TWO letters in your edition of October 14, 2011, have brought me out of retirement, as I am a current member of UKIP, and resent the smear of racism quoted in these letters.

I am a Forester born and bred and have lived in Coalway for over 20 years, but I do not know Siamak Alimi nor what he does for a living. I am afraid that your other correspondent who wrote the letter headed 'Half a Lie...' was left standing in something, at least in my paper, and I do not know what in nor who that person is. However, both assume the mantle typical of socialists who equate any discussion on immigration reduction with racism, thereby mocking their otherwise cogent arguments with failure to face facts. Indeed Mr Alimi even resorts to the jaded jibe of 'Little Englanders' to describe anybody who holds views contrary to his own.

In debating the serious subject of immigration it is necessary to differentiate between EU and non-EU immigrants. Mr Alimi is perfectly right in praising those from the Middle East, and to a lesser extent, the Far East.

To take India as an example, their people have a work ethic far and away superior to any country in Europe. Such is their education system that they readily produce doctors, chemists, solicitors, IT specialists, captains of industry and senior civil servants. That a large number of these professionals come to the UK is not just to our advantage but also necessary, due mainly to the failures of our comprehensive education system.

Anyone like myself whose health requires regular visits to Gloucestershire Royal Hospital will know that a considerable number of doctors and specialists are from the Indian sub-continent, or the Middle East. Without them the hospital could not function. Also when discussing immigration, we must walk around any town and see the number of businesses run by Indians and their neighbours in the Middle East, China and other oriental races and Mediterranean europeans.

But with the exception of the latter, these are the very people who Dave Cameron is seeking to exclude or curtail, at the same time allowing free admission to the criminals, riff-raff, unskilled peasants and jobless masses from Eastern Europe, all because of our EU membership. In other words,?Cameron is going to allow a flood of unproductive, unskilled, ill-educated, desperate hordes to come to this country, who will be a drain on our struggling resources and services, whilst strictly curtailing non-EU immigrants who will contribute in no small way to this country's advancement.

It is this situation that the British people want sorted, which UKIP is highlighting and which successive governments, bound by EU regulations, have failed to tackle. Any country whose infrastructure has been ripped out after years of atrophy; whose farmers, fishermen market-gardeners and other food producers cannot provide for the present population (due largely to the afore-mentioned regulations); where the education, health, transport and housing systems are unable to cope; and the forces of law and order are battling against organised crime which is intensifying, needs to address urgently the prospect of further immigration. To ignore the situation is not an option.

To your correspondents and other supporters of their stance, I would give a comfortable thought; in spite of the torrential downpour of platitudes which passed for a speech at the recent Tory conference, Cameron is unlikely to introduce any curbs, bearing in mind his past record of broken promises, U-turns, three-point turns and general political calisthenics. They are all words to him, spoken only to keep his rocky coalition in power.

Finally, please allow me to congratulate Mr Elsmore of Bream, whose banal letter instigated this exchange. Of all the arguments in favour of continued membership of the EU, his must rank as the most desperate. We must remain a member because Paul McCartney's grandfather came from Ireland. This is Europhilia for you!

– Cy Roberts,?Coalway.