With his hearing aid off, he can't hear the clue phone

Over in the UK - No obvious limit to immigration, says Blunkett:

David Blunkett blew open the political debate over immigration last night when he said there was "no obvious limit" to the number of foreigners who could settle in Britain.

Does he mean what I think he means?

With figures today expected to show that net migration is running at a record level, the Home Secretary conceded that in some areas people felt swamped or overwhelmed by new arrivals. However, he declined to say how many people he thought Britain could comfortably accommodate.
...
Ten years ago the annual figure was about 50,000; cumulative immigration in the past five years is equivalent to a city the size of Liverpool. A poll in the summer suggested that voters considered immigration a bigger political issue than crime.

But Mr Blunkett does not consider that ceilings or quotas are practical and he seeks a "balanced" policy. Interviewed on BBC2's Newsnight, he declined to accept that there was a maximum population which the country could sustain.

"I don't think there is. But I think we need to work on much more robust projections of what is sustainable in the long term. It is a crowded island. We've always been a crowded, vigorous island."

Something to look forward to, I'm sure. But why?