Labour has a long and miserable record pandering to anti-immigration sentiment, both in government and opposition, from Neil Kinnock's failure to challenge Margaret Thatcher's "swamped" rhetoric to their bi-annual asylum and immigration laws under Tony Blair.
Shadow home office minister Yvette Cooper followed in that tradition with her call to "talk more about immigration" in the aftermath of the Heywood and Middleton byelection where Labour lost almost all of their 'safe' majority as they scraped home just ahead of UKIP.
As Britain talks about immigration incessantly the call to "talk more" is code for echoing the prejudices of UKIP and sections of the electorate who have absorbed daily negative newspaper headlines and see immigration as a threat.
Cooper was joined by Simon Danszuk, Labour MP for neighbouring Rochdale, in the demand that Ed Miliband get out the dog whistle and start thinking what they're thinking.
It is hardly a surprise that immigration tops concerns in Rochdale and outlining constituencies; as one of the areas affected by 'Asian paedophile gang' controversies, unscrupulous opportunists on the Right have sought to manipulate public revulsion to turn criminal activity into an immigration issue even though most offenders are British-born.
Quite why Labour think local circumstances in isolated pockets like Rochdale should be turned into a national policy position, only they can answer. The panic over UKIP that seems to have gripped the party betrays a lack of strategic forward-planning in how to deal with Nigel Farage in their heartlands and the absence of a progressive anchor.
After months of cynical silence over UKIP while miscalculating that Farage would do more damage to the Conservatives than Labour, Miliband's party now reveal the absence of a fall-back plan should they be forced to take them on.
There was a short period before the European elections this year when Labour apparatchiks fed journalists research with examples of racism and general loonyism in UKIP ranks but that has long since ceased.
Having apparently failed to make a dent in UKIP's support, Labour now appear to sending their tanks onto the very ground they were previously attacking UKIP - at least by proxy - of occupying.
Into this vacuum of policy, principles and strategy, the likes of Cooper are now being sucked into the quicksand of the anti-immigration Right.
Whatever the polls say, this is not the political centre-ground. Just as in past years and decades, replicating anti-immigration sentiment only drives the insatiable appetite of the Daily Mail, UKIP and large swathes of the Conservative Party yet rightwards.
Labour cannot outflank the Right on the Right on this issue. By the time they get there the ground has already shifted some more.
The fact that they continue to attempt to do so is a testament of successive Labour leaderships failure to listen to their progressive Left.
Yet despite the prevailing anti-immigration wind there remains a large slice of voters who have no wish to see immigrants scapegoated.
The 'I'm-not-racist-but' prelude of "We agree that immigration can be of benefit to Britain but..." has always been a fig-leaf to play to the anti-immigration crowd. UKIP play that tune relentlessly now so a new song is needed to sound different.
The Liberal Democrats are now the only major party now refusing to dance to this tune, just as they alone steadfastly stuck to a pro-European line during the European elections. The Lib Dems failed to reap the rewards even though opinion polls showed at least one third of voters were pro-European, but this was probably more a reflection of a midterm kicking that domestic politics tends to deliver.
The general election is a time when voters tend to give more thought to what parties offer as opposed to what they represent, so staying positive on immigration may not be the stiff headwind popular wisdom may suggest.
Nick Clegg's party pulled in a very respectable 23% at the last general election despite suffering a late backlash over the asylum amnesty policy.
The Lib Dem's error was not to have a pro-asylum stance - even though the amnesty for asylum seekers whose claims have gone unprocessed for ten years was hardly radical - it was the failure to positively advocate this policy well in advance.
Drawing anti-immigration poison early and launching a sustained effort to neutralise it with facts, reason and principle is an obvious but little-practiced strategy.
There are undoubted benefits to doing so. A well-argued positive immigration position is likely to appeal to at least a quarter of the electorate even if every national newspaper takes the opposite view. The broadcast media offers far greater opportunities to put the case, as well as TV and radio being more influential than biased Fleet Street reporting.
With the Lib Dems bumping along at between six to nine percent in the opinion polls the only way is up, so being the most pro-immigration party offers opportunities as well as being the right thing to do.
Being the progressive alternative is what Lib Dems have done best before entering the coalition and rediscovering this is central to presenting a genuine Liberal vision for Britain.
There is no doubt that immigration is a key battleground in the forthcoming election, even if it is more important in some seats like Rochdale than others like metropolitan London.
In contrast to Labour's dazed and confused dash to the Right, the Lib Dems must lead the way by tackling UKIP head-on and speak not just for Liberals but all who reject dog-whistle politics, including the progressive Left of the Labour Party who must be tearing their hair out, once again, at their party's leadership, or lack thereof.
By Lester Holloway @brolezholloway
