSE to train the Libyan civil service may not have been entirely unconnected with these transactions.
Perhaps this mutually agreeable but officially frowned-upon alliance might have continued to this day had not Libya’s liberal idealists meted out rougher-than-strictly-necessary justice last year in Sirte.
Sad to record, in the last two years of Peter’s BP chairmanship (he left in 2010) ungrateful shareholders even argued he was not qualified for the job, as he had been a member of the board of the Royal Bank of Scotland, and on the RBS remuneration committee which was so generous to Sir Fred Goodwin and other equally deserving recipients – ‘resigning’ only when ‘asked’ by the government.
Suchlike perils of greatness were thankfully always counterbalanced by acknowledgements of his usefulness to that cosy world where law, liberalism and lucre meet – with even the un-liberal Vatican clamoring for his services (he has the resounding title of Consultor of the Extraordinary Section of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See). To add to this sacerdotal seal of approval, there have always been plentiful profane rewards – such as the £125 million he reportedly ‘earned’ from Goldman Sachs 1999 flotation.
But the money was always incidental to the greater aim of getting rid of all those pesky prehistoric frontiers, traditions and identities which impede the global flows of capital, commodities, human rights lawyers, pictures of celebrities in thongs, and humans in throngs. As he remarked almost angrily in 2007, opposition to greater globalisation is ‘morally indefensible’.
The morally defensible, personally charming, highly intelligent, ‘passionately Irish’ grand panjandrum of globalization actually seems to be out of love with Irishness…also Englishness, Frenchness, Germannness, Italianness, and all the other nationalities which make up European-ness – to the extent that he would quite like to see them disappear. He has said that ‘Europe for me is the most noble political process in 1,000 years’, and he would dearly love to be the über-European – yet his ideal Europe might not have all that many indigenous Europeans. Europe for him seems not to be a place where Europeans live, but a wholly abstract entity, an entry in a balance sheet.
That is why he was peering at the House of Lords sub-committee like some well-fed but still peckish bird of prey, looking at the parochial parliamentarians from their dusty old-fashioned legislature – perhaps contrasting them unfavourably with the big-picture bureaucrats of his Global Forum on Migration and Development. He was there to answer questions about the government’s immigration policies – and from the outset it was plain that he disapproved. And not just of the policy – but Britain’s whole political structure, culture and national identity – all now, he broadly hinted, overripe for replacement.
… In any case, it came as little surprise to learn that he advocates a global approach to get rid of these dirty differences – an approach based on a wonderfully simple, wildly reckless premise – ‘…at the most basic level individuals should have a freedom of choice.’
No-one enquired whether existing residents of countries would also have the freedom to choose what kind of country they lived in – nor whether he foresaw any kind of limits on human traffic from Asia or Africa into small countries like his own (pop. 3 million). Yeats bemoaned that ‘Romantic Ireland’s dead and gone’ – but if Mr. Sutherland and his many mini-mes have their way unromantic Ireland might soon follow.
Nor was he asked whether he thought it possible that unlimited migration might endanger the ‘tolerant, easy’ characteristics he and most other Europeans value – nor whether his manic métissage might make the whole world rather less interesting and beautiful. Although he will be leaving the world a very much richer man than he entered it, the world he leaves behind will probably be poorer, in ways he cannot begin to comprehend.
In 2015, Sutherland became the chairman of the International Catholic Migration Commission.
This week Sutherland visited the encampment in Calais of migrants attempting to flee France’s war, genocide, and weak Euro for refuge in London. Independent Catholic News reported on the Irish Catholic dignitary’s visit to this camp of the saints:
UN Representative visits Calais ‘Jungle’
Wednesday, September 23, 2015 1:42 pm.
Further to ICN’s “Eyewitness” report on 20th September, Peter Sutherland, the UN Secretary General’s Special Representative for Refugees since 2006, current President of the International Catholic Migration Commission, and former Attorney General of Eire, visited Calais on Monday 21 September. His current UN work is centred around the Mediterranean, but he needed to find out what becomes of exiles when they have moved north.
Here are the horrified tweets posted by this experienced observer on that day, and subsequently:
Today I am in the camp in Calais. The conditions are appalling (about 3pm)
The camp is squalid and unacceptable. There are about 3000 in the camp and the majority are refugees. How can govs allow this to persist? (about 5pm)
They are in France but are determined to get into the UK. Why can’t the two govs accelerate the asylum process together (about 6pm)
a) The ones deserving credit in Calais are the French and British mini charities who compensate for terrible government inaction
b) Intergovernmental agreements on migrants are all about security. A pity a portion is not spent on the poor migrants in particular in Calais (about 7pm)
a) The first thing the EU should do now is to help the front line States Lebanon Turkey and Jordan by accepting resettlement of refugees.
b) The second thing is all the MS should be reminded strongly that membership of the EU requires common values and internal solidarity
c) Common values require that asylum be given to refugees rather than meeting them with barbed wire and teargas (about 9pm)
a) I cannot easily recover from the shock of Calais.the French and British governments should rapidly respond to the horrible conditions.
b) With the filth has come disease and the place is testimony to the desperation of the people in it. They deserve immediate action.
c) The Camp in Calais is a truly dreadful place. It is an indictment of society that it exists.Why have the media largely moved on? (about midnight)