Daily Mail readers are generally presumed to be conservatives, so I was stunned to see the result of the poll which accompanies this article: Save the planet by having fewer babies, says BBC presenter as he calls for tax breaks for small families.

Many of the readers’ comments are wonders to behold as well. No wonder folk keep voting LibLabCon. They obviously want to live impoverished and enslaved in the EUSSR. Here’s what the article says,

BBC wildlife expert Chris Packham has warned the only way to protect the future of the planet is to curb population growth.

The Springwatch presenter suggested offering Britons tax breaks to encourage them to have smaller families.

He effectively endorsed China’s controversial one-child policy, which sees couples who adhere to the rule given a lump sum on retirement.

And which has also seen forced abortions up to the ninth month of pregnancy – and forced sterilisations.

But he stopped short of suggesting people should be penalised for having too many children.

Packham, 49, who has no children of his own, told Radio Times: ‘By 2020, there are going to be 70million people in Britain. Let’s face it, that’s too many.’

Let’s face it, Packham doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Most people are crammed into towns and cities. And anti-humanity advocates love showing photographs of major city centres in the rush hour, like this somehow proves their point. The overpopulation myth is due to be one in my series: Myths and Hoaxes in 21st Century Britain. I’ve only managed to write one so far so don’t expect the next one any time soon! Back to Packham…

He added: ‘There’s no point bleating about the future of pandas, polar bears and  tigers when we’re not addressing the one single factor that’s putting more pressure on the ecosystem than any other – namely the ever-increasing size of the world’s population.’

Packham suggested offering couples a financial incentive as ‘a carrot’ to persuade them to have fewer – or no – children.

He said: ‘I would offer them tax breaks for having small families: say, 10 per cent off your tax bill if you decide to stick with just one child. And an even bigger financial incentive if you choose not to have a family at all.

Some Mail readers have at least tried to explain that an agenda like this will destroy our society. The fertility rate has to be 2.11 children per woman just to maintain the current population. This graph from the Office for National Statistics shows that the British are already in decline.

It is probably worse for native Brits than these figures look, seeing that the birth-rate among Muslims is higher.

Experts have predicted that the British population – which is currently around 62million – will increase to 70million by 2029.

A report by the sustainable development group Forum For The Future said Britain would struggle to handle such growth. The increase in population would be ‘catastrophic’ and put unsustainable pressure on housing, schools and hospitals as well as natural resources.

Forum For The Future are the ones, remember, who envisage a pretty bleak future for us, where only the rich can afford to drive in town centres and we get to eat meat on our birthdays, if we can manage to scrape enough money together.

Current trends will see a city the size of Bristol added to the population of the UK every year for the next two decades.

But they won’t be filled with British people!

Packham, who presents new BBC2 show The Animal’s Guide To British Wildlife, was also critical of the nation’s reliance on cheap supermarket produce and fast food.

‘The public expect cheap food as a right, and we aren’t prepared to pay the prices farmers need in order to provide quality food.

‘We should insist on buying locally grown food and be prepared to pay for it.

‘As for the hard-pressed mum who says she’s not got the time or money, I’m sorry, but making her children good, nutritious food should be her priority.

I think that maybe Mr Packham is out to lunch. While what he says is true, he seems to have forgotten that the social engineers made the country’s women go out to work and dump their kids in playgroups and nursery schools.

‘Everyone knows we’ve got the most obese kids in the world.

I think Americans would be entitled to claim that distinction.

‘Besides which, giving them fast food actually works out more expensive than cooking them a proper meal.’

Yes, it does, but there are only 24 hours in a day, and if eight are spent sleeping, nine or ten are spent at work and getting to and from work, an hour for ablutions et al, doing the washing and ironing, gardening, housework, shopping, and so on, there isn’t exactly a lot of time left to flick through Delia’s latest tome and prepare a masterpiece.

The full interview is in this week’s issue of Radio Times, out now.

You mean he spouts even more uneducated piffle? I expect he’ll be a government “advisor” any day now.

Our society and culture are under attack from all quarters so that we are destroyed as a nation in order to slip us into a global system of government. Reducing our population is just one of those fronts.

The “Two’s Plenty” campaign from the Optimum Population Trust (OPT) is calling for Scotland’s population to be cut by a quarter and the UK’s to be brought as low as 30 million.

Can you imagine what the retirement age will have to be if there are not enough younger people to do the work and pay taxes? It would be a total disaster. Our whole society would collapse. But, I think that’s the idea. I can’t believe that those involved – like David Attenborough, Professor Aubrey Manning and Jonathon Porritt – can possibly not see this.

Unless they also believe in culling the proles when we reach, say sixty years old.

But from perusing the Daily Mail readers’ comments, it is clear that there is much resentment over Child Benefit being paid to other people’s children, and they want to crack open a nut with a sledgehammer to change this. I would expect even Sun readers to be more clued up. Maybe that’s why the Daily Sport went bust – their readers have flocked to the Mail? It makes sense, what with both specialising in ridiculous stories and gratuitous images of female flesh.

This would be my plan for the UK: encourage marriage and larger families and make planning regulations less restrictive. And leave the European Union and take our ‘borders’ back.

COULD YOUR LOCAL COUNCIL SCROUNGE OFF YOUR PETS?

HAS DUMBING-DOWN INFECTED THE MIDDLE CLASS WITH AIDS?

WILL BINGE DRINKING MOLEST THE MEMORY OF DIANA?

ARE THE GERMANS RIPPING OFF YOUR PENSION?

HAVE ASYLUM SEEKERS GIVEN BRITISH JUSTICE CANCER?

WILL THE POLES STEAL FROM YOUR HOUSE?

HAS THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT TURNED THE ROYAL FAMILY GAY?

WILL RUSSELL BRAND DESTROY ENGLAND?

ARE IMMIGRANTS DEVALUING PROPERTY PRICES?

WILL LESBIANS DESTROY BRITISH SOVEREIGNTY?

WILL HEALTH & SAFETY GIVE THE MIDDLE CLASS CANCER?

COULD THE INTERNET TURN HOMEOWNERS GAY?

WILL NEW LABOUR HAVE SEX WITH THE BRITISH PEOPLE?

ARE GYPSIES SCROUNGING OFF THE CHURCH?

HAS THE HOUSE PRICE CRASH GIVEN YOUR DAUGHTERS CANCER?

WILL YOUR LOCAL COUNCIL HURT YOUR CHILDREN?

IS BINGE DRINKING KILLING THE MIDDLE CLASS?

WILL GYPSIES DESTROY CLIFF RICHARD?

WILL CHANNEL 4 HURT COMMON SENSE AND DECENCY?

HAS THE LOONY LEFT MADE BRITISH JUSTICE IMPOTENT?

ARE YOBS KILLING YOUR PENSION?

IS BINGE DRINKING MAKING CLIFF RICHARD OBESE?

HAS NEW LABOUR TURNED THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY GAY?

COULD GAYS RUIN COMMON SENSE AND DECENCY?

ARE THE FRENCH MAKING ENGLAND IMPOTENT?

COULD ASYLUM SEEKERS STEAL THE IDENTITY OF YOUR PETS?

COULD THE GERMANS RUIN ENGLAND?

WILL IMMIGRANTS IMPREGNATE YOUR CHILDREN?

WILL MUSLIMS INFECT CLIFF RICHARD WITH AIDS?

WILL SINGLE MOTHERS GIVE THE ROYAL FAMILY SWINE FLU?

ARE THE FRENCH MAKING BRITAIN’S SWANS IMPOTENT?

HAS THE BBC MADE HOMEOWNERS OBESE?

IS CHANNEL 4 GIVING THE QUEEN CANCER?

IS THE BBC TURNING YOUR DAUGHTERS GAY?

COULD GORDON BROWN MOLEST YOUR PENSION?

HAS FILTH ON TELEVISION TURNED HOMEOWNERS GAY?

WILL THE METRIC SYSTEM GIVE YOUR PETS CANCER?

IS FEMINISM MAKING PENSIONERS IMPOTENT?

COULD THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT GIVE BRITISH SOVEREIGNTY CANCER?

HAVE GYPSIES STOLEN THE IDENTITY OF BRITAIN’S SWANS?

IS BRUSSELS DESTROYING THE BRITISH PEOPLE?

WILL RUSSELL BRAND BURGLE YOUR HOUSE?

WILL MUSLIMS GIVE CLIFF RICHARD DIABETES?

COULD MUSLIMS SCROUNGE OFF PENSIONERS?

HAVE SINGLE MOTHERS HURT YOUR PETS?

COULD FEMINISM RUIN PROPERTY PRICES?

COULD CHAVS STEAL THE IDENTITY OF YOUR DAUGHTERS?

ARE GYPSIES DEVALUING THE COUNTRYSIDE?

HAS THE NANNY STATE MADE YOUR PETS IMPOTENT?

HAVE MUSLIMS STOLEN FROM YOUR MORTGAGE?

HAS RUSSELL BRAND HURT YOUR DAUGHTERS?

IS YOUR LOCAL COUNCIL RUINING ENGLAND?

HAS THE LOONY LEFT KILLED ENGLAND?

HAS THE MMR JAB GIVEN THE QUEEN CANCER?

IS BINGE DRINKING INFECTING YOUR HOUSE WITH AIDS?

My email read…

Good afternoon,

I wish to support the free speech of Jan Moir and the freedom of the press. The concerted efforts by the homosexual lobby to continually try to outlaw any dissenting opinions to their own should frighten us all when wider society sides with them against the majority.

I am not a particular fan of the Daily Mail and I don’t agree with everything Jan Moir wrote, but freedom of speech is at stake. Either it is for all of us, or it is only for special interest groups.

It is also worth considering that a great many people hate the Daily Mail for its politics and so would have taken this opportunity to attack it.

I ask you, therefore, to consider the complaints you have received with these things in mind and reject them in favour of the freedom to speak and write as we are used to doing in our country.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Stewart Cowan,
Etc.

Basically, Jan Moir cannot believe that the late Stephen Gately of Boyzone could have died of natural causes. I’m puzzled as to why she seems so certain.

What Ms Moir goes on to say, and this is what people are getting their knickers in a twist about, is that homosexual ‘civil partnerships’ aren’t as good as normal marriage.

Another real sadness about Gately’s death is that it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships.

She also cites the late Kevin McGee, the former civil partner of Matt Lucas, as evidence.

The public reaction against her has been enormous. I wonder if this would have been the case had she written similar things about a heterosexual pop star.

I doubt it, because we’ve all been conditioned to be supportive of homosexuals and be outraged on their behalf. This has worked due to people being distracted from thinking about the physical behaviour and the morality, to focus instead on more abstract issues like ‘discrimination’ and ‘rights’.

The moral indignation is sweeping the blogosphere. Alastair Campbell thinks the article is an ‘outrage’ and offers a line-by-line guide to Ms Moir’s apology-cum-explanation.

My comment to Mr Campbell was:

I’m not defending Jan Moir’s article per se, but you must love this sort of thing, as it takes the public’s limited attention away from New Labour’s vile and disgusting behaviour.

And another thing, you don’t much like people wanting to know how someone really died, do you? I’m thinking of Dr Kelly and Mr de Menezes in particular.

At the end of the day, Jan Moir is entitled to her opinion and the Daily Mail is entitled to publish it. If people are genuinely angry, then what are they intending to do about this: Ugandan MP proposes that gays should be executed?

Oh, and not only did Marks and Spencer’s request the removal of their ads from the online page, but so did Nestlé: I’ve boycotted them for years due to the way they promote their powdered milk in the Third World. Sad to see they’ve got their priorities wrong. Upsetting homosexuals: bad; dead babies: who cares?