IMMIGRATION, migration, integration and assimilation are all words thrown around like dominoes strewn across a pub table.

They have almost a neutralising affect on your mind with very little meaning, and no one seems to know how and what they mean and to whom they apply?

They are words that seem to have a kind of family relationship with each other, a bit like the Royal family from across the different parts of Europe, but no one is quite sure where they originated from, what their bloodline is and who are their decedents.

These domino words seem to have other words coupled to their general concept such as black, Muslim, asylum, refugee.

And when they are brought together like an "odd married couple", you suddenly realise that you have created a new breed of terminology and possibly a new generation of citizens who have been labelled with a post-modernist term to describe their non-belonging.

In bygone years, one could argue that during the not-so-good old days these domino words were coupled with terms such as "Paki", "nigger", "wog", "towel-head" and so on. We have I suppose moved on, as the world has changed and so has our language. Or has it?

Nigel Harris, from University College London, wrote in his paper for the Commission for Racial Equality on this very subject that everyone in Europe appears to be concerned with migration but talk about integration.

The previous Home Secretary offered us a flavour of his wisdom before he resigned over some allegations concerning an inept Home Office official dealing with a friend's immigration visa papers.

He commented that community cohesion is the way forward if local black and ethnic minority communities, referring in the main to Muslims from the Indian sub-continent (sic), are to identify with Britain.

As though it was the fault of some poor forgotten immigrant who had failed to chat to the local shopkeeper or bookie so to become integrated in to British society.

There is no single path to follow when we are discussing the complex nature of community participation, community immigration and community identity and their relationship to homeland Britains.

Most of our efforts seem to be lost through our own indecisive patterns of behaviour and we barely recognise an immigrant when we do see one.

Yet the whole country is living on some kind of tenterhooks, claiming and counter claiming that we are not properly dealing with these unwanted desperate souls arriving in their millions on our shores in lorries, parachutes, cabins, boats, ships, cars, tunnels, prams, bicycles and even roller-skates.

The paranoia has become so intense that not only the Far Right have made it their main slogan for the (yet to be announced) election campaign, but the central political parties are perceived to have joined hands with the likes of the BNP and UKIP as a possible political benefit to whack the poor unsuspecting immigrant who arrives here to gain some kind of emotional and economic warmth from the British public.

Have we become so ingratiated in our own lives that we have forgotten our history and our own identity as a leading nation that is rich with the warmth of multi-culturalism?

Parties vie for 'get-tough' vote on immigration

MANY of us see Britain as a nation of tolerance that embraces all cultures and people who have sought refuge here from all walks of life.

However, not everyone is so willing to welcome those who have come from far-flung countries and often suffered at the hands of merciless and corrupt Governments.

Immigration has been a hot topic of debate this week, and is often an issue that sparks controversy and accusations of xenophobia and racism - even sparking riots in the past.

And the subject is such an issue that politicians were at loggerheads this week after the main parties announced their policies - all appearing to suggest a future crackdown on the number of migrants entering Britain.

Home Secretary Charles Clarke said Britain would continue to welcome genuine refugees - but announced tough new immigration controls would root out abuse of the asylum-seeking system.

Under Labour's plans, only highly-skilled workers would be allowed to settle here and must speak English and pass a "Britishness test". And Tory proposals include an annual cap on new immigrants, with shadow home secretary David Davis slamming the current system as "confused, weak and chaotic".

He said latest figures show asylum applications were now 67 per cent higher than before New Labour took over power - and argued limiting the number of migrants entering Britain would ease pressure on public services, like housing, schools and hospitals.

Each party hopes their pledges will bag themselves the public vote in the coming General Election. But their arguments have sparked fears that immigrants and ethnic minorities could spark racial tension.

Here, Dr Mohammed Aslam, chief executive of the Worcestershire Racial Equality Council, gives his views on how we should be celebrating our multi-cultural society and learning to live together in harmony...