Site Map | Member Login PayPal — The safer, easier way to pay online. Search this site: _______________ Search Home The Institute of Employment Rights A think tank for the labour movement * About Us * Our Work * News * Publications * Events * Blog * Subscribe * Resources * Coalition Timeline * Contact Join our mailing list Enter your email: _______________ Go PayPal — The safer, easier way to pay online. Home Migrants bring net profit to UK – let's silence the myths and talk about the real problems Submitted by sglenister on Thu, 07/11/2013 - 11:22 07 November 2013 By Sarah Glenister, IER Staff Immigration has been a hot topic for years, and one that is unlikely to disappear anytime soon, but new research shows the perception of 'benefit tourism' is a myth indicates the dialogue on this subject needs to change. A study conducted by Professor Christian Dustmann and Dr Tommaso Frattini of University College London's migration research unit demonstrates that migrants arriving in the UK since 2000 have made a net contribution to the public purse of £25 billion and are 45% less likely to claim benefits or tax credits. They are also 3% less likely to live in social housing. Migrants arriving from European Economic Area countries (Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein in addition to EU member states) contributed around 34% more in taxes than they received in benefits between 2001 to 2011, the research showed. They were also highly skilled and more likely to have a university degree than the British. Meanwhile, people arriving in the UK from further afield paid about 2% more to the Treasury than they received. "Our research shows that … the UK attracts highly educated and skilled immigrants," Professor Dustmann stated. "What's more, immigrants who arrived since 2000 have made a very sizeable net fiscal contribution and therefore helped to reduce the fiscal burden on UK-born workers … Given this evidence, claims about 'benefit tourism' by EEA immigrants seem to be disconnected from reality," he added. The research follows the release of statistical evidence from the European Commission that flew in the face of the government's line that migrants are attracted to the UK in order to take advantage of the welfare state. Despite this, the Home Office continues to refer to 'benefit tourism' in support of its new Immigration Bill. But the Institute of Employment Rights (IER) believes the real issue of immigration is not a question of border control, nor of public finance, but of the exploitation of a foreign workforce that is particularly vulnerable. Current public policy and employment law provides too many opportunities for the exploitation of workers by unethical employers, which applies a downward pressure on the living standards of us all. In our 2005 report Labour Migration and Employment Rights, it was argued that workers should not be seen as a commodity like any other. The cost/benefit approach favoured by New Labour, and the restrictive policies preferred by the Conservative Party were both criticised, and a rights-based model was proposed. This would force focus onto the treatment of workers by employers and how exploitation creates many of the problems associated with immigration – or at least those problems which are not in themselves myths. This is especially important in light of recent sociological research showing that the perceived failure of migrants to culturally integrate is false. In fact, a growing proportion of minorities in the UK are born of parents of differing nationalities, showing that migrants are integrating into British culture in the most intimate of ways. However, segregation does continue, but it is economic segregation, not cultural, showing that migrant workers continue to receive lower wages. On Wednesday 20 November, the IER will launch an update on the 2005 book called Labour Migration in Hard Times at a conference of the same name. The authors of the new publication – the UK's leading experts in the field – will present their findings at the all-day conference, which is particularly timely as the Immigration Bill proceeds through parliament. Immigration must not be allowed to become an issue of the right-wing, as there are measures that can be taken to reduce exploitation and the sinking living standards that accompany it. We must combat the government-peddled myths on migrant workers, which risk boosting support for a knee-jerk reaction to cap migration. This could easily reduce skilled labour in this country and do untold damage to our economy. It is up to us to educate ourselves on the alternatives and to raise awareness of them. To make this possible, the IER is offering a huge 45% discount on entry to the Labour Migration in Hard Times conference when you quote the discount code: 2450. Click here to find out more. * Login to post comments * Blog * Blog This website relies on the use of cookies to function correctly. We understand your continued use of the site as agreement to this. IER, 4th Floor, Jack Jones House, 1 Islington, Liverpool, L3 8EG , Tel: 0151 207 5265, General Enquiries | Back to the top | © IER 2012 #alternate Amazon * Your Amazon.co.uk * Today's Deals * Gift Cards * Sell * Help GCSPORTS20 Shop by Department Search All [All Departments_____________] ____________________ Go Hello. Sign in Your Account Try Prime Basket 0 Wish List * Amazon.co.uk * Warehouse Deals * Subscribe & Save * Amazon Family * Outlet * Amazon Prime * Mobile Apps * Amazon Toolbar * Amazon Local (What are Customer Discussions?) Customer Discussions > politics discussion forum the left and the influx of migrant workers. See latest post Sort: Oldest first | Newest first Showing 1-25 of 102 posts in this discussion Initial post: 14 Mar 2012 01:48:34 GMT Mr. M. Bounds says: as someone who has left wing leanings. i feel to be accepted by political parties like, the socialist workers party, i have to swallow my growing concern at the massive influx of migrant workers into the country. i have worked in a dept where out of 140 staff, 5 were british. the rest mostly east european. the left are protesting about capitalism and its evils but strangly silent on this issue of big business encourging migrant workers into the country to take low paying jobs instead of paying people a decent wage to do these jobs, thus reducing costs and raising profits to re invest. the unions are silent and i feel that it all boils down to not wanting to be branded a racist, but i do feel the workers of this country are being forgotten about. views on this please. Report abuse 12 of 14 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 07:19:36 GMT Molly Brown says: I read somewhere, Guardian I think, regarding the enforcement of the minimum wage that a city the size of Birmingham has just eight (2009) NMW enforcement officers. I bet they have a hell of lot more Benefit Fraud investigators. Report abuse 5 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 10:24:35 GMT gille liath says: I wonder. In my experience there aren't a lot of those, either. But both things are equally fraud, and equally taking from those who can least afford to lose. In answer to the OP - I agree. What else can I say?... Report abuse 3 of 4 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 11:15:07 GMT SundayAfternoon says: To oppose open borders is to be racist, by definition. What you are suffering from is cognitive dissonance. The Frankfurt school's dominant morality teaches one thing (discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, sexual orientation, nationality, religion etc is pathological) your human nature another (your homeland is being transformed by an unaccountable ruling class without your consent being sought or granted). Discrimination in this context must surely include denial of the right to live where in the world you please. If a business does not make a profit it closes, unless it can steal the profits of better run businesses via redistributive taxation. If the money brought in by employing an individual does not cover the cost of employment and cover liabilities etc, then that job will not be created. The minimum wage system together with the possibility for those so inclined to play the entitlement system (are you a fool if you dont? - our ruling classes in the Lords and Commons are all up to it!, and as for the Banksters...) are destroying the moral structure of Britain for ordinary workers. The state can not simply go on printing money to pay people to live on the dole whilst keeping its foot jamming the door open to those seeking a better life than Eastern Europe or the developing world offer. All systems that simply cant go on eventually end. How will our nation end up?. Report abuse 4 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 11:28:13 GMT Last edited by the author on 14 Mar 2012 11:29:36 GMT gille liath says: "To oppose open borders is to be racist, by definition" No it isn't. However that is a convenient argument for those who don't want to pay the minimum wage. "The state can not simply go on printing money to pay people to live on the dole whilst keeping its foot jamming the door open to those seeking a better life than Eastern Europe or the developing world offer." The point is, that if it cracked down on immigrants working under-price, it might not need to pay out so much dole. Report abuse 6 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 11:52:21 GMT Last edited by the author on 14 Mar 2012 11:56:18 GMT James Taylor says: You say 'To oppose open borders is to be racist, by definition.' Why? I think it is quite possible to think of all races as equal but to want to protect our way of life. A friend of mine explains how the school she went to is now a no go area to white British people. Leicester is now 60% Muslim so I hear, and I'm sure that many other cities are not far behind. Things are changing fast, and many of us are very uncertain of our children's future. The racist card is out of date, highly manipulative, and most of us feel insulted when accused because it shows a complete misunderstanding of the way we actually feel. I.e., we know that we live in a highly unstable world, we wish our governments would stop trying to save the world (LOL. What a mess they are causing everywhere they go) and we wish that we could feel a bit more optimistic about our children's future. I used to think that it was wonderful to have a great diversity of cultures in Britain: Now, like many others I'm sure, I feel very afraid of the consequences of our naivety. Report abuse 7 of 13 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 12:01:58 GMT William Podmore says: Mass immigration assets-strips the countries of origin, lowers wages and increases house prices and rents here, especially for poorer workers. Three-quarters of us believe that immigration has put too much pressure on health, education and transport. Since 2004, the number of people from eastern Europe working here in Britain increased by 600,000. Over the same period, the number of unemployed young people here increased from 575,000 to more than a million. Last year, employment of British-born workers fell by more than 200,000 and employment of non-British-born workers rose by more than 200,000, to more than 4.1 million. East European workers are more willing to work for lower wages: 89 per cent of them earned less than 400 a week, compared to 57 per cent of British-born workers. Many of the locals who compete to get low-skilled jobs are black or Asian, while the new immigrants are white. Controlling immigration is not racist. The EU, the employers and the `left' all back the free movement of labour. The `left' claims that workers can't distinguish between immigration controls and racism, but the `left' defines immigration controls as racist, so they are the ones who cannot distinguish between immigration controls and racism. Where are British workers supposed to work, if not in Britain? Who is supposed to do the jobs in Britain, if not British workers? No to the free movement of labour. This is the Communist Party of Britain Marxist-Leninist position. Report abuse 10 of 13 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 12:29:46 GMT Keyboard Paladin says: " Leicester is now 60% Muslim so I hear, and I'm sure that many other cities are not far behind." Lol, why don't you look up the facts before you post such nonsense, it is a large south Asian community comprising of Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs. And last I read on the population of Muslims in this country it was 2million out of 60 million, approximately 10% of the Muslim population in this country are converts as well. Take your daily mail 'Muslims are taking over England' somewhere else. Report abuse 10 of 18 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 12:40:26 GMT SundayAfternoon says: So long as you recoil and say 'I'm not racist but -' when opposing this global social engineering carried out by our ruling classes you have already conceded defeat. This is a class war, you dont have to be Marxist to recognise class conflict. Sean Gabb has a recent talk on youtube on the subject, and Ralph Raico puts Marxist class conflict theory in a the classical liberal context from which it was originally borrowed. The Blair regime undertook the open door immigration policy to 'rub the right's nose in multiculturalism'; 'the right' in this context, are those whom new labour's students of Adorno would consider 'racist'. All those I know in the 'socialist workers' and the former 'revolutionary communists' approved of the policy. Blair himself is on the record as saying that it has enormously improved England. Many English people have married recent immigrants, these people (in my experience) especially are understandably repulsed by the idea of restricting numbers. And yes, home trained engineers and doctors as well as secretaries and cleaners find themselves undercut in wages by new arrivals. Mandelson IIRC has told the indigenous British unemployed to seek work elsewhere in the world, after all, he got a wonderful well paid job in Brussels despite the little scandals surrounding his departure from London. Report abuse 5 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 12:47:56 GMT Last edited by the author on 14 Mar 2012 12:49:59 GMT James Taylor says: K K, I'm so sorry, I meant Asian. Do you spend your entire life reading papers and posting in these forums? Report abuse 4 of 11 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 12:52:42 GMT Keyboard Paladin says: I agree with you mostly but spare a thought for the instances that British workers do not want to do some jobs as well. I live in London and practically all the cleaners I have seen are European and of African origin, take aways are mostly Asian filled staff, I'm sure there are more examples as well. Also I have seen documentaries where employers get more for their money when they hire non British workers as they try to impress more, I am a builder by trade and just the other day I met a polish builder who works for around two thirds what I charge and works around the job, which meant on this particular project he was up with his employers till 5am, I do not begrudge him at all, he works hard and he deserves his success (he drives an A4 which I'm a little jealous of), many a time people complain of being over priced by our British counterparts as compared to ethnics minorities who come and do the same job for much less. Let's face it its a global economy and if we were running a business we would do as much as we can to make the most profit, admittedly some of us would be more considerate but very few of these kinds of business survive. Report abuse 4 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 12:55:57 GMT Keyboard Paladin says: Apology accepted and no, but perhaps you should try reading other papers for a change Report abuse 3 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 13:09:23 GMT James Taylor says: The figures aren't really relevant to the post anyway. Figures can be presented to prove almost any argument you choose, but a walk through almost any city will affirm the thrust of my post. Did you say you were Muslim bought up in Britain? Re the paper reading: I'm a very busy man. Report abuse 1 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 13:19:29 GMT Last edited by the author on 14 Mar 2012 13:23:26 GMT James Taylor says: Let's just say that we all live in very uncertain times, and the best thing we can do is to build as many bridges between us as possible. This is the only way forward. Anyway, I'll duck out of this discussion now because we've gone way off track. All the best to everyone in the discussion. Report abuse 1 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 15:03:12 GMT Last edited by the author on 28 Mar 2012 23:44:13 BDT Keyboard Paladin says: what? figures arent relavent! wasn't it you who posted that you heard leicester is about 60% muslim!!! and now you say a walk through any city will affirm your post, well again, no it would not because the white population far out number all the non white minorities in the uk. please think before you post. Report abuse 3 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 15:41:43 GMT Last edited by the author on 14 Mar 2012 15:49:03 GMT James Taylor says: I merely raised a few concerns, then I apologised for getting my figure wrong, then I said that it didn't really matter that the figure was wrong. The rest of that post, as well you know, is complete rubbish. I didn't even mention 'non-whites'! It's a good job that the Muslim friends I have are decent people. People like you are not typical of the Muslim population - it is important that other people know this. Report abuse 2 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 16:08:03 GMT doctor_jeep says: The short answer is that the modern British left betrayed the ordinary working man when it actively connived at the importation of vast quantities of what is effectively scab labour from overseas. Back in the 1920s the bosses shipped scabs in from overseas to break strikes, in the 1960s and 70s it was the unions who waved them in - and an excess of labour is always to the employer's advantage and always drives wages down. No surprise that we've not been anywhere near full employment for decades. How can there be jobs for all when you have no fixed limit on the number of people to be employed? But as long as people are worried about being labelled "racist" then there's nothing they can do - because "racist" is the default label for anyone that opposes mass immigration (whatever race the immingrants happen to be). No idea why the left sold us all out so badly ... some people say it was the Frankfurt school, others say bourgeois infiltration of the labour movement. Both seem a bit paranoid but how the hell else would you explain it? Report abuse 9 of 14 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 18:39:54 GMT Keyboard Paladin says: No you apologised for saying Muslims instead of Asian, I put forward a post to rebuke your hearsay based post. You then posted that a walk through almost any city will affirm the thrust of your post, that is to imply that Muslims (in your mind) are taking over the population, I merely replaced Muslims with non whites as there are other ethnic minorities that aren't Muslim, to illustrate how wrong you are. Lastly you feel the need to tell everyone that people like me are indecent and not typical of the Muslim population. That tickled me. What have I said to give you that impression? At least you are consistent with making things up. It would seem that you prefer the Muslim that doesn't challenge anything you have to say. This isn't a popularity contest, stop patronising people by telling them what to think. Report abuse 5 of 11 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 19:24:42 GMT James Taylor says: What? I don't know what on earth is going on in your head, but it really doesn't tie in with the conversation at all. Listen, if this is your idea of an argument, then so be it. I'll leave you to it - I've had more productive discussions with 5 year old kids. Report abuse 2 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 19:24:58 GMT Spin says: Non-whites? Are they those who spend time and cash on false tans? =) Report abuse 4 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 19:51:39 GMT Keyboard Paladin says: you shouldn't worry about what's going on in my head but if you wish to continue to debate, give a rebuttal to my posts. You have now raised another disturbing question in that why are you having more productive discussions with 5 year old kids? Report abuse 3 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 20:02:09 GMT James Taylor says: [Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.] [Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Hide post again. (Show all unhelpful posts)] Spin - it's great to hear a touch of humour! KK keep takin them pills Report abuse 1 of 10 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 14 Mar 2012 21:43:21 GMT Keyboard Paladin says: Making more foolish assumptions again....sigh Your are obviously a loser who doesn't have the tools to back up anything he says Report abuse 2 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 21:57:06 GMT Last edited by the author on 14 Mar 2012 22:01:08 GMT psn: P0PC0RN-_-SL4Y3R says: I'm dissapointed by this thread. Are we all too stupid and blind to see that blaming immigrants is not going to solve our problems...? More to the point, I suppose you think its ok for a Brit to be an immigrant in another country right? Maybe if we didnt spend so much time pointing the finger at immigrants we would realise that benefit fraud is a bigger issue, corporate tax evasion is a bigger issue, dodgy expense claims by those who lead our country are a bigger issue, irresponsible lending from our banks was a bigger issue, paying for drugs and alcohol for addicts who are entitled to it as part of their 'treatment' is a bigger issue. Ignorant and racist people will blame immigration for everything, no-one will hold their hands up and say, well actually all of that borrowing we did when we knew we couldn't pay it back could have somthing to do with our current problems. We live in a welfare state were people who cant be ar5ed, get paid for nothing, no wonder everyone wants to live here.... pfffftttttt play the blame game for as long as you want. Report abuse 3 of 4 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 14 Mar 2012 23:43:02 GMT Last edited by the author on 14 Mar 2012 23:47:30 GMT M. Coleman says: The simple answer would be for the UK to leave the EU , then the UK would not have to accept anyone from anywhere if it did not want to . In a talk / panel show on RTE ( in Dublin ) on Monday night , a muslim man said his religion ( human rights ) was being denied to his son as no schools in the Dublin area were of the Muslim type ( most are R.C. and a few protestant ) , so this guy threatened the Irish Govt with the European court in Strasbourg . The fact that ireland is in recession / bailouts ETC meant nothing to this guy who kept insisting that Muslim schools be built . B Obama " I want to get American people back to work " - seen as fair and patriotic G Brown " I want to get British people back to work " - seen as racist Report abuse 8 of 12 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No Your reply to cdAuthorNamePlaceholder's post: Insert a product link To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ You are already tracking this discussion. [ ] Receive e-mail when new posts are made [Post message] [Cancel] Guidelines < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next > [Add comment] Add your own message to the discussion Insert a product link To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ You are already tracking this discussion. [ ] Receive e-mail when new posts are made [Start a new discussion] Prompts for sign-in Guidelines ____________________ Recent discussions in the politics discussion forum Discussion Replies Latest Post United States and crimes committed against civilians 130 4 minutes ago The Limitations of Conspiracy and Cover-Up 39 1 hour ago Should those filthy, misogynistic, sexist, poisonous, foul, disgusting piles of rubbish known as "Lads Mags" be banned? 224 1 hour ago A voice for the British National Party 693 7 hours ago Banned In The U.S. Amazon Forums 1529 20 hours ago To tattoo or not to tattoo? 64 1 day ago At Last! It's clear what he meant by The Big Society!! 14 2 days ago Is the Middle East on the verge of erupting into a region-wide war? 17 2 days ago Statins 114 3 days ago The battle for Britain 241 3 days ago Seasonal Salutations to All You Contributors 26 3 days ago 10 years ago this month Blair and Bush disarmed Gadhafi WMD-wise with their Iraqi invasion 36 3 days ago > See all discussions... > Start a new discussion Active discussions in related forums Discussion Replies Latest Post history discussion forum Michael Gove's comments on teaching about World War One 2 1 minute ago religion discussion forum Why Would One Choose to Be an Atheist or Agnostic Over Christian? 1464 1 minute ago religion discussion forum The utter stupidity of certain Americans 4 3 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Doctor Who DVD Release Schedule... 4287 8 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Your favorite "soft sci-fi" books? 39 9 minutes ago biography discussion forum Bio on Benny Hill shows he was considered funnier than Monty Python by various TV stations 192 11 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Help me find some new books to read please 141 12 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum I don't want to read any silly remarks made under this posting ? 6035 13 minutes ago More Customer Discussions Most active community forums * Meet Our Authors * deals * music * religion * science fiction * video games Most active product forums * Sony PlayStation 4 (PS4) * Xbox One Console * See This Through & Leave Amazon forums * Kindle There's a problem loading this menu at the moment. Learn more about Amazon Prime. * MP3s & Cloud Player * MP3 Music Store Shop 20 million songs * Cloud Player for Web Play from any browser * Cloud Player for Android For Android phones, and tablets * Cloud Player for iOS For iPhone and iPod touch * Amazon Cloud Drive * Your Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Get the Desktop App For Windows and Mac * Cloud Drive Photos for Android For Android phones and tablets * Cloud Drive Photos for iPhone For iPhone and iPod touch * Learn More About Cloud Drive * Kindle E-readers * Kindle Small, light, perfect for reading * Kindle Paperwhite The ultimate device for reading * Kindle Paperwhite 3G With free 3G wireless * Kindle Accessories Covers, chargers, sleeves and more * Kindle Store * Kindle Books * Newsstand * Kindle Owners' Lending Library With Prime, Kindle device owners read for free * Kindle Apps & Resources * Free Kindle Reading Apps For PC, iPad, iPhone, Android, and more * Manage Your Kindle * Kindle Fire Tablets * Kindle Fire HD An HD tablet at a breakthrough price * Kindle Fire HD 8.9" Large 8.9" HD display * Kindle Fire HDX 7" HDX display, powerful 2.2 GHz processor * Kindle Fire HDX 8.9" Astonishingly light, large HDX display * Kindle Fire HDX 4G LTE Tablets * Kindle Fire HDX 4G LTE 7" HDX display with ultra-fast 4G LTE technology * Kindle Fire HDX 8.9" 4G LTE Large HDX display with ultra-fast 4G LTE technology * Kindle Accessories Covers, chargers, stylus, audio and more * Appstore for Android * Appstore * Games * Amazon Apps Kindle, mobile shopping, MP3, and more * Your Apps and Devices View your apps and manage your devices * Digital Games & Software * Digital Games For PC and Mac * Free-to-Play Games For PC and Mac * Digital Software For PC and Mac * Your Games & Software Library * Audible Audiobooks * Audible Membership First book free when you try Audible * Audible Audiobooks & More * Bestsellers * New Releases * Listener Favourites * Books * Books * Kindle Books * Books For Study * Audiobooks * Movies, TV, Music, Games * Music * MP3 Downloads * Musical Instruments & DJ * Film & TV * Blu-ray * PC & Video Games * Electronics * Camera & Photo * TV & Home Cinema * Audio & HiFi * Sat Nav & Car Electronics * Phones * Electronics Accessories * PC & Video Games * All Electronics * Computers & Office * Laptops * Tablets * Computer Accessories * Computer Components * Software * Printers & Ink * All Computers & Accessories * Stationery & Office Supplies * Home & Garden * Garden & Outdoors * Homeware & Furniture * Kitchen & Dining * Kitchen & Home Appliances * Lighting * All Home & Garden * Pets * Pet Supplies * DIY & Tools * DIY & Tools * Toys, Children & Baby * Toys & Games * Baby * Baby Wish List * Amazon Family 20% off nappies, delivery benefits and more * Clothes, Shoes & Jewellery * Clothing * Shoes * Jewellery * Watches * Handbags & Shoulder Bags * Luggage * Sports & Outdoors * Fitness * Camping & Hiking * Cycling * Athletic & Outdoor Clothing * Winter Sports * Golf * Water Sports * All Sports & Outdoors * Health & Beauty * Beauty * Health & Personal Care * Grocery * Grocery * Beer, Wine & Spirits * Subscribe & Save Up to 15% off, free delivery and more * Car & Motorbike * Car Accessories & Parts * Tools & Equipment * Sat Nav & Car Electronics * Motorbike Accessories & Parts * MP3s & Cloud Player 20 million songs, play anywhere * Amazon Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Kindle * Appstore for Android Get a paid app for free every day * Digital Games & Software * Audible Audiobooks 100,000 audiobook downloads * Books * Movies, TV, Music, Games * Electronics & Computers * Home, Garden, Pets & DIY * Toys, Children & Baby * Clothes, Shoes & Jewellery * Sports & Outdoors * Grocery, Health & Beauty * Car & Motorbike * >Full Shop Directory * Sign in New customer? Start here. * Your Account * Your Orders * Your Wish List * Your Recommendations * Manage Your Subscribe & Save Items * Manage Your Kindle * Your Cloud Player Play from any browser * Your Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Your Games and Software Library * Your Apps & Devices Your Shopping Basket is empty. Give it purpose -- fill it with books, DVDs, clothes, electronics and more. If you already have an account, sign in. There's a problem previewing your shopping basket at the moment. Check your Internet connection and go to your cart, or try again. View Shopping Basket (0 items) (0 item) (0 items) * Create a Wish List * Find a Wish List * Wish from Any Website Add items to your List from anywhere * Wedding List * Baby Wish List Sign in New customer? Start here. This discussion Discussion in: politics discussion forum Participants: 19 Total posts: 102 Initial post: 14 Mar 2012 Latest post: 13 Apr 2012 __________________________________________________________________ Loading... You are tracking this discussion. Unsub New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made. Sub Tracked by 1 customer [RSS Feed] RSS Feed __________________________________________________________________ (Report abuse) Search Customer Discussions ____________________ Go [X] Search only this discussion __________________________________________________________________ Get to Know Us * Careers * Investor Relations * Press Releases * Amazon and Our Planet * Amazon in the Community Make Money with Us * Sell on Amazon * Associates Programme * Fulfilment by Amazon * Advertise Your Products * Independently Publish with Us * >See all Let Us Help You * Track Packages or View Orders * Delivery Rates & Policies * Amazon Prime * Returns Are Easy * Manage Your Kindle * Help amazon.co.uk * Australia * Brazil * Canada * China * France * Germany * India * Italy * Japan * Mexico * Spain * United States AbeBooks Rare & Collectible Books Audible Download Audio Books AmazonLocal Great Local Deals In Your City Amazon Web Services Scalable Cloud Computing Services Book Depository Books With Free Delivery Worldwide CreateSpace Indie Print Publishing Made Easy DPReview Digital Photography IMDb Movies, TV & Celebrities Javari UK Shoes & Handbags Javari France Shoes & Handbags Javari Japan Shoes & Handbags Javari Germany Shoes & Handbags Junglee.com Shop Online in India Kindle Direct Publishing Indie Digital Publishing Made Easy MYHABIT Designer & Fashion Private Sale Site Shopbop Designer Fashion Brands * Conditions of Use & Sale * Privacy Notice * Cookies & Internet Advertising * 1996-2013, Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates #alternate Amazon * Your Amazon.co.uk * Today's Deals * Gift Cards * Sell * Help GCSPORTS20 Shop by Department Search All [All Departments_____________] ____________________ Go Hello. Sign in Your Account Try Prime Basket 0 Wish List * Amazon.co.uk * Warehouse Deals * Subscribe & Save * Amazon Family * Outlet * Amazon Prime * Mobile Apps * Amazon Toolbar * Amazon Local (What are Customer Discussions?) Customer Discussions > politics discussion forum Immigration from eastern Europe See latest post Sort: Oldest first | Newest first Showing 51-75 of 94 posts in this discussion In reply to an earlier post on 20 Nov 2013 16:29:17 GMT easytiger says: True. Suggest you go to thier website and have a look. I'm not here to argue the pros and cons of the EDL with a shinner. Totally pointless. Report abuse 3 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Nov 2013 16:35:34 GMT Last edited by the author on 20 Nov 2013 18:32:22 GMT Spin says: [Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.] [Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Hide post again. (Show all unhelpful posts)] Easy: No thanks. The terms "Defence" and "League" are too reminiscent of Nazi fascism to attract my political attention...=) Report abuse 0 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Nov 2013 11:15:10 GMT easytiger says: So shut tf up then. Report abuse 5 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Nov 2013 15:34:47 GMT Spin says: [Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.] [Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Hide post again. (Show all unhelpful posts)] easy: is that the motto of your "EDL"? You are hardly a good advert for your politics, I must say.. Report abuse 1 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Nov 2013 16:50:42 GMT easytiger says: Dunno what the motto of the EDL is actually. You bring up a subject you know nothing about, refuse to learn anything about, then seem surprised at the obvious retort. Report abuse 3 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Nov 2013 17:03:54 GMT Spin says: easy: Trust me, my dismissal of latent or blatent Nazism is NOT based on an ignorance of the subject. Report abuse 1 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Nov 2013 17:16:57 GMT easytiger says: It certainly is. Tell you what spun, this week it seems you're getting a battering from the prescription drug brigade, gay atheists and canadian transexuals who can't iron, so why come on here spouting about an organisation you admit to knowing nothing about? Report abuse 3 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Nov 2013 17:32:18 GMT Spin says: Easy: Believe what you want. I am sure your political beliefs, which provide you with a certain amount of comfort, will make no difference to the real world...=) Report abuse 1 of 4 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Nov 2013 18:26:39 GMT easytiger says: Which real world? The 'up' one or your upside down theory? Report abuse 2 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Nov 2013 18:31:50 GMT Spin says: Easy: The real world; the one you guys refuse to acknowledge... Report abuse 1 of 4 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Nov 2013 19:04:56 GMT TNF/GOMSY says: Spoon....can it be true....did you write a poem....? Report abuse 1 of 4 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 22 Nov 2013 17:22:52 GMT Spin says: TNF; I'm a poet and I didn't know it. =) Report abuse 0 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Nov 2013 10:09:38 GMT [Deleted by Amazon on 26 Nov 2013 05:55:03 GMT] __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Nov 2013 10:29:57 GMT Dan Fante says: Absolutely spot on. Report abuse 7 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Nov 2013 11:28:58 GMT Gordon Bennett says: Major Doom, What's <>? Did UKey have one between 2007 and 2010? Is there the same legal compulsion upon member states to enforce every bit of the Social Charter as with EU law on the right of people from member countries to live and work where they choose? Ukeyland seems to apply most of the Social Charter...strange behaviour for an <>. <> on the entry of migrants from other EU states. They can only do this to prevent people entering from new member states for a limited period, and the UKey gov has too done this with people from Romania, Albania and Bulgaria. Are you claiming that in 2014 the Germans, Dutch, Swedes and others will continue to block migrants from Romania and other new member states, but UKey will let them in? <>. Will you explain how this claim will show itself in they way people vote? Report abuse 3 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Nov 2013 11:29:42 GMT Gordon Bennett says: ...stark raving bonkers spot on. Report abuse 2 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Nov 2013 14:22:56 GMT easytiger says: Corporal Doom, Mass immigration was favoured instead of delayed like in the rest of europe the following: The Labour government as a source of new votes(80% of new immigrants vote labour) to 'smash the Right'(thier words) The TUC who saw a chance to increase thier diminishing membership The 'One world' brigade Large corporations who saw a great opportunity to grind down wage rates All done by Tony Blair who so hated the British working class that he decided to import his own. Report abuse 5 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Nov 2013 16:25:03 GMT TNF/GOMSY says: Settle.... Report abuse 0 of 2 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Nov 2013 17:16:04 GMT Gordon Bennett says: ...is that a posh name for the settee...a must have DFS corner unit in cream faux leather and the fury zebra pattern cushions with the extending foot rests...ideal for watching Strictly whilst balancing a KFC family bucket and a 2 litre bottle of Coke on yer belly. Report abuse 2 of 4 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Nov 2013 17:17:49 GMT Gordon Bennett says: Me settle?...Lance Corporal Doom was the lad getting his y-fronts on the wrong way. Report abuse 2 of 4 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 24 Nov 2013 19:17:13 GMT Last edited by the author on 24 Nov 2013 19:31:58 GMT Charlieost says: Good point easytiger and well remembered. We have had a number of incidents in the Republic such as stabbings and drunken car accidents in which Irish people have been injured or killed. It has been obvious from the surnames of the guilty parties that they are of former Soviet Union extraction. They do seem to be takin some time to settle into our cultural ways. We had a bunch from Latvia down at a local caravan park causing chaos this summer. The gards had to be called to turf them out eventually. They were asked to keep the noise down at three in the morning when they were still keeping everyone awake and got really nasty with the old fella (in his eighties) that runs the site. Horrible bunch. Never noticed any trouble from the Roma though. Still, a re-think in order methinks. C PS. I did buy my latest car off a really pleasant Polish fella who gave me fifty euro back for as we call it over here, "luck money". Nice guy, works in a local shop. Very rural area here though. Presume I would run into them more in the cities. Report abuse 2 of 3 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 24 Nov 2013 20:34:29 GMT [Deleted by Amazon on 25 Nov 2013 06:06:07 GMT] __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 24 Nov 2013 20:39:37 GMT Charlieost says: Well thank you Princess. I tell it as I see it. :) Report abuse 3 of 4 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 25 Nov 2013 21:28:27 GMT Anita says: Easytiger - you here? I have a question, if you don't mind. (Completely off topic, but construction/engineering related, so thought I'd ask you) Report abuse Do you think this post adds to the discussion? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 26 Nov 2013 00:38:13 GMT Gordon Bennett says: Are you planning a survival shelter? Report abuse 2 of 3 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No Your reply to cdAuthorNamePlaceholder's post: Insert a product link To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ You are already tracking this discussion. [ ] Receive e-mail when new posts are made [Post message] [Cancel] Guidelines < Previous 1 2 3 4 Next > [Add comment] Add your own message to the discussion Insert a product link To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ You are already tracking this discussion. [ ] Receive e-mail when new posts are made [Start a new discussion] Prompts for sign-in Guidelines ____________________ Recent discussions in the politics discussion forum Discussion Replies Latest Post United States and crimes committed against civilians 130 4 minutes ago The Limitations of Conspiracy and Cover-Up 39 1 hour ago Should those filthy, misogynistic, sexist, poisonous, foul, disgusting piles of rubbish known as "Lads Mags" be banned? 224 1 hour ago A voice for the British National Party 693 7 hours ago Banned In The U.S. Amazon Forums 1529 20 hours ago To tattoo or not to tattoo? 64 1 day ago At Last! It's clear what he meant by The Big Society!! 14 2 days ago Is the Middle East on the verge of erupting into a region-wide war? 17 2 days ago Statins 114 3 days ago The battle for Britain 241 3 days ago Seasonal Salutations to All You Contributors 26 3 days ago 10 years ago this month Blair and Bush disarmed Gadhafi WMD-wise with their Iraqi invasion 36 3 days ago > See all discussions... > Start a new discussion Active discussions in related forums Discussion Replies Latest Post history discussion forum Michael Gove's comments on teaching about World War One 2 1 minute ago religion discussion forum Why Would One Choose to Be an Atheist or Agnostic Over Christian? 1464 1 minute ago religion discussion forum The utter stupidity of certain Americans 4 3 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Doctor Who DVD Release Schedule... 4287 8 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Your favorite "soft sci-fi" books? 39 9 minutes ago biography discussion forum Bio on Benny Hill shows he was considered funnier than Monty Python by various TV stations 192 11 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Help me find some new books to read please 141 12 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum I don't want to read any silly remarks made under this posting ? 6035 13 minutes ago More Customer Discussions Most active community forums * Meet Our Authors * deals * music * religion * science fiction * video games Most active product forums * Sony PlayStation 4 (PS4) * Xbox One Console * See This Through & Leave Amazon forums * Kindle There's a problem loading this menu at the moment. Learn more about Amazon Prime. * MP3s & Cloud Player * MP3 Music Store Shop 20 million songs * Cloud Player for Web Play from any browser * Cloud Player for Android For Android phones, and tablets * Cloud Player for iOS For iPhone and iPod touch * Amazon Cloud Drive * Your Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Get the Desktop App For Windows and Mac * Cloud Drive Photos for Android For Android phones and tablets * Cloud Drive Photos for iPhone For iPhone and iPod touch * Learn More About Cloud Drive * Kindle E-readers * Kindle Small, light, perfect for reading * Kindle Paperwhite The ultimate device for reading * Kindle Paperwhite 3G With free 3G wireless * Kindle Accessories Covers, chargers, sleeves and more * Kindle Store * Kindle Books * Newsstand * Kindle Owners' Lending Library With Prime, Kindle device owners read for free * Kindle Apps & Resources * Free Kindle Reading Apps For PC, iPad, iPhone, Android, and more * Manage Your Kindle * Kindle Fire Tablets * Kindle Fire HD An HD tablet at a breakthrough price * Kindle Fire HD 8.9" Large 8.9" HD display * Kindle Fire HDX 7" HDX display, powerful 2.2 GHz processor * Kindle Fire HDX 8.9" Astonishingly light, large HDX display * Kindle Fire HDX 4G LTE Tablets * Kindle Fire HDX 4G LTE 7" HDX display with ultra-fast 4G LTE technology * Kindle Fire HDX 8.9" 4G LTE Large HDX display with ultra-fast 4G LTE technology * Kindle Accessories Covers, chargers, stylus, audio and more * Appstore for Android * Appstore * Games * Amazon Apps Kindle, mobile shopping, MP3, and more * Your Apps and Devices View your apps and manage your devices * Digital Games & Software * Digital Games For PC and Mac * Free-to-Play Games For PC and Mac * Digital Software For PC and Mac * Your Games & Software Library * Audible Audiobooks * Audible Membership First book free when you try Audible * Audible Audiobooks & More * Bestsellers * New Releases * Listener Favourites * Books * Books * Kindle Books * Books For Study * Audiobooks * Movies, TV, Music, Games * Music * MP3 Downloads * Musical Instruments & DJ * Film & TV * Blu-ray * PC & Video Games * Electronics * Camera & Photo * TV & Home Cinema * Audio & HiFi * Sat Nav & Car Electronics * Phones * Electronics Accessories * PC & Video Games * All Electronics * Computers & Office * Laptops * Tablets * Computer Accessories * Computer Components * Software * Printers & Ink * All Computers & Accessories * Stationery & Office Supplies * Home & Garden * Garden & Outdoors * Homeware & Furniture * Kitchen & Dining * Kitchen & Home Appliances * Lighting * All Home & Garden * Pets * Pet Supplies * DIY & Tools * DIY & Tools * Toys, Children & Baby * Toys & Games * Baby * Baby Wish List * Amazon Family 20% off nappies, delivery benefits and more * Clothes, Shoes & Jewellery * Clothing * Shoes * Jewellery * Watches * Handbags & Shoulder Bags * Luggage * Sports & Outdoors * Fitness * Camping & Hiking * Cycling * Athletic & Outdoor Clothing * Winter Sports * Golf * Water Sports * All Sports & Outdoors * Health & Beauty * Beauty * Health & Personal Care * Grocery * Grocery * Beer, Wine & Spirits * Subscribe & Save Up to 15% off, free delivery and more * Car & Motorbike * Car Accessories & Parts * Tools & Equipment * Sat Nav & Car Electronics * Motorbike Accessories & Parts * MP3s & Cloud Player 20 million songs, play anywhere * Amazon Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Kindle * Appstore for Android Get a paid app for free every day * Digital Games & Software * Audible Audiobooks 100,000 audiobook downloads * Books * Movies, TV, Music, Games * Electronics & Computers * Home, Garden, Pets & DIY * Toys, Children & Baby * Clothes, Shoes & Jewellery * Sports & Outdoors * Grocery, Health & Beauty * Car & Motorbike * >Full Shop Directory * Sign in New customer? Start here. * Your Account * Your Orders * Your Wish List * Your Recommendations * Manage Your Subscribe & Save Items * Manage Your Kindle * Your Cloud Player Play from any browser * Your Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Your Games and Software Library * Your Apps & Devices Your Shopping Basket is empty. Give it purpose -- fill it with books, DVDs, clothes, electronics and more. If you already have an account, sign in. There's a problem previewing your shopping basket at the moment. Check your Internet connection and go to your cart, or try again. View Shopping Basket (0 items) (0 item) (0 items) * Create a Wish List * Find a Wish List * Wish from Any Website Add items to your List from anywhere * Wedding List * Baby Wish List Sign in New customer? Start here. This discussion Discussion in: politics discussion forum Participants: 13 Total posts: 94 Initial post: 15 Nov 2013 Latest post: 27 Nov 2013 __________________________________________________________________ Loading... You are tracking this discussion. Unsub New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made. Sub [RSS Feed] RSS Feed __________________________________________________________________ (Report abuse) Search Customer Discussions ____________________ Go [X] Search only this discussion __________________________________________________________________ Get to Know Us * Careers * Investor Relations * Press Releases * Amazon and Our Planet * Amazon in the Community Make Money with Us * Sell on Amazon * Associates Programme * Fulfilment by Amazon * Advertise Your Products * Independently Publish with Us * >See all Let Us Help You * Track Packages or View Orders * Delivery Rates & Policies * Amazon Prime * Returns Are Easy * Manage Your Kindle * Help amazon.co.uk * Australia * Brazil * Canada * China * France * Germany * India * Italy * Japan * Mexico * Spain * United States AbeBooks Rare & Collectible Books Audible Download Audio Books AmazonLocal Great Local Deals In Your City Amazon Web Services Scalable Cloud Computing Services Book Depository Books With Free Delivery Worldwide CreateSpace Indie Print Publishing Made Easy DPReview Digital Photography IMDb Movies, TV & Celebrities Javari UK Shoes & Handbags Javari France Shoes & Handbags Javari Japan Shoes & Handbags Javari Germany Shoes & Handbags Junglee.com Shop Online in India Kindle Direct Publishing Indie Digital Publishing Made Easy MYHABIT Designer & Fashion Private Sale Site Shopbop Designer Fashion Brands * Conditions of Use & Sale * Privacy Notice * Cookies & Internet Advertising * (c) 1996-2013, Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates #alternate Amazon * Your Amazon.co.uk * Today's Deals * Gift Cards * Sell * Help XmasDealsWB13 Shop by Department Search All [All Departments_____________] ____________________ Go Hello. Sign in Your Account Try Prime Basket 0 Wish List * Amazon.co.uk * Warehouse Deals * Subscribe & Save * Amazon Family * Outlet * Amazon Prime * Mobile Apps * Amazon Toolbar * Amazon Local (What are Customer Discussions?) Customer Discussions > politics discussion forum the left and the influx of migrant workers. See latest post Sort: Oldest first | Newest first Showing 51-75 of 102 posts in this discussion In reply to an earlier post on 18 Mar 2012 20:38:08 GMT Mr. M. Bounds says: i dont blame anyone who lives off benefits, if their only option is to take a mundane job that pays minimum wage. there is nothing noble about waking at the crack of dawn, working in excess of 40 hours and to take home a wage that gives you no standard of living Report abuse 3 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 18 Mar 2012 21:10:51 GMT M. Coleman says: + the cost of transport of getting there and back each day , in winter - leaving the house in the dark and getting home when it is dark again , perhaps working outside in the cold rain and snow , and for an abusive boss or line manager as well ,, " Just Sign On , Son " I would say . Report abuse 3 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 18 Mar 2012 21:18:05 GMT Spin says: The problem is not wages. It is a problem of personal fulfillment. Society provides no fulfillment whatsoever to its labour force. It demands payment for education then, upon education, demands one serves burgers to tourists. One must ensure an economy that provides not only cash, but fulfillment to the labour force. Each one of us would work for any wage as long as we were happy in our job and felt as if we were contributing to both our own ambition and loves, and to society. Report abuse 4 of 11 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 18 Mar 2012 21:45:22 GMT Mr. M. Bounds says: three weeks time i will be redundant. i have been in full employment since 1986. i am taking my money and going to south east asia for a few months, because the only alternative is to get on my hands and knees and beg for a job that will pay me about two hundred pounds a week. no thanks Report abuse 4 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 18 Mar 2012 21:48:08 GMT Mr. M. Bounds says: i agree whole heartedly with your post completely. Report abuse 3 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 18 Mar 2012 21:55:07 GMT Spin says: Capitalism requires not you,but your labour. Your contribution to society is of as much relevence to capitalism as a bee is to a hive. Report abuse 3 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 19 Mar 2012 15:00:30 GMT doctor_jeep says: Sadly the same goes for socialism - the main difference being the basis on which you are rewarded. Would you rather be paid based on the demand for your labour or on what someone else thinks you need? No economic theory is going to have much interest in that which it cannot model. Report abuse 3 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 19 Mar 2012 19:21:09 GMT Spin says: Doctor: That is exactly the pont of communism. Socialism is a weak, inferior and cowardly branch of politics, neither embracing nor refusing capitalism or communism, but balancing precariously on the fence. "When, in the course of development, class distinctions have diappeared,and all production has been concentrated in the hands of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organised power of one class for oppressing another..." ( Marx and Engels,The Communist Manifesto) Report abuse 4 of 10 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Mar 2012 04:46:43 GMT Last edited by the author on 20 Mar 2012 04:49:17 GMT Molly Brown says: Mr Bounds, you should be careful what you say, as regards having "left wing leanings", the Police may have a dossier on you. I am sorry that you are losing your job, hopefully not joining the thousands of Construction Workers who have been unable to regain employment due apparently to this country's Secret Police keeping tags on what you do, say or what you might be thinking? I must admit I missed this story in the mainstream News, and only briefly picked up on it today whilst watching Russia Today on Freeview. "Blacklisted building workers hope for day in court after ruling?" http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012 /mar/03/police-blacklist-link-construction-workers?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487 Daniel Boffey, policy editor guardian.co.uk, Saturday 3 March 2012 21.57 GMT "The police or security services supplied information to a blacklist funded by the country's major construction firms that has kept thousands of people out of work over the past three decades. The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has revealed that records that could only have come from the police or MI5 have been discovered in a vast database of files held on 3,200 victims who were deemed leftwing or troublesome. The files were collected by the Consulting Association, a clandestine organisation funded by major names in the construction industry. Its database was seized nearly three years ago, but the extraordinary nature of the information held has only now emerged, following an employment tribunal for one of the victims, Dave Smith, a 46-year-old engineer who had a 36-page file against his name and was victimised repeatedly for highlighting safety hazards on sites, including the presence of asbestos." ===================================================== "The Consulting Association, a shadowy organisation that compiled a list of 'troublemakers' - with the help of the security services - for Britain's biggest building companies was closed four years ago. Only now can its 3,200 victims go to court and hope to win" One of the victims of this secret blacklist, compiled by the (Secret) Police and which stopped this man from gaining employment in the Construction Industry included pages detailing his private activities such as, "We were at an anti-fascist demonstration at the Cenotaph and that somehow finds a way into the file. It is incredible. What has that got to do with my employment record? People were emailing me saying come along Monday and then I would get a phone call on the Sunday saying, 'That job has gone.' It was devastating. It smacks of a sort of police state, almost with the police colluding with the employers to blacklist the trade unionists. Some of the people on that blacklist are just ordinary health and safety reps. You just wonder how far this goes." see full article @ http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/m ar/03/blacklisted-building-workers-court-hopes Apparently this kind of blacklisting has been happening, surprisingly, NOT, since the days of Maggie Thatcher and continued by her poodle, Blair, and only just discovered I gather because of the current investigation into Police corruption via the Leveson Enquiry and other investigations into the media. Report abuse 9 of 10 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Mar 2012 10:53:03 GMT William Podmore says: Excellent post, Molly - thank you for the useful information. Report abuse 6 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Mar 2012 17:28:58 GMT rock n roll animal says: bet i'm on it!! Report abuse 1 of 2 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Mar 2012 18:03:23 GMT Pipkin says: Hi R & R, Me also! Report abuse 1 of 2 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Mar 2012 21:00:28 GMT TomC says: It started well before Thatcher ... http://www.1in12events.co.uk/archive/publ ications/library/spies/spies.htm The Consulting Association is the Economic League continued under another name. Report abuse 3 of 3 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Mar 2012 05:50:57 GMT Last edited by the author on 21 Mar 2012 06:16:46 GMT Molly Brown says: "Economic League (United Kingdom)" From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_League_(UK) "The Economic League was an organisation in the United Kingdom dedicated to opposing what they saw as subversion and action against free enterprise. The organisation was founded in 1919 by a group of industrialists and then MP William Reginald Hall under the name of National Propaganda. Its chief function was to promote the point of view of industrialists and businessmen. Predating McCarthyism, it worked closely with the British Empire Union. John Baker White worked as the league's Assistant Director, and then from 1926 to 1939 as Director.[1] They later worked with MI5 to blacklist workers who they suspected of association with certain left wing groups, ranging from the Communist Party of Great Britain to the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.[citation needed] The League became more visible in the 1980s, as the press investigated its activities, and questions were asked in Parliament in a campaign against the League, led by Maria Fyfe. It was wound up in 1994, with two of its former directors forming the similar organisation CAPRiM shortly afterwards.[2] Another similar organisation was The Consulting Association which was raided by the Office of the Information Commissioner in February 2009." "The league's running cost was funded by contributions from various companies. In the early 1980s numerous companies would check out employees with the League to ensure that employeess were not communist-trained with the intent of disruption." Hi Tom C, I've recently had problems with a trojan on my PC from unknown sites, so didn't go to your link. Did however, look it up on Wiki, and you are totally correct. Why on earth should I believe it was something new. I mean Capitalists maintaining their power, through subversive means. My main concern, and reason for posting the links, was that it was not easy to access, it took me some time to find a mainstream site that had reported on this outrageous and illegal blacklisting of working people because of their political beliefs. Now who is to say what a "troublemaker" is, I have been accused and harassed at work of being just that. What it often means is that you have simply pointed out to your boss that actually what they have instructed you to do, is possibly illegal, infringes your employment rights, or is quite often immoral or dangerous to your or others health, ? It means you are not a "yes man(woman)", but has nothing to do with your ability to do your job or do it very well. You are already using your abilities to make money for the company presumably, in some way. In many cases where I have drawn certain points out to a manager, it was in the best interests of the company, but perhaps not in the best interests of that particular manager? I have never been sacked for doing this, infact quite the reverse, the person involved in a dispute of some of the above has subsequently "been moved on", conincidentally soon after the problem arising, and the company stood by me and was grateful for making them aware of a problem, you know, "whistleblowing". Companies need to trust their workers more, encourage "whistleblowing" as sometimes in is in their economic benefit, to actually know what is happening in their companies, when corrupt, or potentially unsafe practices are carried out. Many Companies employ "troubleshooters", or any other term of undercover employees to find these problems before they come back to bite them on the @rse, causing perhaps fatal injury. Just look at News International? Report abuse 4 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 22 Mar 2012 08:25:29 GMT easytiger says: The blacklist in the construction industry is not exclusively for the left, it includes people on the right who actively opposed the import of cheap labour to bolster the profits of multi-nationals and subject the indigenous workers to unemployment which the government pays for not them. I know; I'm on it. That's one of the reasons I don't work in UK anymore. I was lucky, having the quals and experience to do this-millions haven't. Mornin' Molly. Report abuse 6 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 22 Mar 2012 11:33:36 GMT Dan & Tues says: "when opposing this global social engineering" In what sense is closing borders and dividing people along ethnic lines not also "social engineering"? Report abuse 5 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Mar 2012 05:31:46 GMT Molly Brown says: Morning easytiger, so you went out into the world and got your own back then. I wouldn't say the imported cheap labour question is necessarily a right wing thing. It's just that the left think it is politically incorrect to question foreign labour undercutting the labour market here. I think the right and left and middle (perhaps), would like a decent living wage for all people in the country. Report abuse 4 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 23 Mar 2012 07:30:35 GMT easytiger says: What galls me about the left is that they're usually well educated, middle-class civil servants in what used to be jobs for life. Try walking out the site gate with your cards on a friday and then watch cheap labour march in on a monday. This one world-no borders thing plays right into the multi-nationals' hands-the ability to shift blocks of cheap labour round the world without giving a fig about the living standards of the indigenous population. It's not just on the shop floor either. I did three different contracts on the Olympic Park and by the time I was on the final one in 2010 I was the only englishman on the job and that included engineers and managers.It's all done now, no way back, but from 2003 onwards you can bet your bottom dollar that if half the presenters and reporters on the BBC had turned into eastern europeans overnight a totally different attitude would have have prevailed. Report abuse 8 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 23 Mar 2012 07:36:29 GMT easytiger says: That old quip 'TB didn't like the British working class so he imported his own' rings so true. If the likes of Thatcher had done this it would have been classed as a savage attack on the working class and there would have been mass demonstrations in the streets! I just don't get the left in UK at all. Report abuse 7 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Mar 2012 07:38:19 GMT Last edited by the author on 23 Mar 2012 07:39:14 GMT Molly Brown says: Then ofcourse there is the old vs the young, (that's how I was undercut with redundancy). Makes sense to get rid of someone that has worked their way up to a decent wage, then suddenly, you're gone and some 21 year old whizz kid who'll work for peanuts because they don't have a mortgage, or there parents are rich, takes your re-titled job. This is going on now with internships. I am certainly not middle class, and had to fend for myself from aged 16. It's not just imported labour now that's undercutting jobs. Report abuse 3 of 3 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 23 Mar 2012 12:59:50 GMT Mrs. A. Pinteaux says: Many people seem to mix migrants, immigrants and asylum seekers and blame them for what is Globalised Capitalism. And what does this issue have to do with religion??? Are you worried about your work being stolen by immigrants or you are afraid your culture, whatever it is, being diluted by those bloody people who are so different? It is Globalised Capitalism that requires the movement of workers. The sooner you give up the little island mentality the sooner you can face the reality of the capitalism we all benefit from, i.e cheap food and cheap clothing. You cannot focus on the symptom without being able to understand the cause. You can blame your average Eastern European worker for this all you like, if that makes you feel better, but what will this change? Conversely all people who berate migrant workers are abjectly silent on the Brits who move abroad and use the local health service etc., are you all who complain about Eastern Europeans happy for Brits to be able to move to France, Spain, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary etc. and use the benefit system there, expect the same treatment as here and drive up local property prices so local kids cannot get work or buy their first homes? If you close the borders and quit the EU you will pay a very high price: you will loose trade, all your citizens who are expats will loose their benefits as all the agreements to match standards will be annulled, and pay higher export price, is that what you really want? 70% of UK trade for the moment is coming from the EU if I remember well the figures. Be careful what you wish for! Report abuse 3 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 23 Mar 2012 13:18:44 GMT Last edited by the author on 23 Mar 2012 13:19:16 GMT easytiger says: Quite frankly most of the Brits I know who haved moved abroad are solvent and can take care of themselves. Most of them say they left Britain not because of migrant workers but because their cities had become full of immigrant layabouts demanding that the culture they supposedly fled be imposed on their new homelands. You don't have million Brits in catholic Madrid shouting for protestant schools do you? Quite frankly I couldn't give a monkey's what expat Brits get up to (by the way I work abroad but retain residence in UK by paying UK tax and NI-costs me a lot of money to be a smug B), it's an irrelevant arguing point. Quite frankly if you still believe all that propaganda that the EU and the BBC churn out I should try reading some other literature if I were you. Very soon there will be limited access to the internet because of the impending (I kid you not) powercuts caused by this completely non-sensical renewable energy policy dictated to us by EU. Report abuse 5 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Mar 2012 14:14:31 GMT [Deleted by the author on 29 Mar 2012 09:46:20 BDT] __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 23 Mar 2012 14:19:11 GMT M. Coleman says: Mrs A , what rubbish - for a start - global capitalism nearly brought the whole house down lately , with the EU resorting to build " Firewalls " around 1 small country - Greece , global capitalism being reversed as fast as possible here , even the USA and China were feeling the heat . perhaps more firewalls are required around other countries , some bigger than Greece . Imagine the havoc if France or Spain were to take the place of Greece , more firewalls needed now , and higher walls than what has already been done . De globalisation is now needed asap to save the globe from any 1 country whose clap-trap finances hit the fan in the near future . As for immigration , the joke is now over , local unemployment is rising all round the UK and local people can not find any meaningfull jobs now , perhaps we should tell the EU to get stuffed , we're leaving ( ireland really should asap ) , don't worry about trade , they do not want to lose our buying power . We will still buy Mercs , BMW's , Audis , Renualts and Citroens from them , they will not want to harm that . OK , so MRS Ashton loses her cushy well paid number , but time to give the EU back it's citizens and endless red-tape . Report abuse 5 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Mar 2012 14:21:07 GMT rock n roll animal says: WHOOP!!!! WHOOP!!!!!! i concur 100% Report abuse 2 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No Your reply to cdAuthorNamePlaceholder's post: Insert a product link To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ You are already tracking this discussion. [ ] Receive e-mail when new posts are made [Post message] [Cancel] Guidelines < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next > [Add comment] Add your own message to the discussion Insert a product link To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ You are already tracking this discussion. [ ] Receive e-mail when new posts are made [Start a new discussion] Prompts for sign-in Guidelines ____________________ Recent discussions in the politics discussion forum Discussion Replies Latest Post United States and crimes committed against civilians 130 4 minutes ago The Limitations of Conspiracy and Cover-Up 39 1 hour ago Should those filthy, misogynistic, sexist, poisonous, foul, disgusting piles of rubbish known as "Lads Mags" be banned? 224 1 hour ago A voice for the British National Party 693 7 hours ago Banned In The U.S. Amazon Forums 1529 20 hours ago To tattoo or not to tattoo? 64 1 day ago At Last! It's clear what he meant by The Big Society!! 14 2 days ago Is the Middle East on the verge of erupting into a region-wide war? 17 2 days ago Statins 114 3 days ago The battle for Britain 241 3 days ago Seasonal Salutations to All You Contributors 26 3 days ago 10 years ago this month Blair and Bush disarmed Gadhafi WMD-wise with their Iraqi invasion 36 3 days ago > See all discussions... > Start a new discussion Active discussions in related forums Discussion Replies Latest Post history discussion forum Michael Gove's comments on teaching about World War One 2 1 minute ago religion discussion forum Why Would One Choose to Be an Atheist or Agnostic Over Christian? 1464 2 minutes ago religion discussion forum The utter stupidity of certain Americans 4 3 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Doctor Who DVD Release Schedule... 4287 8 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Your favorite "soft sci-fi" books? 39 9 minutes ago biography discussion forum Bio on Benny Hill shows he was considered funnier than Monty Python by various TV stations 192 12 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Help me find some new books to read please 141 12 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum I don't want to read any silly remarks made under this posting ? 6035 13 minutes ago More Customer Discussions Most active community forums * Meet Our Authors * deals * music * religion * science fiction * video games Most active product forums * Sony PlayStation 4 (PS4) * Xbox One Console * See This Through & Leave Amazon forums * Kindle There's a problem loading this menu at the moment. Learn more about Amazon Prime. * MP3s & Cloud Player * MP3 Music Store Shop 20 million songs * Cloud Player for Web Play from any browser * Cloud Player for Android For Android phones, and tablets * Cloud Player for iOS For iPhone and iPod touch * Amazon Cloud Drive * Your Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Get the Desktop App For Windows and Mac * Cloud Drive Photos for Android For Android phones and tablets * Cloud Drive Photos for iPhone For iPhone and iPod touch * Learn More About Cloud Drive * Kindle E-readers * Kindle Small, light, perfect for reading * Kindle Paperwhite The ultimate device for reading * Kindle Paperwhite 3G With free 3G wireless * Kindle Accessories Covers, chargers, sleeves and more * Kindle Store * Kindle Books * Newsstand * Kindle Owners' Lending Library With Prime, Kindle device owners read for free * Kindle Apps & Resources * Free Kindle Reading Apps For PC, iPad, iPhone, Android, and more * Manage Your Kindle * Kindle Fire Tablets * Kindle Fire HD An HD tablet at a breakthrough price * Kindle Fire HD 8.9" Large 8.9" HD display * Kindle Fire HDX 7" HDX display, powerful 2.2 GHz processor * Kindle Fire HDX 8.9" Astonishingly light, large HDX display * Kindle Fire HDX 4G LTE Tablets * Kindle Fire HDX 4G LTE 7" HDX display with ultra-fast 4G LTE technology * Kindle Fire HDX 8.9" 4G LTE Large HDX display with ultra-fast 4G LTE technology * Kindle Accessories Covers, chargers, stylus, audio and more * Appstore for Android * Appstore * Games * Amazon Apps Kindle, mobile shopping, MP3, and more * Your Apps and Devices View your apps and manage your devices * Digital Games & Software * Digital Games For PC and Mac * Free-to-Play Games For PC and Mac * Digital Software For PC and Mac * Your Games & Software Library * Audible Audiobooks * Audible Membership First book free when you try Audible * Audible Audiobooks & More * Bestsellers * New Releases * Listener Favourites * Books * Books * Kindle Books * Books For Study * Audiobooks * Movies, TV, Music, Games * Music * MP3 Downloads * Musical Instruments & DJ * Film & TV * Blu-ray * PC & Video Games * Electronics * Camera & Photo * TV & Home Cinema * Audio & HiFi * Sat Nav & Car Electronics * Phones * Electronics Accessories * PC & Video Games * All Electronics * Computers & Office * Laptops * Tablets * Computer Accessories * Computer Components * Software * Printers & Ink * All Computers & Accessories * Stationery & Office Supplies * Home & Garden * Garden & Outdoors * Homeware & Furniture * Kitchen & Dining * Kitchen & Home Appliances * Lighting * All Home & Garden * Pets * Pet Supplies * DIY & Tools * DIY & Tools * Toys, Children & Baby * Toys & Games * Baby * Baby Wish List * Amazon Family 20% off nappies, delivery benefits and more * Clothes, Shoes & Jewellery * Clothing * Shoes * Jewellery * Watches * Handbags & Shoulder Bags * Luggage * Sports & Outdoors * Fitness * Camping & Hiking * Cycling * Athletic & Outdoor Clothing * Winter Sports * Golf * Water Sports * All Sports & Outdoors * Health & Beauty * Beauty * Health & Personal Care * Grocery * Grocery * Beer, Wine & Spirits * Subscribe & Save Up to 15% off, free delivery and more * Car & Motorbike * Car Accessories & Parts * Tools & Equipment * Sat Nav & Car Electronics * Motorbike Accessories & Parts * MP3s & Cloud Player 20 million songs, play anywhere * Amazon Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Kindle * Appstore for Android Get a paid app for free every day * Digital Games & Software * Audible Audiobooks 100,000 audiobook downloads * Books * Movies, TV, Music, Games * Electronics & Computers * Home, Garden, Pets & DIY * Toys, Children & Baby * Clothes, Shoes & Jewellery * Sports & Outdoors * Grocery, Health & Beauty * Car & Motorbike * >Full Shop Directory * Sign in New customer? Start here. * Your Account * Your Orders * Your Wish List * Your Recommendations * Manage Your Subscribe & Save Items * Manage Your Kindle * Your Cloud Player Play from any browser * Your Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Your Games and Software Library * Your Apps & Devices Your Shopping Basket is empty. Give it purpose -- fill it with books, DVDs, clothes, electronics and more. If you already have an account, sign in. There's a problem previewing your shopping basket at the moment. Check your Internet connection and go to your cart, or try again. View Shopping Basket (0 items) (0 item) (0 items) * Create a Wish List * Find a Wish List * Wish from Any Website Add items to your List from anywhere * Wedding List * Baby Wish List Sign in New customer? Start here. This discussion Discussion in: politics discussion forum Participants: 19 Total posts: 102 Initial post: 14 Mar 2012 Latest post: 13 Apr 2012 __________________________________________________________________ Loading... You are tracking this discussion. Unsub New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made. Sub Tracked by 1 customer [RSS Feed] RSS Feed __________________________________________________________________ (Report abuse) Search Customer Discussions ____________________ Go [X] Search only this discussion __________________________________________________________________ Get to Know Us * Careers * Investor Relations * Press Releases * Amazon and Our Planet * Amazon in the Community Make Money with Us * Sell on Amazon * Associates Programme * Fulfilment by Amazon * Advertise Your Products * Independently Publish with Us * >See all Let Us Help You * Track Packages or View Orders * Delivery Rates & Policies * Amazon Prime * Returns Are Easy * Manage Your Kindle * Help amazon.co.uk * Australia * Brazil * Canada * China * France * Germany * India * Italy * Japan * Mexico * Spain * United States AbeBooks Rare & Collectible Books Audible Download Audio Books AmazonLocal Great Local Deals In Your City Amazon Web Services Scalable Cloud Computing Services Book Depository Books With Free Delivery Worldwide CreateSpace Indie Print Publishing Made Easy DPReview Digital Photography IMDb Movies, TV & Celebrities Javari UK Shoes & Handbags Javari France Shoes & Handbags Javari Japan Shoes & Handbags Javari Germany Shoes & Handbags Junglee.com Shop Online in India Kindle Direct Publishing Indie Digital Publishing Made Easy MYHABIT Designer & Fashion Private Sale Site Shopbop Designer Fashion Brands * Conditions of Use & Sale * Privacy Notice * Cookies & Internet Advertising * (c) 1996-2013, Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates #alternate Amazon * Your Amazon.co.uk * Today's Deals * Gift Cards * Sell * Help GCSPORTS20 Shop by Department Search All [All Departments_____________] ____________________ Go Hello. Sign in Your Account Try Prime Basket 0 Wish List * Amazon.co.uk * Warehouse Deals * Subscribe & Save * Amazon Family * Outlet * Amazon Prime * Mobile Apps * Amazon Toolbar * Amazon Local (What are Customer Discussions?) Customer Discussions > politics discussion forum the left and the influx of migrant workers. See latest post Sort: Oldest first | Newest first Showing 51-75 of 102 posts in this discussion In reply to an earlier post on 18 Mar 2012 20:38:08 GMT Mr. M. Bounds says: i dont blame anyone who lives off benefits, if their only option is to take a mundane job that pays minimum wage. there is nothing noble about waking at the crack of dawn, working in excess of 40 hours and to take home a wage that gives you no standard of living Report abuse 3 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 18 Mar 2012 21:10:51 GMT M. Coleman says: + the cost of transport of getting there and back each day , in winter - leaving the house in the dark and getting home when it is dark again , perhaps working outside in the cold rain and snow , and for an abusive boss or line manager as well ,, " Just Sign On , Son " I would say . Report abuse 3 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 18 Mar 2012 21:18:05 GMT Spin says: The problem is not wages. It is a problem of personal fulfillment. Society provides no fulfillment whatsoever to its labour force. It demands payment for education then, upon education, demands one serves burgers to tourists. One must ensure an economy that provides not only cash, but fulfillment to the labour force. Each one of us would work for any wage as long as we were happy in our job and felt as if we were contributing to both our own ambition and loves, and to society. Report abuse 4 of 11 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 18 Mar 2012 21:45:22 GMT Mr. M. Bounds says: three weeks time i will be redundant. i have been in full employment since 1986. i am taking my money and going to south east asia for a few months, because the only alternative is to get on my hands and knees and beg for a job that will pay me about two hundred pounds a week. no thanks Report abuse 4 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 18 Mar 2012 21:48:08 GMT Mr. M. Bounds says: i agree whole heartedly with your post completely. Report abuse 3 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 18 Mar 2012 21:55:07 GMT Spin says: Capitalism requires not you,but your labour. Your contribution to society is of as much relevence to capitalism as a bee is to a hive. Report abuse 3 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 19 Mar 2012 15:00:30 GMT doctor_jeep says: Sadly the same goes for socialism - the main difference being the basis on which you are rewarded. Would you rather be paid based on the demand for your labour or on what someone else thinks you need? No economic theory is going to have much interest in that which it cannot model. Report abuse 3 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 19 Mar 2012 19:21:09 GMT Spin says: Doctor: That is exactly the pont of communism. Socialism is a weak, inferior and cowardly branch of politics, neither embracing nor refusing capitalism or communism, but balancing precariously on the fence. "When, in the course of development, class distinctions have diappeared,and all production has been concentrated in the hands of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organised power of one class for oppressing another..." ( Marx and Engels,The Communist Manifesto) Report abuse 4 of 10 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Mar 2012 04:46:43 GMT Last edited by the author on 20 Mar 2012 04:49:17 GMT Molly Brown says: Mr Bounds, you should be careful what you say, as regards having "left wing leanings", the Police may have a dossier on you. I am sorry that you are losing your job, hopefully not joining the thousands of Construction Workers who have been unable to regain employment due apparently to this country's Secret Police keeping tags on what you do, say or what you might be thinking? I must admit I missed this story in the mainstream News, and only briefly picked up on it today whilst watching Russia Today on Freeview. "Blacklisted building workers hope for day in court after ruling?" http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012 /mar/03/police-blacklist-link-construction-workers?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487 Daniel Boffey, policy editor guardian.co.uk, Saturday 3 March 2012 21.57 GMT "The police or security services supplied information to a blacklist funded by the country's major construction firms that has kept thousands of people out of work over the past three decades. The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has revealed that records that could only have come from the police or MI5 have been discovered in a vast database of files held on 3,200 victims who were deemed leftwing or troublesome. The files were collected by the Consulting Association, a clandestine organisation funded by major names in the construction industry. Its database was seized nearly three years ago, but the extraordinary nature of the information held has only now emerged, following an employment tribunal for one of the victims, Dave Smith, a 46-year-old engineer who had a 36-page file against his name and was victimised repeatedly for highlighting safety hazards on sites, including the presence of asbestos." ===================================================== "The Consulting Association, a shadowy organisation that compiled a list of 'troublemakers' - with the help of the security services - for Britain's biggest building companies was closed four years ago. Only now can its 3,200 victims go to court and hope to win" One of the victims of this secret blacklist, compiled by the (Secret) Police and which stopped this man from gaining employment in the Construction Industry included pages detailing his private activities such as, "We were at an anti-fascist demonstration at the Cenotaph and that somehow finds a way into the file. It is incredible. What has that got to do with my employment record? People were emailing me saying come along Monday and then I would get a phone call on the Sunday saying, 'That job has gone.' It was devastating. It smacks of a sort of police state, almost with the police colluding with the employers to blacklist the trade unionists. Some of the people on that blacklist are just ordinary health and safety reps. You just wonder how far this goes." see full article @ http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/m ar/03/blacklisted-building-workers-court-hopes Apparently this kind of blacklisting has been happening, surprisingly, NOT, since the days of Maggie Thatcher and continued by her poodle, Blair, and only just discovered I gather because of the current investigation into Police corruption via the Leveson Enquiry and other investigations into the media. Report abuse 9 of 10 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Mar 2012 10:53:03 GMT William Podmore says: Excellent post, Molly - thank you for the useful information. Report abuse 6 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Mar 2012 17:28:58 GMT rock n roll animal says: bet i'm on it!! Report abuse 1 of 2 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Mar 2012 18:03:23 GMT Pipkin says: Hi R & R, Me also! Report abuse 1 of 2 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 20 Mar 2012 21:00:28 GMT TomC says: It started well before Thatcher ... http://www.1in12events.co.uk/archive/publ ications/library/spies/spies.htm The Consulting Association is the Economic League continued under another name. Report abuse 3 of 3 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 21 Mar 2012 05:50:57 GMT Last edited by the author on 21 Mar 2012 06:16:46 GMT Molly Brown says: "Economic League (United Kingdom)" From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_League_(UK) "The Economic League was an organisation in the United Kingdom dedicated to opposing what they saw as subversion and action against free enterprise. The organisation was founded in 1919 by a group of industrialists and then MP William Reginald Hall under the name of National Propaganda. Its chief function was to promote the point of view of industrialists and businessmen. Predating McCarthyism, it worked closely with the British Empire Union. John Baker White worked as the league's Assistant Director, and then from 1926 to 1939 as Director.[1] They later worked with MI5 to blacklist workers who they suspected of association with certain left wing groups, ranging from the Communist Party of Great Britain to the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.[citation needed] The League became more visible in the 1980s, as the press investigated its activities, and questions were asked in Parliament in a campaign against the League, led by Maria Fyfe. It was wound up in 1994, with two of its former directors forming the similar organisation CAPRiM shortly afterwards.[2] Another similar organisation was The Consulting Association which was raided by the Office of the Information Commissioner in February 2009." "The league's running cost was funded by contributions from various companies. In the early 1980s numerous companies would check out employees with the League to ensure that employeess were not communist-trained with the intent of disruption." Hi Tom C, I've recently had problems with a trojan on my PC from unknown sites, so didn't go to your link. Did however, look it up on Wiki, and you are totally correct. Why on earth should I believe it was something new. I mean Capitalists maintaining their power, through subversive means. My main concern, and reason for posting the links, was that it was not easy to access, it took me some time to find a mainstream site that had reported on this outrageous and illegal blacklisting of working people because of their political beliefs. Now who is to say what a "troublemaker" is, I have been accused and harassed at work of being just that. What it often means is that you have simply pointed out to your boss that actually what they have instructed you to do, is possibly illegal, infringes your employment rights, or is quite often immoral or dangerous to your or others health, ? It means you are not a "yes man(woman)", but has nothing to do with your ability to do your job or do it very well. You are already using your abilities to make money for the company presumably, in some way. In many cases where I have drawn certain points out to a manager, it was in the best interests of the company, but perhaps not in the best interests of that particular manager? I have never been sacked for doing this, infact quite the reverse, the person involved in a dispute of some of the above has subsequently "been moved on", conincidentally soon after the problem arising, and the company stood by me and was grateful for making them aware of a problem, you know, "whistleblowing". Companies need to trust their workers more, encourage "whistleblowing" as sometimes in is in their economic benefit, to actually know what is happening in their companies, when corrupt, or potentially unsafe practices are carried out. Many Companies employ "troubleshooters", or any other term of undercover employees to find these problems before they come back to bite them on the @rse, causing perhaps fatal injury. Just look at News International? Report abuse 4 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 22 Mar 2012 08:25:29 GMT easytiger says: The blacklist in the construction industry is not exclusively for the left, it includes people on the right who actively opposed the import of cheap labour to bolster the profits of multi-nationals and subject the indigenous workers to unemployment which the government pays for not them. I know; I'm on it. That's one of the reasons I don't work in UK anymore. I was lucky, having the quals and experience to do this-millions haven't. Mornin' Molly. Report abuse 6 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 22 Mar 2012 11:33:36 GMT Dan & Tues says: "when opposing this global social engineering" In what sense is closing borders and dividing people along ethnic lines not also "social engineering"? Report abuse 5 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Mar 2012 05:31:46 GMT Molly Brown says: Morning easytiger, so you went out into the world and got your own back then. I wouldn't say the imported cheap labour question is necessarily a right wing thing. It's just that the left think it is politically incorrect to question foreign labour undercutting the labour market here. I think the right and left and middle (perhaps), would like a decent living wage for all people in the country. Report abuse 4 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 23 Mar 2012 07:30:35 GMT easytiger says: What galls me about the left is that they're usually well educated, middle-class civil servants in what used to be jobs for life. Try walking out the site gate with your cards on a friday and then watch cheap labour march in on a monday. This one world-no borders thing plays right into the multi-nationals' hands-the ability to shift blocks of cheap labour round the world without giving a fig about the living standards of the indigenous population. It's not just on the shop floor either. I did three different contracts on the Olympic Park and by the time I was on the final one in 2010 I was the only englishman on the job and that included engineers and managers.It's all done now, no way back, but from 2003 onwards you can bet your bottom dollar that if half the presenters and reporters on the BBC had turned into eastern europeans overnight a totally different attitude would have have prevailed. Report abuse 8 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 23 Mar 2012 07:36:29 GMT easytiger says: That old quip 'TB didn't like the British working class so he imported his own' rings so true. If the likes of Thatcher had done this it would have been classed as a savage attack on the working class and there would have been mass demonstrations in the streets! I just don't get the left in UK at all. Report abuse 7 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Mar 2012 07:38:19 GMT Last edited by the author on 23 Mar 2012 07:39:14 GMT Molly Brown says: Then ofcourse there is the old vs the young, (that's how I was undercut with redundancy). Makes sense to get rid of someone that has worked their way up to a decent wage, then suddenly, you're gone and some 21 year old whizz kid who'll work for peanuts because they don't have a mortgage, or there parents are rich, takes your re-titled job. This is going on now with internships. I am certainly not middle class, and had to fend for myself from aged 16. It's not just imported labour now that's undercutting jobs. Report abuse 3 of 3 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 23 Mar 2012 12:59:50 GMT Mrs. A. Pinteaux says: Many people seem to mix migrants, immigrants and asylum seekers and blame them for what is Globalised Capitalism. And what does this issue have to do with religion??? Are you worried about your work being stolen by immigrants or you are afraid your culture, whatever it is, being diluted by those bloody people who are so different? It is Globalised Capitalism that requires the movement of workers. The sooner you give up the little island mentality the sooner you can face the reality of the capitalism we all benefit from, i.e cheap food and cheap clothing. You cannot focus on the symptom without being able to understand the cause. You can blame your average Eastern European worker for this all you like, if that makes you feel better, but what will this change? Conversely all people who berate migrant workers are abjectly silent on the Brits who move abroad and use the local health service etc., are you all who complain about Eastern Europeans happy for Brits to be able to move to France, Spain, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary etc. and use the benefit system there, expect the same treatment as here and drive up local property prices so local kids cannot get work or buy their first homes? If you close the borders and quit the EU you will pay a very high price: you will loose trade, all your citizens who are expats will loose their benefits as all the agreements to match standards will be annulled, and pay higher export price, is that what you really want? 70% of UK trade for the moment is coming from the EU if I remember well the figures. Be careful what you wish for! Report abuse 3 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 23 Mar 2012 13:18:44 GMT Last edited by the author on 23 Mar 2012 13:19:16 GMT easytiger says: Quite frankly most of the Brits I know who haved moved abroad are solvent and can take care of themselves. Most of them say they left Britain not because of migrant workers but because their cities had become full of immigrant layabouts demanding that the culture they supposedly fled be imposed on their new homelands. You don't have million Brits in catholic Madrid shouting for protestant schools do you? Quite frankly I couldn't give a monkey's what expat Brits get up to (by the way I work abroad but retain residence in UK by paying UK tax and NI-costs me a lot of money to be a smug B), it's an irrelevant arguing point. Quite frankly if you still believe all that propaganda that the EU and the BBC churn out I should try reading some other literature if I were you. Very soon there will be limited access to the internet because of the impending (I kid you not) powercuts caused by this completely non-sensical renewable energy policy dictated to us by EU. Report abuse 5 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Mar 2012 14:14:31 GMT [Deleted by the author on 29 Mar 2012 09:46:20 BDT] __________________________________________________________________ Posted on 23 Mar 2012 14:19:11 GMT M. Coleman says: Mrs A , what rubbish - for a start - global capitalism nearly brought the whole house down lately , with the EU resorting to build " Firewalls " around 1 small country - Greece , global capitalism being reversed as fast as possible here , even the USA and China were feeling the heat . perhaps more firewalls are required around other countries , some bigger than Greece . Imagine the havoc if France or Spain were to take the place of Greece , more firewalls needed now , and higher walls than what has already been done . De globalisation is now needed asap to save the globe from any 1 country whose clap-trap finances hit the fan in the near future . As for immigration , the joke is now over , local unemployment is rising all round the UK and local people can not find any meaningfull jobs now , perhaps we should tell the EU to get stuffed , we're leaving ( ireland really should asap ) , don't worry about trade , they do not want to lose our buying power . We will still buy Mercs , BMW's , Audis , Renualts and Citroens from them , they will not want to harm that . OK , so MRS Ashton loses her cushy well paid number , but time to give the EU back it's citizens and endless red-tape . Report abuse 5 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No __________________________________________________________________ In reply to an earlier post on 23 Mar 2012 14:21:07 GMT rock n roll animal says: WHOOP!!!! WHOOP!!!!!! i concur 100% Report abuse 2 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No Your reply to cdAuthorNamePlaceholder's post: Insert a product link To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ You are already tracking this discussion. [ ] Receive e-mail when new posts are made [Post message] [Cancel] Guidelines < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next > [Add comment] Add your own message to the discussion Insert a product link To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ You are already tracking this discussion. [ ] Receive e-mail when new posts are made [Start a new discussion] Prompts for sign-in Guidelines ____________________ Recent discussions in the politics discussion forum Discussion Replies Latest Post United States and crimes committed against civilians 130 4 minutes ago The Limitations of Conspiracy and Cover-Up 39 1 hour ago Should those filthy, misogynistic, sexist, poisonous, foul, disgusting piles of rubbish known as "Lads Mags" be banned? 224 1 hour ago A voice for the British National Party 693 7 hours ago Banned In The U.S. Amazon Forums 1529 20 hours ago To tattoo or not to tattoo? 64 1 day ago At Last! It's clear what he meant by The Big Society!! 14 2 days ago Is the Middle East on the verge of erupting into a region-wide war? 17 2 days ago Statins 114 3 days ago The battle for Britain 241 3 days ago Seasonal Salutations to All You Contributors 26 3 days ago 10 years ago this month Blair and Bush disarmed Gadhafi WMD-wise with their Iraqi invasion 36 3 days ago > See all discussions... > Start a new discussion Active discussions in related forums Discussion Replies Latest Post history discussion forum Michael Gove's comments on teaching about World War One 2 1 minute ago religion discussion forum Why Would One Choose to Be an Atheist or Agnostic Over Christian? 1464 2 minutes ago religion discussion forum The utter stupidity of certain Americans 4 3 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Doctor Who DVD Release Schedule... 4287 9 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Your favorite "soft sci-fi" books? 39 9 minutes ago biography discussion forum Bio on Benny Hill shows he was considered funnier than Monty Python by various TV stations 192 12 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum Help me find some new books to read please 141 12 minutes ago science fiction discussion forum I don't want to read any silly remarks made under this posting ? 6035 13 minutes ago More Customer Discussions Most active community forums * Meet Our Authors * deals * music * religion * science fiction * video games Most active product forums * Sony PlayStation 4 (PS4) * Xbox One Console * See This Through & Leave Amazon forums * Kindle There's a problem loading this menu at the moment. Learn more about Amazon Prime. * MP3s & Cloud Player * MP3 Music Store Shop 20 million songs * Cloud Player for Web Play from any browser * Cloud Player for Android For Android phones, and tablets * Cloud Player for iOS For iPhone and iPod touch * Amazon Cloud Drive * Your Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Get the Desktop App For Windows and Mac * Cloud Drive Photos for Android For Android phones and tablets * Cloud Drive Photos for iPhone For iPhone and iPod touch * Learn More About Cloud Drive * Kindle E-readers * Kindle Small, light, perfect for reading * Kindle Paperwhite The ultimate device for reading * Kindle Paperwhite 3G With free 3G wireless * Kindle Accessories Covers, chargers, sleeves and more * Kindle Store * Kindle Books * Newsstand * Kindle Owners' Lending Library With Prime, Kindle device owners read for free * Kindle Apps & Resources * Free Kindle Reading Apps For PC, iPad, iPhone, Android, and more * Manage Your Kindle * Kindle Fire Tablets * Kindle Fire HD An HD tablet at a breakthrough price * Kindle Fire HD 8.9" Large 8.9" HD display * Kindle Fire HDX 7" HDX display, powerful 2.2 GHz processor * Kindle Fire HDX 8.9" Astonishingly light, large HDX display * Kindle Fire HDX 4G LTE Tablets * Kindle Fire HDX 4G LTE 7" HDX display with ultra-fast 4G LTE technology * Kindle Fire HDX 8.9" 4G LTE Large HDX display with ultra-fast 4G LTE technology * Kindle Accessories Covers, chargers, stylus, audio and more * Appstore for Android * Appstore * Games * Amazon Apps Kindle, mobile shopping, MP3, and more * Your Apps and Devices View your apps and manage your devices * Digital Games & Software * Digital Games For PC and Mac * Free-to-Play Games For PC and Mac * Digital Software For PC and Mac * Your Games & Software Library * Audible Audiobooks * Audible Membership First book free when you try Audible * Audible Audiobooks & More * Bestsellers * New Releases * Listener Favourites * Books * Books * Kindle Books * Books For Study * Audiobooks * Movies, TV, Music, Games * Music * MP3 Downloads * Musical Instruments & DJ * Film & TV * Blu-ray * PC & Video Games * Electronics * Camera & Photo * TV & Home Cinema * Audio & HiFi * Sat Nav & Car Electronics * Phones * Electronics Accessories * PC & Video Games * All Electronics * Computers & Office * Laptops * Tablets * Computer Accessories * Computer Components * Software * Printers & Ink * All Computers & Accessories * Stationery & Office Supplies * Home & Garden * Garden & Outdoors * Homeware & Furniture * Kitchen & Dining * Kitchen & Home Appliances * Lighting * All Home & Garden * Pets * Pet Supplies * DIY & Tools * DIY & Tools * Toys, Children & Baby * Toys & Games * Baby * Baby Wish List * Amazon Family 20% off nappies, delivery benefits and more * Clothes, Shoes & Jewellery * Clothing * Shoes * Jewellery * Watches * Handbags & Shoulder Bags * Luggage * Sports & Outdoors * Fitness * Camping & Hiking * Cycling * Athletic & Outdoor Clothing * Winter Sports * Golf * Water Sports * All Sports & Outdoors * Health & Beauty * Beauty * Health & Personal Care * Grocery * Grocery * Beer, Wine & Spirits * Subscribe & Save Up to 15% off, free delivery and more * Car & Motorbike * Car Accessories & Parts * Tools & Equipment * Sat Nav & Car Electronics * Motorbike Accessories & Parts * MP3s & Cloud Player 20 million songs, play anywhere * Amazon Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Kindle * Appstore for Android Get a paid app for free every day * Digital Games & Software * Audible Audiobooks 100,000 audiobook downloads * Books * Movies, TV, Music, Games * Electronics & Computers * Home, Garden, Pets & DIY * Toys, Children & Baby * Clothes, Shoes & Jewellery * Sports & Outdoors * Grocery, Health & Beauty * Car & Motorbike * >Full Shop Directory * Sign in New customer? Start here. * Your Account * Your Orders * Your Wish List * Your Recommendations * Manage Your Subscribe & Save Items * Manage Your Kindle * Your Cloud Player Play from any browser * Your Cloud Drive 5 GB of free storage * Your Games and Software Library * Your Apps & Devices Your Shopping Basket is empty. Give it purpose -- fill it with books, DVDs, clothes, electronics and more. If you already have an account, sign in. There's a problem previewing your shopping basket at the moment. Check your Internet connection and go to your cart, or try again. View Shopping Basket (0 items) (0 item) (0 items) * Create a Wish List * Find a Wish List * Wish from Any Website Add items to your List from anywhere * Wedding List * Baby Wish List Sign in New customer? Start here. This discussion Discussion in: politics discussion forum Participants: 19 Total posts: 102 Initial post: 14 Mar 2012 Latest post: 13 Apr 2012 __________________________________________________________________ Loading... You are tracking this discussion. Unsub New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made. Sub Tracked by 1 customer [RSS Feed] RSS Feed __________________________________________________________________ (Report abuse) Search Customer Discussions ____________________ Go [X] Search only this discussion __________________________________________________________________ Get to Know Us * Careers * Investor Relations * Press Releases * Amazon and Our Planet * Amazon in the Community Make Money with Us * Sell on Amazon * Associates Programme * Fulfilment by Amazon * Advertise Your Products * Independently Publish with Us * >See all Let Us Help You * Track Packages or View Orders * Delivery Rates & Policies * Amazon Prime * Returns Are Easy * Manage Your Kindle * Help amazon.co.uk * Australia * Brazil * Canada * China * France * Germany * India * Italy * Japan * Mexico * Spain * United States AbeBooks Rare & Collectible Books Audible Download Audio Books AmazonLocal Great Local Deals In Your City Amazon Web Services Scalable Cloud Computing Services Book Depository Books With Free Delivery Worldwide CreateSpace Indie Print Publishing Made Easy DPReview Digital Photography IMDb Movies, TV & Celebrities Javari UK Shoes & Handbags Javari France Shoes & Handbags Javari Japan Shoes & Handbags Javari Germany Shoes & Handbags Junglee.com Shop Online in India Kindle Direct Publishing Indie Digital Publishing Made Easy MYHABIT Designer & Fashion Private Sale Site Shopbop Designer Fashion Brands * Conditions of Use & Sale * Privacy Notice * Cookies & Internet Advertising * (c) 1996-2013, Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates #Latest Threads (RSS 2.0) Latest Threads (Atom 1.0) * Our other sites: * UK Column website * British Constitution Group * Lawful Rebellion * Common Purpose Exposed * Get the newspaper Search ...________________ Go __________________________________________________________________ Current time: 06-01-2014, 08:58 PM Hi there, Guest! (Login — Register) __________________________________________________________________ UK Column Discussion / Politics / UK Political Parties v 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next » / What's the truth about immigration? Pages (2): 1 2 Next » Thread Rating: * 0 Votes - 0 Average * 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 Threaded Mode | Linear Mode What's the truth about immigration? 01-05-2010, 04:03 PM Post: #1 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 What's the truth about immigration? If my ears and eyes serve me right it is the Poles who are being targeted as the main source of immigration into Britain. We know that Polish are hard working people so they would naturally show a high profile in the jobs market. However if you go to the link below then to page 6 of the World Bank migration and development report you will find a graph made up of data provided by the UK Office of National Statistics. The Polish are just one part of the A8 migrants shown in the graph and even though their influx was exponential It is clear to see that other groups of migrants were well established by 2002 especially those from the African Continent. Of course the graph only refers to those in work but can still give an indication of ratios. It would be interesting to know the true influx of immigration especially because Britain’s benefit system makes us the destination of choice especially for economic migrants . The next question is why is the rate of immigration from Africa concealed? It is very important to know especially if an amnesty is offered by Clegg to illegal immigrants because this would provide a legitimate route for their families to follow. If Turkey joins the EU then this will also be another source over which we will have no control. There is also information of how other countries are or plan to deal with immigration and America which is about 39 times larger than our little island. Takealook. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPR...rief11.pdf In the Mail today. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...wrong.html And http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election...oblem.html _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user 01-05-2010, 05:28 PM Post: #2 Bluthund Offline Senior Member * * * * Posts: 723 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 1 RE: What's the truth about immigration? Oh, we are well in the Destabilisation phase of DDCN Doctrine: http://www.philipbrennan.net/essays/how-...-a-nation/ Bluthund. _________________ There is no Left or Right - there is only Freedom or Tyranny. Everything else is an illusion, an obfuscation to keep you confused and silent as the world burns around you. Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user 03-05-2010, 10:56 PM Post: #3 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? From the Mail Online today http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election...chdog.html _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user 11-05-2010, 07:57 AM Post: #4 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? . http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPR...velopmentB The link below works http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPR...rief11.pdf _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user 11-05-2010, 09:39 AM Post: #5 Bluthund Offline Senior Member * * * * Posts: 723 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 1 RE: What's the truth about immigration? Takealook - email me at pbrennan42ATgmailDOTcom and I will host the PDF. Bluthund. _________________ There is no Left or Right - there is only Freedom or Tyranny. Everything else is an illusion, an obfuscation to keep you confused and silent as the world burns around you. Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user 05-07-2010, 11:32 PM Post: #6 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? At last here is the relevent pdf Page 6 for Migrant employment into the UK by country of birth [attachment=87] or http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPR...rief11.pdf _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user 17-07-2010, 04:29 AM Post: #7 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? Just before closing down to go to bed I stumbled across this link. http://www.eutimes.net/2010/07/europe-be...migration/ It ties in very nicely with something I have been thinking about for two or three weeks and links in with the previous posts here especially because the rate of immigration from Africa had been concealed by labour but as it is known they have had an agenda to alter our way of life through uncontrolled immigration. I suspect that they plan to further this agenda with the compressed coil spring of this concealed population and of course it will all take place under the new coalition government. 1).Things had been a little quiet on the Labour front and I couldn't help wondering what mischief they have been up to as old habits no doubt persist. It came to mind that many of the seats they won were in high immigration areas and as the Daily Mail reported they were actively caught committing election fraud Which nobody else seemed to question afterwards. 2). It is only recently that I have noticed African families have begun to appear in my location springing up like mushrooms do in the early morning. 3). Also it had been announced that anybody willing to relocate to other areas of the country will be given priority for council housing. 4).Only yesterday (2 days ago now) the radio channels were full of the story that between now and 2051 the population will grow from 59 million to 78 million and that it will be achieved by the 16 ethnic minorities who will swell from the present 8% of the population to 20%. This being because they are of predominantly child bearing age. The rate of increase in the indigenous population will shrink. How do they know this so far ahead? 5).Don't forget that Clegg wanted to offer an amnesty for illegals who would then be able to bring their relatives legally into the country. Does this and turning a blind eye to Labour's election fraud of registering none existent voters point to an ongoing agenda no matter who is in power. I would like to point out that in the early 70s I had Jamaican associates and from time to time attended their Reggae parties and when I moved to London had Nigerian and Jamaican friends often sharing weekends with their families. It is the hidden agenda I object to. Perhaps we are all being set up for the fall. You will notice when you read the article that The Africans whom the Uks own statistics show are the greatest infux have again not been mentioned. Takealook _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user 17-07-2010, 08:16 AM Post: #8 Martin Edwards Offline Site Admin * * * * * * Posts: 541 Joined: Jul 2009 Reputation: 1 RE: What's the truth about immigration? Guys, It might be worth your while looking to see how Migration fits in with the United Nations and Agenda 21. For example, see UNESCO and the International Migration Convention. More info from this search Find all posts by this user 17-07-2010, 12:49 PM Post: #9 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? (17-07-2010 08:16 AM)Martin Edwards Wrote: Guys, It might be worth your while looking to see how Migration fits in with the United Nations and Agenda 21. For example, see UNESCO and the International Migration Convention. More info from this search Thanks for that link Martin. It sheds further light on what is taking place and of course it is a program for all EU countries (Member States as they now like to call us) So they can all look forward to the same. Of course all people are entitled to be treated properly just as we would expect for ourselves but it can things can also be manipulated to the detriment of each country if they please. What I found interesting is that all bases are covered and enshrined by law. This means that they can play it which ever way they choose and we are powerless do anything about it. For instance Article 22-1 states that ''Migrant workers and their families shall not be subject to measures of collective expulsion. Each case of expulsion shall be examined and decided individually.'' That is fair enough but then the next article says 22- 2''Migrant workers and members of their families may be expelled from the territory of a State Party only in pursuance of a decision taken by the competent authority in accordance with law' One thing that I liked which hopefully will continue apply to us as well is this in Article 18-2. Migrant workers and members of their families who are charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law. The articles 8-35 referred at the end of your link are to be found here. http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/45/a45r158.htm International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families quote. Article 35 Nothing in the present part of the Convention shall be interpreted as implying the regularization of the situation of migrant workers or members of their families who are non-documented or in an irregular situation or any right to such regularization of their situation, nor shall it prejudice the measures intended to ensure sound and equitable conditions for international migration as provided in part VI of the present Convention. quote Can anyone interpret the meaning of the sentence above. I would guess that it means that the preceding Articles apply only to legal immigrants but not illegals. Any way what are £500 an hour lawyers for if not to make statements like this mean whatever they want. However if it does mean that then it provides grist for the mill for lawyers to fight over on behalf of the illegals because human rights as they are written should apply to all. Shouldn't they?? Takealook This was planned to be included in the reply. It is the last paragraph on Martin's link but I overlooked it so I will tag it on the end here instead. * Rights of undocumented ('illegal') workers The Convention recognizes that "the human problems involved in migration are even more serious in the case of irregular migration" and the need to encourage appropriate action "to prevent and eliminate clandestine movements and trafficking in migrant workers, while at the same time assuring the protection of their fundamental rights" (Preamble). As measures for preventing and eliminating illegal labour migration, the Convention proposes that the States concerned should collaborate in taking appropriate actions against the dissemination of misleading information relating to emigration and immigration, to detect and eradicate illegal or clandestine movements of migrant workers and impose sanctions on those who are responsible for organising and operating such movements as well as employers of illegal migrant workers (Art. 68). However, the fundamental rights of undocumented migrant workers are protected by the Convention (Art. 8 - 35). Does this answer my question about Article 35 or not? _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user 19-07-2010, 11:58 AM Post: #10 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? Yesterday I heard on the news that there will be a cap on skilled workers but not on unskilled or illegal immigrants. How can this make sense? Are we witnessing the reversal of roles between Labour and Conservative. Is it an indication that agenda is marching on. (Labour are now beginning to spout all the things that they should have said while in office but didn't). Surely limiting the flow of talented people while encouraging other categories is doubly damaging for the country. There have always been natural migration through out history and and countries have benefited. Isambard Kingdom Brunel came from a family of French Immigrants and even his sister was well capable of competing on the same level as an engineer but ladies weren’t allowed to be seen doing that sort of thing in those days. The Polish who always seem to willing, happy. capable and bright always seem to be singled out for media attention. It so happens that children in Poland do not start school until 7 years of age and by the time they leave for secondary School or whatever the equivalent is they are two years ahead of their British counterparts. This pattern I have been told continues right through to the end of University. This is why the International Baccalaureate is so valuable. What Is objectionable is how immigration is being used as a weapon to eventually destabilise Nations and destroy their identity. It was the concealment (as pointed out at the head of this thread) of otherwise published statistics by mainstream media that drew my attention and interest in this subject matter. Takealook http://www.eutimes.net/2010/07/more-immi...-brussels/ More Immigration for Europe Says Brussels Posted by EU Times on Jul 15th, 2010 // 7 Comments BRUSSELS: EU home affairs commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom is to alter the rules for migrants BUREAUCRATS are planning to encourage more new migrants to come to the EU despite rising levels of unemployment, it emerged last night. Brussels officials are to simplify entry rules for workers heading to Europe to take up temporary seasonal jobs in farming, tourism and other industries. EU home affairs commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom said: “We need immigrant workers in order to secure our economic survival.” She claimed more were needed to fill “labour shortages”. But her remarks are bound to provoke new concerns that Eurocrats are determined to press for ever higher levels of immigration. Last night, Home Office insiders insisted Britain would refuse to sign up to the latest overhaul of EU border controls. Mrs Malmstrom said: “We know unemployment rates are still very high in Europe. Paradoxically, at the same time there are labour shortages.” She plans to speed up procedures for hiring managers, specialists and seasonal workers from outside the 27 EU member states. The EU lacks workers in certain sectors even though average unemployment is at 10 per cent, up from seven per cent before the crisis, commission officials said. Mrs Malmstrom – responsible for migration policies – has said the EU will continue to need extra workers in the next few years even though slower economic growth is putting pressure on some EU governments to curb the number of immigrants. An ageing population and low birth rates mean that migrant labour will be necessary to help EU growth in the long term. Mrs Malmstrom said: “In light of the demographic challenge the EU is facing, where our active population is forecasted to start falling already in 2013, we need immigrant workers in order to secure our economic survival. “I will continue to take more steps towards a more inclusive labour migration policy for the EU in the coming years.” Under the proposals, which have to be approved by EU governments and the European Parliament, companies will be able to bring seasonal workers into the EU more quickly to address changing needs. Officials insist the measures are aimed at tackling the growing problem of illegal migrants working in a black economy. Thousands, many from Africa, are hired each year to do jobs such as harvesting tomatoes in Italy. But critics of mass immigration insist that unemployed native workers should be encouraged – or forced through benefit cuts – to take up the work. The new rules would force employers to prove they provide accommodation and set up a complaints mechanism. And companies would benefit from simplified application procedures when bringing managers and specialists into EU branches of international corporations. A spokesman for Mrs Malmstrom said last night: “It is up to each member state to decide whether they need more seasonal workers and how many they should take. If they don’t need more seasonal workers, of course that is their choice.” Source VN:F [1.9.3_1094] _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user Enter Keywords___________ Search Thread « Next Oldest | Next Newest » Pages (2): 1 2 Next » Possibly Related Threads... Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post UAF v BNP & EDL. Mass Immigration: A Frankfurt School Technique Takealook 13 3,245 17-12-2010 03:29 AM Last Post: Takealook Anyone want to discuss Eastern European immigration into the UK and Ireland? dekarnys 9 2,249 05-07-2010 11:44 PM Last Post: Takealook European immigration is an Issue! dekarnys 0 514 19-05-2010 09:59 PM Last Post: dekarnys * View a Printable Version * Send this Thread to a Friend * Subscribe to this thread __________________________________________________________________ UK Column, The Annex, Scott Lodge, Scott Road, Plymouth PL2 3DU - 01752 478050 - editor@ukcolumn.org The UK Column is not affiliated with any political party. UK Column | Return to Top | Return to Content | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2014 MyBB Group. #Latest Threads (RSS 2.0) Latest Threads (Atom 1.0) * Our other sites: * UK Column website * British Constitution Group * Lawful Rebellion * Common Purpose Exposed * Get the newspaper Search ...________________ Go __________________________________________________________________ Current time: 06-01-2014, 08:58 PM Hi there, Guest! (Login — Register) __________________________________________________________________ UK Column Discussion / Politics / UK Political Parties v 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next » / What's the truth about immigration? Pages (2): « Previous 1 2 Thread Rating: * 0 Votes - 0 Average * 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 Threaded Mode | Linear Mode What's the truth about immigration? 25-07-2010, 08:20 AM Post: #11 major hitch Offline Senior Member * * * * Posts: 445 Joined: Jun 2009 Reputation: 0 RE: What's the truth about immigration? Whether the size of the population, or the composition of the population, of any country should change by way of immigration is a question sole'ly for the citizens of that country to decide by referendum. It is too important to be left to mere politicians - because everybody is smarter than anybody; all of us are smarter than any few of us. Find all posts by this user 25-07-2010, 03:35 PM Post: #12 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? This reply by Sean answers the question What is The Truth About Immigration very succinctly. Sean says: 24/07/2010 at 7:20 pm People who have expended the great moral and intellectual effort needed to understand the true nature of the world in which we live know that the Conspiratorial View of History is correct. That nothing on this good Earth happens by accident, especially in politics and high finance. Moreover, who understand that Hidden Hands are guiding mankind rapidly towards an apocalyptic time that is verily the Climax of the historical process as we know it. Furthermore, these Proper Students of History know that sinister hands are guiding the Ancient Evil Conspiracy for World Government, which is unfolding rapidly in the Arena of History, and which is easily observed by those with eyes to see … In this connection — and against the wishes of the vast majority of Westerners — a secret, high level policy of mass immigration of non-whites, adoption of foreign, non-white children, and increased miscegenation aimed at radically transforming the West has been pursued, and whose outrages and iniquities have been vigorously defended by professional “Race Relations” experts and “Race Industry” organizations whose disproportionate “power” within contemporary Western culture is not their own. The Shadow Government allows this “power,” for these vociferous advocates and defenders of Multiculturalism (as well as its ideological bodyguard, the Thought Tyranny called Political Correctness) comprise the legion of useful fools, infesting all fields of human endeavour, who are used by the Secret Rulers of this Earth on the long-travelled road towards global tyranny. The Multicultural scam becomes clearly visible to those with eyes to see when one ponders the injustice and absurdities inherent in official policy, especially that policy hidden from the purview of the masses, which not only encourages massive illegal immigration but also lavishly rewards those who break national laws and come to the West illegally. This overrunning of the West by NON-WHITE, non-Christian peoples, is primarily designed to create massive social tensions, using the old “divide and rule” principle, which will allow the Secret Masters of the Evil Agenda to bring about the final destruction of Western Christian Civilization and the enslavement of its indigenous peoples. Also permit me to state that it is only with intuitive insight that one can penetrate beyond the external form or substance of things, to reach their internal substance or reality. It is only with the inner light of the discerning heart that one can achieve confirmation that we now live in an Age of Extreme Evil which will culminate in the end of the historical process as we know it. Empirical and discursive knowledge and thought can only suggest, but cannot directly perceive, and hence penetrate, the true nature of the Age in which we now live. And one of the telltale signs of this Age of Evil is RACIAL AND ETHNIC ADULTERATION ON A MASSIVE SCALE, a pernicious plot especially directed at the indigenous Caucasian, and particularly “Nordid”, populations of the Western World. Why is Western Civilization the main, main target? For the reason that not only is it the cradle of the ancient Sinister Plot to Transform the World, but it is also its greatest impediment, or, more specifically, the spirituality that underpins Western Civilization, which is the Christ Impulse released from the Cross at Calvary commonly called Christianity. That is why the Secret Masters of the New Age One World Agenda – the Lords of Power – have worked tirelessly for centuries to subvert Christendom, and are now also working tirelessly to undermine the racial integrity of the Western Caucasian populations — whether the citizens have the clarity of vision to see it, or not. It is a reply submitted to this link. http://www.eutimes.net/2010/07/europe-be...migration/ _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user 30-07-2010, 08:09 PM Post: #13 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? The question What is the truth about immigration is answered here in an article by Steve Doughty, Social Affairs Correspondent for the Daily Mail. I have reintroduced a few minor details (but perhaps important) that were printed in Wednesdays paper but missing in the online version. Takealook Immigration sees UK's population growth outstrip the rest of Europe By Steve Doughty Last updated at 11:06 AM on 28th July 2010 Britain's population growth is outpacing the rest of Europe, according to figures released yesterday. This country gained more people last year thanks to immigration and rising birth rates than anywhere in the continent. The rise in population in Britain accounted for nearly a third of the 1.4million increase in the number of people living in all of the 27 EU countries, according to the analysis from Brussels. Influx: Britain experienced greater population growth than other European countries last year, according to new figures Influx: Britain experienced greater population growth than other European countries last year, according to new analysis from Brussels It said the increase pushed the EU population above the half billion mark, with just over 501million European citizens at the beginning of this year. The breakdown from the EU’s Eurostat arm showed how fast Britain’s population is rising compared to that of our neighbours and rivals and provoked fresh calls for the Government to curb numbers coming into the country. There are rising fears that pressure on housing, transport, water, power and social services will become overwhelming if official projections that the number of people in the country will reach 70million by 2029 are realised. The Eurostat analysis showed that Britain’s population rose by 412,000 in 2009, up 182,000 because there were more immigrants than emigrants, and up by 231,000 because of rising birth rates. Much of the new baby boom is a result of immigration, and one in four children born last year was born to mothers who were themselves born abroad. The British figures compare with an increase of 34 ,000 in France, mainly a result of high birthrates, and 295,000 in Italy, largely caused by high immigration. Germany’s population fell by 203,000. The UK increase meant the population rise per head in Britain was the greatest of any of the major EU countries. Numbers in Britain grew by 6. for every 1,000 people last year, compared with 5.4 for every 1,000 in France, 4.9 for every 1,000 in Italy, and 3.5 for every 1,000 in Spain. In Germany there were 2.5 fewer people for every 1,000, and Poland’s population grew by fewer than one for every 1,000 people – a clear indication that millions of Poles who left to work abroad in the boom years of the 2000s have yet to return home. Only small and minor countries – Belgium, Sweden, Slovenia and tiny Luxembourg – showed a faster rate of population growth for every 1,000 people than Britain. Sir Andrew Green, of the Migrationwatch think tank, said: ‘This is further confirmation that the population of the UK is rising extremely fast, mainly due to immigration, which accounts for two thirds of the projected population growth of the next 25 years. ‘There are always arguments in favour of immigration. But the majority of people are clear that immigration needs to be brought down. The Government would do well to stick to the promises they have made to the electorate.’ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...urope.html __________________________________ On the front page of Wednesdays issue it said this (and this time I will quote directly from the page because the online version has been severely altered almost beyond recognition) Takealook Daily Mail 28th July 2010 James Chapman and Daniel Martin. Coalition at war on Immigration. The Coalition was at war last night over a key onservative election pledge to impose a a strict annual limit on immigration. Liberal Democrat Vince Cable led a growing rebelion against enforcing a draconian cap on numbers comming into the country, demanding 'as liberal a policy as possible'. The Business Secretary has privately described the idea of a tight limit as 'crazy' at a time when Britain is trying to boost trade. His call revealed deep divisions within the Government, with even some senior Tories sympathetic of watering down the policy. They are understood to include universities minister David Willets. A senior Government source last night said Mr Cable would not back down from his position, which has led to a tense Cabinet stand-off with Home Secretary Theresa May. The row came as it emerged that immigration and rising birth rates mean that Britain accounted for nearly a third of the growth in population across the whole of Europe last year with 412,000 added to the UK total. ---------------------------------------------------------- (There is more to the article but this is the essence related to this thread. However the remaining is important and could be covered in a new thread) Yesterday somebody made a post to this thread and could have been motivated by strong feelings because she joined up to the Forum, made the post then deleted it within half an hour and had only spent about 15 minutes total online. The name was eventually removed from the posters list by the evening. She may have thought better about it, perhaps to save later embarasment. Takealook _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user 14-12-2010, 11:48 PM Post: #14 Vortigern Offline Member * * * Posts: 122 Joined: Jul 2009 Reputation: 0 RE: What's the truth about immigration? The end result of abolishing borders and national states is that the future ceases to be determined by the vote, as the democrat would have you believe, and becomes determined by genetics. If the majority of babies born in the British Isles are not British then the future of the British Isles will not be British (or English, Irish, Scottish or Welsh if you prefer). The largest breeding population in an area eventually defines the present. Imagine if all the British people were dropped into the Chinese population. Within a few generations the majority of their descendents would cease to be a recognisable entity. There would no longer be 'the British', there would instead be those of 'British heritage', and this would be a heritage that would diminish with each generation, until all that remained were a few traits amongst certain individuals discernable only to the scientist. Of course, it is not possible to physically drop the British gene pool into that of China. But what if the equivalent numbers of people were allowed into Britain? Then the same process would occur, what is distinctive about the British, their genetic identity, would dilute and then vanish. There would be no melting pot where the British population mixes with the incoming population to create a new population because the incoming numbers are too great, instead the British population would dissolve in the the incoming population. Liberalism, socialism, democracy - all of these belief systems were created by some caucasoids. Their mistake was they held their beliefs to be universal and forced them upon the world. When caucasoids disappear genetically so will their belief systems. Equally of course, so will their borderless states! The US and the EU will simply fracture into new state structures based on the new population groups. The future rulers will not be brown skinned versions of Cameron,Milliband, van Rompuy or Merkel or whoever, they will be negroids or sub-continentals who may have inherited one or two of their genes - but nothing more. Find all posts by this user 03-03-2011, 05:38 PM Post: #15 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...-long.html Migrant cover-up: Reports kept secret by Labour show mass immigration cut wages, raised tensions and that too many stayed too long By James Chapman Last updated at 9:45 AM on 1st March 2011 Comments (345) Add to My Stories Labour is today accused of a ‘shocking’ cover-up over the impact of years of mass immigration as damning official research buried by the last government is revealed. Ministers will publish three reports commissioned at the taxpayers’ expense by Labour politicians – but then apparently ‘sat on’ because of their inconvenient conclusions. Government advisers concluded immigration had depressed wages, threatened to increase community tensions and seen many incomers stay longer than intended. Cover-up: The Coalition promises openness about migration while Labour leader Ed Miliband has admitted his party got it 'wrong' on immigration while they were in power - with millions having their incomes squeezed The Coalition claims the unpublished reports, which cost more than £100,000 to produce, are extraordinary evidence of how Labour lost control of Britain’s borders and then tried to cover it up. The revelations come as Labour leader Ed Miliband admitted his party got it ‘wrong’ on immigration while they were in power – with millions of families having their incomes squeezed as a result. More... Immigration DID hurt wages and Labour 'under-estimated significantly' the influx, admits Miliband Middle-class families 'to be £4,000 worse off'... but rich and poor are insulated from cost of living crisis The last government was widely criticised for failing to impose any controls when ten countries joined the EU, underestimating the number of migrant workers coming to the UK as a result of the changes by a factor of ten. Local government minister Grant Shapps, who will release research commissioned by the Department for Communities and Local Government before last year’s election, said: ‘This is a shocking cover-up by Labour. Labour ministers spent over £100,000 of taxpayers’ money on research reports into immigration, and when they didn’t like the results they tried to brush it all under the carpet. ‘The new Government is being more honest with the public and so we will be making these reports public. We are introducing a series of measures to get immigration under control. Labour’s uncontrolled immigration put unacceptable pressures on public services and harmed community relations.’ The first report, a DCLG ‘economics paper’, was commissioned in 2009 at a cost of £24,275, and looked into immigration and rural economies. Government advisers concluded that immigration had had a negative effect on the wages of British workers, particularly at the lower end of the income scale. They also warned of a big increase in the number of National Insurance numbers being issued, with hundreds of thousands handed to illegal workers as there was no requirement for JobCentre staff to check whether a person was in the country legally. In rural areas, migrants make up a third of food manufacturing workers, a quarter of farm workers and a fifth of hotel and restaurant workers, the report added. ‘There are challenges posed by language barriers, which can make access to services and integration within local communities more difficult,’ it said. Enlarge ‘Housing, healthcare and education could also be affected by an increase in local population, when some existing local services may already be under pressure.’ The largest clusters of migrant workers, the report said, were around Herefordshire, Lincolnshire and Cambridgeshire and, to an extent, Somerset and Devon. ‘Far from being an urban phenomenon, recent migrants have increasingly chosen to settle in the countryside, in many cases in areas without a history of migration,’ the report added. The second report, prepared by the Government’s regeneration and economic development analysis expert panel, looked at the impact of the economic downturn on migration. It was commissioned in 2008 at a cost of £3,400. The report showed that the number of migrants entering the country with dependants increased dramatically from 2007 to 2008. Ministers were also warned that community tensions were likely to increase in the event of an economic downturn. The third report, commissioned last year at a cost of £78,500, was designed to measure international and internal migration using information from a national database of school pupils. It found that one in eleven pupils spoke English as a second language. Yesterday, Ed Miliband admitted the Labour government’s open door policy towards immigration from Eastern Europe had put ‘pressure on people’s wages’ by bringing about an influx of cheap migrant labour. He also conceded that Labour ministers had been ‘wrong’ to say that a maximum of 13,000 migrants a year would come to the UK from Eastern Europe following EU enlargement in 2004. In the event, more than 600,000 arrived in the following two years. And he warned that immigration had helped widen the gap between rich and poor by piling pressure on those in lower skilled jobs. Labour’s former immigration minister Phil Woolas claimed last year that even at party gatherings, senior figures were reluctant to talk about one of voters’ chief concerns. ‘We had imposed a gag on ourselves,’ he said. And by the 2010 election, when the party did finally discuss the issue, ‘the public thought we were shutting the stable door after the horse had bolted and even worse that we were doing it for electoral gain _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user 04-03-2011, 09:21 AM Post: #16 hetzer Offline Senior Member * * * * Posts: 474 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? The rot started in 1948 when Atlee, without any reference to or consent of the indeginous people, allowed ex colonials to have access to British Passports and therefore British Nationality. This was an act of appeasement and a grave mistake in my opinion. Another excuse he used was that postwar Britain needed the colonials to fill the job market and do the menial work that the Brits didn't want to do. Hundreds of thousands poured in thereby needing housing, schooling etc. The nation could have coped with the indigenous needs, the British always used to. Since that year, the nation has starts to be watered down with all sorts of ethnics from abroad. Idi Amin's Ugandan Asians followed, plus any riff raff who muttered the 'asylum' word. There has been a downward spiral ever since, they have bred so fast, unfortunately even with Brits, been given totally equal rights and privileges, it is disgrace. The situation will be difficult to reverse now, impossible even. Britain will be coffee coloured within the next fifty years at this rate. Some may find that ok, I don't, won't and never will. However many laws are passed, many will never accept this situation. _________________ The broad mass of a Nation will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one! Find all posts by this user 19-03-2011, 03:47 PM Post: #17 Takealook Offline Posting Freak * * * * * Posts: 901 Joined: Apr 2010 Reputation: 2 RE: What's the truth about immigration? Yet again EU immigrants are being scapegoated but as page 6 of the PDF shows there are far more migrants from none EU countries which is (as usual) ignored. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ly-UK.html _________________ Behind every sentence is a greater story - Takealook Find all posts by this user Enter Keywords___________ Search Thread « Next Oldest | Next Newest » Pages (2): « Previous 1 2 Possibly Related Threads... Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post UAF v BNP & EDL. Mass Immigration: A Frankfurt School Technique Takealook 13 3,245 17-12-2010 03:29 AM Last Post: Takealook Anyone want to discuss Eastern European immigration into the UK and Ireland? dekarnys 9 2,249 05-07-2010 11:44 PM Last Post: Takealook European immigration is an Issue! dekarnys 0 514 19-05-2010 09:59 PM Last Post: dekarnys * View a Printable Version * Send this Thread to a Friend * Subscribe to this thread __________________________________________________________________ UK Column, The Annex, Scott Lodge, Scott Road, Plymouth PL2 3DU - 01752 478050 - editor@ukcolumn.org The UK Column is not affiliated with any political party. UK Column | Return to Top | Return to Content | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2014 MyBB Group. #Digital Spy Forums RSS Feed Digital Spy Forums - Politics - RSS Feed Digital Spy * Showbiz * Music * Movies * TV * Soaps * Reality TV * US TV * Gaming * Tech * Forums Search Digital Spy Home / Forums / General Discussion Forums / Politics / Do other EU countries pay housing benefit and other benefits to EU immigrants? DS Forums * Register * FAQ * Today's Posts * Search * Rules My DS Account On Digital Spy No account yet? Create one now! OR Login with Digital Spy account Threads: 1,899,888 Posts: 70,643,109 Members: 547,268 Welcome to our newest member, D_P1 Do other EU countries pay housing benefit and other benefits to EU immigrants? Reply 1 of 2 1 2 Next Thread Tools Search this Thread Old 27-11-2013, 22:42 #1 Puterkid Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 2,895 Do other EU countries pay housing benefit and other benefits to EU immigrants? __________________________________________________________________ Just wondered really. Do countries like Germany and France provide housing and pay benefits to EU immigrants? Are they also getting large numbers entering their country's? Are their populations also not happy about it? If they don't, why is the UK going to be seen as the 'nasty country'? Puterkid is offline Reply With Quote Puterkid View Public Profile Find More Posts by Puterkid Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement. Old 27-11-2013, 22:53 #2 Leindub Forum Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Ireland Posts: 141 We do in Ireland. Infact we have the second most generous dole in europe. At the start of the euro crisis it was 216euro per week, it's now 188euro per week. We also have generous housing allowance and other allowances. We've had unprecedented immigration to Ireland in the last ten years. Our print, radio and T.V media never debate it. Someone might call you a racist. To my knowledge Ireland has the most generous childrens allowance in europe, think it is about 140euro a month. The Polish pay about 10 euro. A working Polish parent in Ireland gets the balance of 130euro from our government to send to their child back home. Our social affairs minister tried to do something about it and the EU basically told her to do a runner. We in Ireland are generally percieved in europe as the nice English speaking member, the only time we cause a little hassle is when we vote no to EU referenda but we always give europe the 'right' answer, second time round. Leindub is offline Reply With Quote Leindub View Public Profile Find More Posts by Leindub Old 27-11-2013, 23:02 #3 Hypnodisc Forum Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 14,621 Quote: Originally Posted by Puterkid Just wondered really. Do countries like Germany and France provide housing and pay benefits to EU immigrants? Are they also getting large numbers entering their country's? Are their populations also not happy about it? If they don't, why is the UK going to be seen as the 'nasty country'? Yes. They pay such benefits. Yes. (Doesn't France have the greatest number of immigrants?) Yes/No. Other countries are generally less xenophobic than Britain, although of course, you have whingers and fascists everywhere. Hypnodisc is offline Reply With Quote Hypnodisc View Public Profile Find More Posts by Hypnodisc Old 27-11-2013, 23:15 #4 Puterkid Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 2,895 Thanks for the answers. So, if I turn up in Germany with no job or place to live, I would be entitled to their equivalent of JSA and could expect accommodation provided by the state? I guess what will happen eventually is that the poorer countries will continue to lose population, whilst the richer ones grow and grow! It doesn't seem a hugely well thought through policy. Puterkid is offline Reply With Quote Puterkid View Public Profile Find More Posts by Puterkid Old 27-11-2013, 23:30 #5 ItJustMyOpinion Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London Posts: 15,825 Quote: Originally Posted by Leindub We do in Ireland. Infact we have the second most generous dole in europe. At the start of the euro crisis it was 216euro per week, it's now 188euro per week. We also have generous housing allowance and other allowances. We've had unprecedented immigration to Ireland in the last ten years. Our print, radio and T.V media never debate it. Someone might call you a racist. Anyone notice the BBC are going with the new immigration restrictions as their top story. Trying to make up for their previous bias I guess. ItJustMyOpinion is offline Reply With Quote ItJustMyOpinion View Public Profile Find More Posts by ItJustMyOpinion Old 28-11-2013, 00:26 #6 Markjuk Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 7,157 Quote: Originally Posted by Hypnodisc Yes. They pay such benefits. Yes. (Doesn't France have the greatest number of immigrants?) Yes/No. Other countries are generally less xenophobic than Britain, although of course, you have whingers and fascists everywhere. If you feel the need to be the big man throwing around the usual left wing derogatory terms then fine. No one really cares as the majority of the population support moves restricting foreigner benefits. Markjuk is offline Reply With Quote Markjuk View Public Profile Find More Posts by Markjuk Old 28-11-2013, 00:28 #7 woot_whoo Forum Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 13,388 Quote: Originally Posted by ItJustMyOpinion Anyone notice the BBC are going with the new immigration restrictions as their top story. Trying to make up for their previous bias I guess. Damned if they do and damned if they don't, I guess. woot_whoo is offline Reply With Quote woot_whoo View Public Profile Find More Posts by woot_whoo Old 28-11-2013, 00:31 #8 howard h Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Gtr Manchester UK Posts: 4,205 r/e benefits, especially unemployment, why can't there be an EU-wide maximum for people not in the country of their passport - so if the max was e.50/week, if I moved to Germany and claimed the dole, that's the maximum I could expect irrespective of what Germans get? Or - the country you are in pays you the lower of the two countries - so if it's e70 in the UK, but e 40 in Bulgaria (haven't a clue - that's just guessing) a |Bulgarian cannot expect the UK to pay any more than he/she would expect in Bulgaria. ?? howard h is offline Reply With Quote howard h View Public Profile Find More Posts by howard h Old 28-11-2013, 00:41 #9 Markjuk Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 7,157 Quote: Originally Posted by howard h r/e benefits, especially unemployment, why can't there be an EU-wide maximum for people not in the country of their passport - so if the max was e.50/week, if I moved to Germany and claimed the dole, that's the maximum I could expect irrespective of what Germans get? Or - the country you are in pays you the lower of the two countries - so if it's e70 in the UK, but e 40 in Bulgaria (haven't a clue - that's just guessing) a |Bulgarian cannot expect the UK to pay any more than he/she would expect in Bulgaria. ?? What about a better option. Come here to work or you are not welcome. Markjuk is offline Reply With Quote Markjuk View Public Profile Find More Posts by Markjuk Old 28-11-2013, 00:47 #10 Jol44 Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 8,401 So basically it means that poor Brits won't be able to claim them abroad once Cameron gets his way? Jol44 is offline Reply With Quote Jol44 View Public Profile Find More Posts by Jol44 Old 28-11-2013, 00:53 #11 johnny_boi_UK Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 279 Germany, holland and austria do. Their governments are being pressured to try and curb atleast some of the payments that go to migrants that do not work. Hypno, your mud slinging doesnt help matters. I would like to consider myself pro eu (changes do have to be made to make it more democratic) but i am all for removing child and unemployment benifits from those migrants that do not work. johnny_boi_UK is offline Reply With Quote johnny_boi_UK View Public Profile Find More Posts by johnny_boi_UK Old 28-11-2013, 01:05 #12 Old Lefty Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 312 Quote: Originally Posted by johnny_boi_UK Germany, holland and austria do. Their governments are being pressured to try and curb atleast some of the payments that go to migrants that do not work. Hypno, your mud slinging doesnt help matters. I would like to consider myself pro eu (changes do have to be made to make it more democratic) but i am all for removing child and unemployment benifits from those migrants that do not work. So what would you do if say, the person and child were from Syria, they had seen their families bombed and poisoned, shot, etc etc (and that's just the basic things that have been happening to them), they came here to try and build a new life and couldn't get a job to begin with until they had adjusted from the trauma. You do realise why there are so many immigrants do you? Why people are risking drowning etc to escape? And before you ask, we don't get many of them, more than 2 million have gone to places like Lebanon, Jordon, Turkey etc, 24,000 have gone to Germany, No, not all immigrants are fleeing things as bad as that, but do you really think people uproot themselves from their families and travel and try and start a new life for the fun of it, or for a few paltry pounds? Do you think British people never go to live abroad? Or is that different? You think they don't get benefits in the countries they go to if they loose jobs etc? Perhaps you would like to have a look at this link, with countries and the number of immigrants tey have, which includes numbers as a percentage of the population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...orn_population Take a look down to Jordan and Hong Kong, smaller than us, much higher percentage of immigrants. Old Lefty is offline Reply With Quote Old Lefty View Public Profile Find More Posts by Old Lefty Old 28-11-2013, 01:07 #13 anndra_w Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 2,979 Quote: Originally Posted by Leindub We do in Ireland. Infact we have the second most generous dole in europe. At the start of the euro crisis it was 216euro per week, it's now 188euro per week. We also have generous housing allowance and other allowances. We've had unprecedented immigration to Ireland in the last ten years. Our print, radio and T.V media never debate it. Someone might call you a racist. To my knowledge Ireland has the most generous childrens allowance in europe, think it is about 140euro a month. The Polish pay about 10 euro. A working Polish parent in Ireland gets the balance of 130euro from our government to send to their child back home. Our social affairs minister tried to do something about it and the EU basically told her to do a runner. We in Ireland are generally percieved in europe as the nice English speaking member, the only time we cause a little hassle is when we vote no to EU referenda but we always give europe the 'right' answer, second time round. It's just a shame the BBC and the British press don't report this to the idiotic masses who obsess over the immigration issue. Something has to be done to tackle British Xenophobia. It's almost acceptable because it's become so widespread with the press and the conservatives most to blame for inflaming it. anndra_w is offline Reply With Quote anndra_w View Public Profile Find More Posts by anndra_w Old 28-11-2013, 01:12 #14 johnny_boi_UK Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 279 Quote: Originally Posted by Old Lefty So what would you do if say, the person and child were from Syria, they had seen their families bombed and poisoned, shot, etc etc (and that's just the basic things that have been happening to them), they came here to try and build a new life and couldn't get a job to begin with until they had adjusted from the trauma. You do realise why there are so many immigrants do you? Why people are risking drowning etc to escape? And before you ask, we don't get many of them, more than 2 million have gone to places like Lebanon, Jordon, Turkey etc, 24,000 have gone to Germany, No, not all immigrants are fleeing things as bad as that, but do you really think people uproot themselves from their families and travel and try and start a new life for the fun of it, or for a few paltry pounds? Do you think British people never go to live abroad? Or is that different? You think they don't get benefits in the countries they go to if they loose jobs etc? Picking at the low hanging fruit i see Notice i said migrants not asylum seekers. johnny_boi_UK is offline Reply With Quote johnny_boi_UK View Public Profile Find More Posts by johnny_boi_UK Old 28-11-2013, 01:12 #15 Old Lefty Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 312 Quote: Originally Posted by anndra_w It's just a shame the BBC and the British press don't report this to the idiotic masses who obsess over the immigration issue. Something has to be done to tackle British Xenophobia. It's almost acceptable because it's become so widespread with the press and the conservatives most to blame for inflaming it. Would you believe, I know someone on another forum who have emigrated to Ireland and is doing her very best to instill them with English Xenophobia. I'm glad to say, she's not having much luck. Old Lefty is offline Reply With Quote Old Lefty View Public Profile Find More Posts by Old Lefty Old 28-11-2013, 01:14 #16 Old Lefty Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 312 Quote: Originally Posted by johnny_boi_UK Picking at the low hanging fruit i see Notice i said migrants not asylum seekers. Low fruit? Why do you think migrants move? If they had a good life they wouldn't move, would they? Old Lefty is offline Reply With Quote Old Lefty View Public Profile Find More Posts by Old Lefty Old 28-11-2013, 01:22 #17 Hypnodisc Forum Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 14,621 Quote: Originally Posted by Markjuk If you feel the need to be the big man throwing around the usual left wing derogatory terms then fine. No one really cares as the majority of the population support moves restricting foreigner benefits. The majority of the idiot population, maybe. It doesn't make them right just because they've been misled into thinking this is a bigger problem than it is Quote: Originally Posted by johnny_boi_UK Germany, holland and austria do. Their governments are being pressured to try and curb atleast some of the payments that go to migrants that do not work. Hypno, your mud slinging doesnt help matters. I would like to consider myself pro eu (changes do have to be made to make it more democratic) but i am all for removing child and unemployment benifits from those migrants that do not work. It's not really mud slinging. It's just putting forward the point that no other country is as obsessed with this sort of nonsense as us. If there was a big problem with non-working migrants claiming those benefits I might be more inclined to worry about the economics of it - but I'm not, as there isn't a big problem. The facts and figures speak for themselves. Hypnodisc is offline Reply With Quote Hypnodisc View Public Profile Find More Posts by Hypnodisc Old 28-11-2013, 01:27 #18 OLD HIPPY GUY Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: preferably on my Harley Posts: 7,402 Quote: Originally Posted by Leindub We do in Ireland. Infact we have the second most generous dole in europe. At the start of the euro crisis it was 216euro per week, it's now 188euro per week. We also have generous housing allowance and other allowances. We've had unprecedented immigration to Ireland in the last ten years. Our print, radio and T.V media never debate it. Someone might call you a racist. To my knowledge Ireland has the most generous childrens allowance in europe, think it is about 140euro a month. The Polish pay about 10 euro. A working Polish parent in Ireland gets the balance of 130euro from our government to send to their child back home. Our social affairs minister tried to do something about it and the EU basically told her to do a runner. We in Ireland are generally percieved in europe as the nice English speaking member, the only time we cause a little hassle is when we vote no to EU referenda but we always give europe the 'right' answer, second time round. I lived and worked in the republic from 99 until 2006 (Mullingar) and for the last year I was there I was on the dole unfortunately, no fault of my own, the entire factory closed making me redundant, the Irish dole was around 20 pounds a week more than the UK dole (at the time 2005/6) and I could also claim for my rent, and I wasn't made to feel as though I was vermin either, as the unemployed here are, I applied for and was granted a place on a business study course, with a view to going self employed, the course lasted 6 months, one day a week, and from the moment I started the course my 'dole' went up by 20 euros a week, and I wasn't expected to look for work, and anything I earned from my self employment wile on the course was not taken from my benefits, see the Irish actually try to HELP the unemployed rather than kicking them in the teeth, Had I finished the course, I would have been able to apply for an almost guaranteed non re-payable grant of up to 10 thousand euros, to help start my business, and I would STILL be allowed to claim 'dole' for another 4 years after going self employed, on a sliding reduction of 25% per year, But so good is the propaganda here, that huge numbers of the herd think we have the most generous welfare system in Europe, we certainly have one of the best, but far from THE best, It was a real culture shock when I arrived back in the UK, and turned up at the job-centre and asked for 'help' I can tell ya, OLD HIPPY GUY is offline Reply With Quote OLD HIPPY GUY View Public Profile Find More Posts by OLD HIPPY GUY Old 28-11-2013, 01:28 #19 johnny_boi_UK Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 279 Quote: Originally Posted by Old Lefty Low fruit? Why do you think migrants move? If they had a good life they wouldn't move, would they? You are trying to compare those who are fleeing a warzone aka an asylum seeker to an economic migrant. These are two completley different things. A much more interesting country from your wiki link iswthe uae. johnny_boi_UK is offline Reply With Quote johnny_boi_UK View Public Profile Find More Posts by johnny_boi_UK Old 28-11-2013, 01:38 #20 OLD HIPPY GUY Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: preferably on my Harley Posts: 7,402 Quote: Originally Posted by Markjuk If you feel the need to be the big man throwing around the usual left wing derogatory terms then fine. No one really cares as the majority of the population support moves restricting foreigner benefits. and believing that an opinion or point of view based on prejudice and ignorance, shouldn't be opposed or argued against because "the majority" agree, worked really well in a certain European country, in the early half of the last century didn't it? although, I've yet to see any proof, of this "majority" support, all we seem to see is lots of very vocal 'righties' TELLING everyone what the "majority" thinks, and yet if the "majority" DO agree with this, then why aren't the BNP in power? and should we expect a UKIP government in 2015 if "the majority" do indeed agree?, OLD HIPPY GUY is offline Reply With Quote OLD HIPPY GUY View Public Profile Find More Posts by OLD HIPPY GUY Old 28-11-2013, 01:56 #21 Pemblechook Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: North Wales..Near Chester, UK Posts: 1,453 Germany has tended to be the number one destination with the chance of well paid work. I Pemblechook is offline Reply With Quote Pemblechook View Public Profile Find More Posts by Pemblechook Old 28-11-2013, 02:10 #22 DinkyDoobie Forum Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 9,298 Quote: Originally Posted by Hypnodisc If there was a big problem with non-working migrants claiming those benefits I might be more inclined to worry about the economics of it - but I'm not, as there isn't a big problem. The facts and figures speak for themselves. Which facts and figures are those? DinkyDoobie is offline Reply With Quote DinkyDoobie View Public Profile Find More Posts by DinkyDoobie Old 28-11-2013, 02:11 #23 Markjuk Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 7,157 Quote: Originally Posted by DinkyDoobie Which facts and figures are those? Ones from mickey mouse Wikipedia no doubt Markjuk is offline Reply With Quote Markjuk View Public Profile Find More Posts by Markjuk Old 28-11-2013, 02:17 #24 Markjuk Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 7,157 Quote: Originally Posted by OLD HIPPY GUY and believing that an opinion or point of view based on prejudice and ignorance, shouldn't be opposed or argued against because "the majority" agree, worked really well in a certain European country, in the early half of the last century didn't it? although, I've yet to see any proof, of this "majority" support, all we seem to see is lots of very vocal 'righties' TELLING everyone what the "majority" thinks, and yet if the "majority" DO agree with this, then why aren't the BNP in power? and should we expect a UKIP government in 2015 if "the majority" do indeed agree?, The majority agree on restricting benefits to foreigners, there is nothing racist or xenophobic about that. Certainly no need to join extremist parties such as the BNP in order to support this common sense approach in order for you to stoke you cl.aims of racism or xenophobia. What is occurring with this policy is common sense - something that some who share your patterns of thought seriously lack. Markjuk is offline Reply With Quote Markjuk View Public Profile Find More Posts by Markjuk Old 28-11-2013, 02:40 #25 Hypnodisc Forum Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 14,621 Quote: Originally Posted by DinkyDoobie Which facts and figures are those? Quote: Originally Posted by Markjuk Ones from mickey mouse Wikipedia no doubt C4 News have done various Fact-Checks on supposed 'benefit tourism' and they've all concluded that the 'problem' is a virtually negligible one. Christ, there was even a BBC Magazine article about this only yesterday, link here. This sentence sums up the findings: Quote: But whats the evidence for benefit tourism? The answer is that there is very little - and it is an extremely complex picture. Most people who emigrate here do so to work or study, not to claim benefits. Of course, there will always be exceptions but people don't generally arrive here solely to claim benefits. Hypnodisc is offline Reply With Quote Hypnodisc View Public Profile Find More Posts by Hypnodisc Reply 1 of 2 1 2 Next Previous Thread | Next Thread Thread Tools Search this Thread Show Printable Version Show Printable Version Email this Page Email this Page Search this Thread: ____________________ Go Advanced Search Forum Jump [ Politics_____________________________________________] Go All times are GMT. The time now is 20:58. [-- Digital Spy [WIP]] Digital Spy * Latest * Movies * Showbiz * Gaming * Soaps * Tech * TV * Video * Music * Forums * About Us + About Digital Spy + Advertise + Jobs + Mobile * Contact Us + Contact Digital Spy + Terms and Conditions + Privacy + Cookie Policy * DS International + UK + USA + Australia Join Us * Twitter * Facebook Hearst Magazines UK (c) Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved. _______ Submit X #Digital Spy Forums RSS Feed Digital Spy Forums - Politics - RSS Feed Digital Spy * Showbiz * Music * Movies * TV * Soaps * Reality TV * US TV * Gaming * Tech * Forums Search Digital Spy Home / Forums / General Discussion Forums / Politics / Cameron stops UK migrant 3,000 bond plan DS Forums * Register * FAQ * Today's Posts * Search * Rules My DS Account On Digital Spy No account yet? Create one now! OR Login with Digital Spy account Threads: 1,899,888 Posts: 70,643,109 Members: 547,268 Welcome to our newest member, D_P1 Cameron stops UK migrant 3,000 bond plan Reply 3 of 3 Previous 1 2 3 Thread Tools Search this Thread Old 02-07-2013, 08:27 #51 ItJustMyOpinion Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London Posts: 15,825 Quote: Originally Posted by Josquius Agreed. Key word bogus of course. The way the government is doing it now is tackling all education and international marriages. You forget the small matter of discrimination being illegal. If one section of society are doing something they want to stop, they must apply the counter measures to everyone. Foreign students at quality universities has increased. Its the east end language colleges that have been shut down. The decrease from India is most likely due to the student route being used as a work route. Now they can't use it as a way in to Britain for work as under the last Labour government, they will just find another country. The remainder will probably be the genuine ones. ItJustMyOpinion is offline Reply With Quote ItJustMyOpinion View Public Profile Find More Posts by ItJustMyOpinion Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement. Old 02-07-2013, 08:49 #52 ItJustMyOpinion Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London Posts: 15,825 Quote: Originally Posted by Josquius Hear hear. A friend of mine, British born white guy, university educated, decent job, has a girlfriend who happens to be from Hong Kong. No sinister plan to flood the country with oriental people there, but thanks to the government constantly needing to bend over backwards to pander to those who are paranoid about immigration he's having a complete bitch of a time trying to be together with her. We live in a globalised world, people don't always fall for someone from their home village any more. http://www.expatforum.com/britain/ti...bers-drop.html http://www.migrationwatchuk.co.uk/br...r/document/301 Quote: Originally Posted by expatforum The number of visas for non European Union family members reached a peak of 70,000 in 2006. It has since declined and is at its lowest levels for many years. The top country for all family visas in 2012 was Pakistan at around 7,500. This was followed by India at 3,300 with Bangladesh, Nepal and the United States all between 2,000 and 3,000 visas. In 2006 over 53,000 visas were issued to partners to enter the UK, some gaining immediate settlement. It has since declined to 35,000 in 2011. There was a further decline to 31,000 in 2012 that may reflect the impact of the new salary threshold for overseas spouses. The top country for partner visas in 2012 was Pakistan with almost 7,000, followed by India with 2,900, Bangladesh with 2,000 and the United States with 1,800 grants. It is obvious that we are not just talking about young British backpackers meeting the love of their life while exploring the world, whose family probably haven't married a foreigner for generations and just want to be together. People such as you friend are inconvenienced because of the the cultural and economic lifestyle decisions of others and how that affects controlling immigration numbers and integration. Quote: Originally Posted by Josquius Well duh. Asked a blank question "Do you want more unskilled workers in the country" of course people will say no. Who wants that? Ask more reasonable questions like "should people be free to marry and be together with foreigners, even if they're not university educated" and you'll get very different answers. You could also ask them what they think of people marrying every generation to people in the old country, or whether they think those that bringing over foreign spouses should let the tax payer pick up the bill. I guarantee you that whatever you ask the public I can ask a counter question before they answer, so don't think you would always get the answer you want. Quote: Originally Posted by Josquius You realise that's effectively sending a message that they've bought the right to stay in the UK as long as they like? Do you not see how its really encouraging any poor people who want to visit for a few months to try and work illegally while they're here? Can you not see how it is causing a major inconvenience and really putting off people who just want to visit for a few weeks? The main point of the bonds is to cover the expense incurred by the border agency in locating, detaining and deporting over stayers and any cost to the NHS or public services etc. If they are that poor they won't be able to afford it. Its no inconvenience, just include a cheque with their visa application at our embassy. Quote: Originally Posted by Josquius Really, this was a stupid, stupid plan. Whatever your views on immigration you have to see that. What I see is a system that was being abused and the best way to deal with that is to change the rules to favour immigration control over the migrant. ItJustMyOpinion is offline Reply With Quote ItJustMyOpinion View Public Profile Find More Posts by ItJustMyOpinion Old 02-07-2013, 10:20 #53 Josquius Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,349 Quote: Originally Posted by ItJustMyOpinion http://www.expatforum.com/britain/ti...bers-drop.html http://www.migrationwatchuk.co.uk/br...r/document/301 It is obvious that we are not just talking about young British backpackers meeting the love of their life while exploring the world, whose family probably haven't married a foreigner for generations and just want to be together. People such as you friend are inconvenienced because of the the cultural and economic lifestyle decisions of others and how that affects controlling immigration numbers and integration. See, the thing is the government designs anti-immigrant policies to target the troublesome sorts and appeal to you guys but in the process of doing that everyone completely ignores the damage it would do to people who aren't doing anything wrong. These wealth restrictions for instance. You might say it stops them bringing over cousins they've decided to marry just to get into the UK...do you now think how maybe it is discriminating against innocent poor people? It really is applying one law to the poor and one law to the rich. Things shouldn't work that way. The true best way to stop Asian Brits marrying people from back home, as you're so scared about, is to increase their quality of life and integrate them more into mainstream British society. Carrots not sticks. Quote: You could also ask them what they think of people marrying every generation to people in the old country, or whether they think those that bringing over foreign spouses should let the tax payer pick up the bill. I guarantee you that whatever you ask the public I can ask a counter question before they answer, so don't think you would always get the answer you want. Well yes, that's exactly my point. Those questions you're proposing are biased and will give obvious answers if they're blank yes or no questions. Quote: The main point of the bonds is to cover the expense incurred by the border agency in locating, detaining and deporting over stayers and any cost to the NHS or public services etc. If they are that poor they won't be able to afford it. Its no inconvenience, just include a cheque with their visa application at our embassy. So we punish law abiding people to punish other foreigners who don't obey the law? Quote: What I see is a system that was being abused and the best way to deal with that is to change the rules to favour immigration control over the migrant. Change the rules? Thats the way the rules already are. Its a disgusting myth that Britain somehow has open door immigration as it patently doesn't, its one of the hardest countries to migrate to there is. Josquius is offline Reply With Quote Josquius View Public Profile Find More Posts by Josquius Old 02-07-2013, 10:29 #54 Nick1966 Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: North London Posts: 12,586 Quote: Originally Posted by WhiteFang ...Cameron and the Tories ... will not shut the borders. Exactly why do Mr Cameron and the Conservatives want an "open door policy" on borders. They must have some reasoning behind their policy. Nick1966 is offline Reply With Quote Nick1966 View Public Profile Visit Nick1966's homepage! Find More Posts by Nick1966 Old 02-07-2013, 10:34 #55 jmclaugh Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 34,181 Well if they actually kept track of those coming here on visas and made sure they were able to remove them if they outstayed them the idea of bonds wouldn't be required. Cameron however is giving mixed messages on immigration and still seems to be of the view economic growth in developing markets is somehow linked to immigration from those markets. jmclaugh is offline Reply With Quote jmclaugh View Public Profile Find More Posts by jmclaugh Old 02-07-2013, 10:34 #56 trevgo Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Leafy London Posts: 11,687 The only thing wrong with the policy was the ridiculously low sum of 3,000. Pathetic decision by Cameron. trevgo is offline Reply With Quote trevgo View Public Profile Find More Posts by trevgo Old 02-07-2013, 11:05 #57 ItJustMyOpinion Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London Posts: 15,825 Quote: Originally Posted by Josquius See, the thing is the government designs anti-immigrant policies to target the troublesome sorts and appeal to you guys but in the process of doing that everyone completely ignores the damage it would do to people who aren't doing anything wrong. These wealth restrictions for instance. You might say it stops them bringing over cousins they've decided to marry just to get into the UK...do you now think how maybe it is discriminating against innocent poor people? It really is applying one law to the poor and one law to the rich. Things shouldn't work that way. As I keep explaining the government is not able to discriminate, its against the law. They have no choice but to apply it equally to everyone, even though according to the graph, 'Figure 3. Partner Visa Grants, Top Ten 2005-2012' http://www.migrationwatchuk.co.uk/br...r/document/301 there is a complete disproportionate use of spouse visas and settlements by ethnic minorities. There is no other way, any attempt to be selective and Keith Vaz will be screaming racism and discrimination. Quote: Originally Posted by Josquius The true best way to stop Asian Brits marrying people from back home, as you're so scared about, is to increase their quality of life and integrate them more into mainstream British society. Carrots not sticks. How do we do that? It is chain migration that is damaging integration. Breaking the link with the old country will make self imposed segregation much harder. Quote: Originally Posted by Josquius Well yes, that's exactly my point. Those questions you're proposing are biased and will give obvious answers if they're blank yes or no questions. No more biased than not pointing out all the facts to the public and letting them decide. Quote: Originally Posted by Josquius So we punish law abiding people to punish other foreigners who don't obey the law? They are just a deposit, law abiding people will have their money returned when they leave. Quote: Originally Posted by Josquius Change the rules? Thats the way the rules already are. Its a disgusting myth that Britain somehow has open door immigration as it patently doesn't, its one of the hardest countries to migrate to there is. Things like human rights, no detention of minors, interference from the foreign office, work in the favour of the migrant. ItJustMyOpinion is offline Reply With Quote ItJustMyOpinion View Public Profile Find More Posts by ItJustMyOpinion Old 02-07-2013, 11:11 #58 WhiteFang Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Narnia Posts: 3,396 Quote: Originally Posted by Nick1966 Exactly why do Mr Cameron and the Conservatives want an "open door policy" on borders. They must have some reasoning behind their policy. I just think its their economic policies and money / trade issues taking over common sense.Cant understand the Conservatives as they seem to put money before anything else. WhiteFang is offline Reply With Quote WhiteFang View Public Profile Find More Posts by WhiteFang Old 02-07-2013, 11:15 #59 smudges dad Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fort William and Aberdeen Posts: 12,930 Quote: Originally Posted by ItJustMyOpinion How do we do that? It is chain migration that is damaging integration. Breaking the link with the old country will make self imposed segregation much harder. Things like human rights, no detention of minors, interference from the foreign office, work in the favour of the migrant. Some of your points are amusingly absurd. Human rights work in EVERYONE'S favour, including yours smudges dad is offline Reply With Quote smudges dad View Public Profile Find More Posts by smudges dad Old 03-07-2013, 01:58 #60 Josquius Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,349 Quote: Originally Posted by ItJustMyOpinion As I keep explaining the government is not able to discriminate, its against the law. They have no choice but to apply it equally to everyone, even though according to the graph, 'Figure 3. Partner Visa Grants, Top Ten 2005-2012' http://www.migrationwatchuk.co.uk/br...r/document/301 there is a complete disproportionate use of spouse visas and settlements by ethnic minorities. There is no other way, any attempt to be selective and Keith Vaz will be screaming racism and discrimination. So because you can't discriminate (why would you want to?) you instead hurt everyone? I'm not sure I like that conclusion. The more reasonale way is to not pick on anyone. Quote: How do we do that? It is chain migration that is damaging integration. Breaking the link with the old country will make self imposed segregation much harder. It isn't self imposed. Its imposed by a mixture of the ideology of fear us vs. them that the right is fond of spreading and the crappy economic situation they find themselves in, which as in poor white areas leads to a it of a siege mentality. Quote: No more biased than not pointing out all the facts to the public and letting them decide. Which I support. Yet so many people are woefully unaware of the facts and seem to think its easy for anyone to just up and move to the UK and start collecting benefits. This couldn't be further from the truth. Quote: They are just a deposit, law abiding people will have their money returned when they leave. There mere fact of the deposit is making things annoying for them and treating them like second class people. 3000 isn't a lot of money for wealthy Indians but for middle class Indians it is still quite a lot of money. Quote: Things like human rights, no detention of minors, interference from the foreign office, work in the favour of the migrant. Am I misreading or are you saying we go back to the Victorian age and do away with human rights and start treating children breaking the law as we would adults? Josquius is offline Reply With Quote Josquius View Public Profile Find More Posts by Josquius Old 10-07-2013, 20:12 #61 ItJustMyOpinion Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London Posts: 15,825 Revealed: The financial cost of Theresa May's immigration policy __________________________________________________________________ Here's one for Styker, apparently Some academics from Middlesex University have worked out that the 18,600 limit will actually cost us more taxpayers money, rather than saving it. http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2013/...s-immigrationl Quote: Originally Posted by politics.co.uk The UK will lose 850 million over ten years as a result of new visa restrictions on foreign spouses of British citizens, new research suggests. Analysis of the government's impact assessment from Middlesex University strongly suggests income requirements on foreign spouses could be putting an additional burden on the taxpayer. "It appears the government got its sums wrong when designing this policy," said Dr Helena Wray, from the School of Law at Middlesex University, who co-authored the research. "When the cost-benefit calculations for this policy in the impact assessment are properly carried out, the figures actually show that the income requirement could cost the public purse 850 million over ten years. "It will not reduce the benefits bill; in fact, it is likely to increase it as single people are more likely to claim benefits than those living with a partner." Easy to claim, how about some facts. Quote: But the research shows that non-EEA foreign spouses, who had the right to work but not to claim benefits, were never a burden on the welfare state. Researchers pointed out that Home Office statistics only counted the cost of services to migrants but excluded their overall economic contribution, in a move which went directly against the advice of the migration advisory committee. This cooking of the statistics hid the economic effects of the policy, according to analysts. So have they factored in the 5,000 cost per child, per year when they start their families? If there economic contribution is so high, how come they don't even earn 18,600? Also when do they stop counting them as migrants, when they get settlement? They should count the entire life of the foreign spouse and 50% of their children until they are adults. Quote: Government figures also fail to take into account the difference in welfare claims depending on marital status. Single parents, for example, are more likely to draw on state support if they are alone than if their partner is given the right to work in the UK. Once a non-EEA partner is in the UK and providing the family with two potential incomes, the family unit is more likely to earn above the cut-off point for welfare. A quarter of the family migration foreign spouses are from Pakistan. As far as I know culturally and religiously they are expected to get married first, live together as a married couple and then have children in the traditional way. Besides if they are both working whose looking after the children? Plus won't many people just emigrate. ItJustMyOpinion is offline Reply With Quote ItJustMyOpinion View Public Profile Find More Posts by ItJustMyOpinion Old 10-07-2013, 20:17 #62 Ethel_Fred Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 22,775 Quote: This cooking of the statistics Doesn't sound like this government Ethel_Fred is offline Reply With Quote Ethel_Fred View Public Profile Find More Posts by Ethel_Fred Old 10-07-2013, 20:22 #63 ItJustMyOpinion Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London Posts: 15,825 Quote: Originally Posted by Ethel_Fred Doesn't sound like this government Well we don't know the university academics haven't rigged their results. What they consider valid costs of migrants and what I consider valid costs may not be the same thing. How many did they ask, who did they ask? ItJustMyOpinion is offline Reply With Quote ItJustMyOpinion View Public Profile Find More Posts by ItJustMyOpinion Old 10-07-2013, 20:42 #64 ItJustMyOpinion Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London Posts: 15,825 Response from the government. http://www.expressandstar.com/busine...shake-up-cost/ Quote: Originally Posted by expressandstar But the Home Office rejected the report's findings. It said the 850 million figure referred to in the report was "incorrect" as it included the taxes paid by migrant partners, but not their costs to public services, and therefore overestimated the positive effect of family migrants. "We do not accept the conclusions reached by Middlesex University," a Home Office spokesman said. "We estimate that the minimum income threshold, set following advice from the independent Migration Advisory Committee, will benefit the taxpayer by 660 million over 10 years. "This includes both the expected savings in public services and the reduction in taxes paid by migrant spouses and partners". So they did not deduct the British citizens costs from their tax's. Anyway do foreign spouses really start working straight away and pay tax's, or do they start a family? The good news is in the figures though. Quote: Home Office estimates suggested the policy would reduce family visas by 17,800 a year. Recent figures suggest that guess was, if anything, an underestimate. There has been a 58% drop in overall applications, including an 83.6% drop in the number of visas issued to male partners of a British spouse. ItJustMyOpinion is offline Reply With Quote ItJustMyOpinion View Public Profile Find More Posts by ItJustMyOpinion Old 10-07-2013, 21:47 #65 Styker Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 18,641 Quote: Originally Posted by ItJustMyOpinion Here's one for Styker, apparently Some academics from Middlesex University have worked out that the 18,600 limit will actually cost us more taxpayers money, rather than saving it. http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2013/...s-immigrationl Easy to claim, how about some facts. So have they factored in the 5,000 cost per child, per year when they start their families? If there economic contribution is so high, how come they don't even earn 18,600? Also when do they stop counting them as migrants, when they get settlement? They should count the entire life of the foreign spouse and 50% of their children until they are adults. A quarter of the family migration foreign spouses are from Pakistan. As far as I know culturally and religiously they are expected to get married first, live together as a married couple and then have children in the traditional way. Besides if they are both working whose looking after the children? Plus won't many people just emigrate. Like I've always said, these bunch of rules are all about reducing the immigration numbers, nothing else. The Tories do not care how and who they do over to get to their target on this either imho. @ the Tories on that! As for your questions on money, how long was this study looking at on financial contribution from married couples with one half being foreign? A year, or longer? Over years the foreign spouse may well start working, but in any case, families with heritage to the indian sub continent do support each other generally and finacially, especially when it comes to marriage, the cost of marriage, setting up of a home and in business etc etc. The Tories do not seem to want to hear about that, its all about the cutting of the numbers hence why they won't allow self employed people to "get round" the minimum income rule by having or be gifted 16 thousand in savings or more for at least 6 months but they do allow that to people who are employed by a company. Could that be because again, many peeople with heritage to the indian sub continet are in self employed positions? Styker is offline Reply With Quote Styker View Public Profile Find More Posts by Styker Reply 3 of 3 Previous 1 2 3 Previous Thread | Next Thread Thread Tools Search this Thread Show Printable Version Show Printable Version Email this Page Email this Page Search this Thread: ____________________ Go Advanced Search Forum Jump [ Politics_____________________________________________] Go All times are GMT. The time now is 20:58. [-- Digital Spy [WIP]] Digital Spy * Latest * Movies * Showbiz * Gaming * Soaps * Tech * TV * Video * Music * Forums * About Us + About Digital Spy + Advertise + Jobs + Mobile * Contact Us + Contact Digital Spy + Terms and Conditions + Privacy + Cookie Policy * DS International + UK + USA + Australia Join Us * Twitter * Facebook Hearst Magazines UK Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved. _______ Submit X #Heresy Corner - Atom Heresy Corner - RSS Heresy Corner - Atom skip to main | skip to sidebar Heresy Corner | HOME | FAQ | POLITICS | RELIGION | CULTURE | CONTACT | ____________________ Search Subscribe in a reader FOLLOW THIS BLOG All original material, design © 2007-2013 Heresy Corner, all rights reserved. [Tags and categories_________] Latest Comments The Heresiarch recommends * [icon18_wrench_allbkg.png] Friendly Atheist The Pastafarian Politician Explains Why He Wore a Colander at His Swearing-In Ceremony 2 hours ago * [icon18_wrench_allbkg.png] Damian Thompson Cults: how to separate truth from fiction 7 hours ago * [icon18_wrench_allbkg.png] New Humanist Blog The scathing slurs of my fellow atheists make me despair 7 hours ago * [icon18_wrench_allbkg.png] A Very British Dude Slavery 8 hours ago * [icon18_wrench_allbkg.png] Cranmer Is the Church of England ashamed to preach Christ crucified? 11 hours ago * [icon18_wrench_allbkg.png] The Freethinker Nigerian health official sounds alarm over a filthy ‘miracle’ lake that allegedly ‘cures’ True Believers 1 day ago * [icon18_wrench_allbkg.png] A Don's Life by Mary Beard What's up with the escalators? 1 day ago The Heresiarch does not anathematise: * Ambush Predator * Anna Raccoon * Bella Gerens * Bishop Hill * Cabinet of Wonders * Cath Elliott * Charles Crawford's Diplomatic Blogoir * Charlotte Gore * Charon QC * Church Mouse * Crispian Jago * Cubik's Rube * Devil's Knife (formerly Devil's Kitchen) * Dick Puddlecote * Dungeekin * EU Referendum * Index on Censorship * Jack of Kent * Jourdemayne * Leg Iron * Liberal England * Liberal Vision * Mark Reckons * MediaWatchWatch * Muffled Vociferation * New York Times: the Lede * Obsolete * People's Rebublic of Mortimer * Platitude of the Day * Political Betting * Pub philosopher * Quiet Riot Girl * Sexonomics (Belle de Jour) * Stumbling and Mumbling * The Exile * The Vibe The Heresiarch's Houseguests * Cranmer's Curate * Edwin Moore * Frank Fisher * L'Hérétique * Miss Dennis Queen aka Clair Lewis * My dungeon * Pandora Blake * Valdemar * Weeping Cross Cif Survivors Get this widget! Powered By Blogger Monday, 25 March 2013 A genuine chance of a job In his big immigration speech today, David Cameron took an axe to the rhetorical and philosophical basis of the Coalition's welfare reforms. I don't think he intended to do so, and few people seem to have picked up on it, but the implications of his remarks are nevertheless profound. I'm referring to this. Rhetorically addressing an East European migrant, the sort who might be tempted to "come and take advantage of our generosity without making a proper contribution to our country" he first reminds them of what conditions are already imposed on British jobseekers: You will be subject to full conditionality and work search requirements and you will have to show you are genuinely seeking employment. If you fail that test, you will lose your benefit. But then he goes further: And as a migrant, we’re only going to give you six months to be a jobseeker. After that benefits will be cut off unless you really can prove not just that you are genuinely seeking employment but also that you have a genuine chance of getting a job. But why would that help reduce the benefits bill? Surely anyone who is genuinely seeking work has a genuine chance of finding it? After all, the whole sanctions regime, which has been steadily cranked up during the past decade (under Labour and Coalition governments alike) and which can now lead to a claimant being thrown off jobseekers' allowance for three whole years, is based on the assumption that such incentives will encourage people to get back into work. An assumption that being out of work for a long period is a personal failing that can be corrected by a strong kick up the backside. But in that case, what does having "a genuine chance of getting a job" mean? It means, presumably, that you can be genuinely seeking work, genuinely doing everything that the DWP requires of you, and more, to get off benefits and into employment, and still not have a genuine chance of a job. Cameron is talking about migrants. But there's no logical reason why it this applies only to migrants. He mentions inadequate spoken English as one possible barrier to finding work, which will form part of a "robust" test applied to unemployed migrants. He doesn't mention the other criteria that will be applied, but it's not hard to think of ones that apply equally to native jobseekers. Such as: low educational attainment, age, a drink problem, a patchy employment record, or (most of all, perhaps) lack of available jobs. Because it is a truth universally unacknowledged (by mainstream politicians, at any rate) that there are many unemployed people who have no real chance of getting a job, however often they have their benefits stopped and however many workfare schemes they are sent on. To acknowledge this fact, though, would make a nonsense of much of the political debate around welfare, which seems premised on the assumption that the way to reduce unemployment is to make life as difficult as possible for the unemployed. Foreigners can be told to leave or starve, but what is to be done with British-born people who, according to what are now going to be formally devised criteria, have "no genuine chance of a job." Informally, we have the answer: they are going to be forced to work, not for the national minimum wage (which would at least be reasonable) but for the inadequate benefits that they had hitherto been given while "looking for work". But workfare programmes, thus far, have been justified on the principle that they exist as a stepping stone towards proper paid employment, even though someone working a full week at a fairly intense (if unpaid) job is likely to have insufficient time and energy for useful job-hunting. No politician has yet suggested that performing state-directed labour for around a quarter of the national minimum wage is meant as an alternative to normal employment. Not yet. But perhaps the way is now open for such an admission, as the new concept of "genuine chance of employment" is tried out, initially on migrants from other EU countries. The next development in benefits conditionality might be precisely this, that after a period (perhaps two years, perhaps one, perhaps even six months) of permitted job-hunting a claimant will be subjected to a "genuine chance of employment" test, and anyone failing it will be put onto underpaid work for life. I can imagine some employers being quite enchanted by the prospect of not having to pay unskilled workers properly, or at all. Of course it will distort the labour market, taking away jobs from paid employees: but they needn't despair, because after a suitable interval they'll become eligible for workfare too. Posted by The Heresiarch at 6:07 pm Labels: Cameron, Politics, Society A genuine chance of a job 2013-03-25T18:07:00Z The Heresiarch Cameron|Politics|Society| Newer Post Older Post Home Welcome Heretics Confined by Lucifer to one of the lower circles of Hell, the Heresiarch nevertheless continues to campaign against all forms of orthodoxy. "One of the best blogs on the internet" - Paul Sims, New Humanist "Intelligent, well-argued posts that tackle lazy thinking wherever it’s found." - Shane Richmond, The Telegraph "The best writer in the UK blogosphere?" - Ambassador Charles Crawford More testimonials View my complete profile Heresiarch Twitters Follow @Heresy_Corner Archived Posts * 2013 (63) + December (1) + November (2) + October (2) + September (7) + August (6) + July (5) + June (7) + May (5) + April (6) + March (7) o Melvyn Bragg on Mary Mag: A cause for Concern o A genuine chance of a job o How Implementing Leveson threatens religious freed... o Hubris and a Woman Scorn'd: Narrative cliché in th... o Is marital coercion a feminist defence? o City bonuses pay for our schools o Nicola Edgington, mental health and the failure of... + February (7) + January (8) * 2012 (112) + December (8) + November (10) + October (9) + September (9) + August (8) + July (10) + June (11) + May (8) + April (9) + March (11) + February (8) + January (11) * 2011 (159) + December (11) + November (14) + October (13) + September (12) + August (13) + July (15) + June (13) + May (21) + April (16) + March (10) + February (4) + January (17) * 2010 (245) + December (18) + November (16) + October (20) + September (16) + August (15) + July (17) + June (23) + May (15) + April (24) + March (24) + February (28) + January (29) * 2009 (373) + December (27) + November (29) + October (33) + September (33) + August (32) + July (31) + June (31) + May (37) + April (27) + March (34) + February (29) + January (30) * 2008 (346) + December (27) + November (25) + October (30) + September (26) + August (23) + July (28) + June (27) + May (30) + April (34) + March (34) + February (32) + January (30) * 2007 (85) + December (23) + November (25) + October (22) + September (15) Popular Posts * A touch of Harry * All that Jazz * Baby P and the Facebook Furies * Bye Bye Blasphemy * Christians for Darwin * Citizenship Lessons * Death by a thousand emails * Diabolically Clever * Doing it for Charity * God v. the Feminists * Letter to the Philippians * Lord Alton's Tall Story * Nailing Palin * Nelson Mandela Overrated? * Obama Not the Antichrist: Official * Shrouding the Truth * Whipping up a storm [Shortlist+Badge.jpg] [CisionTop50Badge1.jpg] Wikio - Top Blogs - Politics [rightofcentre50.png] [top75.png] Top Websites Recommend It * BBC News * Boing Boing * Guardian * New York Times * Richard Dawkins Foundation * The Register Site Meter [sticker.gif] Original material, header and unique template elements © 2007-2010 Heresy Corner, all rights reserved. In the case of guest posts, copyright remains with the original author. Articles may not be republished in full or in bulk without permission. Limited extracts may be quoted with attribution and link. #Biased BBC » Feed Biased BBC » Comments Feed Biased BBC » The BBC And Immigration…The Benefits ‘Soft Touch’ Comments Feed BlowBack The Race Card Biased BBC Skip to content * Home * Editorial Contact * Site FAQs * Technical Contact * In Their Own Words * In Their Own Tweets « BlowBack The Race Card » The BBC And Immigration…The Benefits ‘Soft Touch’ By Alan | October 20, 2013 - 7:31 am | BBC bias Saturday morning and Justin Webb announced (08:54) that ‘You can’t consider London ‘English’‘ in a discussion about what constitutes Englishness. So the capital of England is no longer ‘English’ by race or culture. But the BBC, Mark Easton in particular, thinks immigration is a good thing….and is prepared to be economical with the truth to defend that position. The BBC’s reaction to an EU report on migration to the UK was slow and when it eventually came up with something it was designed to play down the effects of migration. EU study on migrants rebuffs ‘benefit tourism’ claims A European Commission study has found that jobless EU migrants make up a very small share of those claiming social benefits in EU member states. The study, carried out by a consultancy for the EU’s executive, suggests that claims about large-scale “benefit tourism” in the EU are exaggerated. This is the BBC’s favourite part of the report which it emphasised and headlined on news reports: The European Commission says EU migrants continue to make a net contribution to their host countries’ finances, by paying more in taxes than they receive in benefits. That is disingenuous. It isn’t the real picture because the BBC and the EU aren’t including housing, use of NHS services, access to police and legal services, schooling, social services and all those other indirect benefits that migrants receive living in this society…..never mind the cultural and social costs to Britain as a whole as it is forced to take these migrants without anyone asking them whether this is acceptable or not. The Telegraph notes: The EU, the consultants, the report on benefit tourists and £71m in fees The authors of an official European Commission report used to suggest that “benefits tourism” is largely a myth have received more than £70  million in consultancy fees from the European Union, The Telegraph can disclose and then examines the BBC’s reporting: Analysis: Was the BBC’s reporting of migrant issue fair and balanced? Last Monday night the BBC’s 10 O’Clock News – its most popular television news programme – broadcast a bulletin by Mark Easton, the home editor, in the wake of the publication by the European Commission (EC) of its report on migration. What the BBC said Introduction by presenter Huw Edwards: “The European Commission has found that jobless migrants from different parts of the EU make up a very small share of those claiming benefits. “The study suggests that claims about large-scale benefits tourism in the EU are exaggerated. “But the British Government still wants tougher EU rules and the Commission has asked the Government to publish any evidence it has to back up its claims. Our home editor Mark Easton reports.” What the BBC said Three Polish migrants interviewed by Easton each say they have “never met anyone” from their country coming to Britain just to claim hand-outs. One of the three unnamed interviewees says he came here in 1943. Easton: “Well, reflecting the views in this restaurant, today’s European Commission report quotes research suggesting that, actually, EU migrants are less likely to claim benefits than British citizens and describing ‘benefit tourism’ as a ‘canard’, or a myth.” Analysis The word “canard” does not appear in the 276-page document, nor does the word “myth”. What the BBC said Easton: “Three years ago the Commission asked the UK Government for evidence of benefit tourism but says ministers have failed to provide any.” Unfortunately for the incompetent or corrupt Mark Easton the BBC’s own reporting recently backed up the ‘myth’. On Friday Victoria Derbyshire spoke to Syrian migrants attempting to get to Britain...after travelling through Turkey, Italy, Germany and France…….for once the BBC was open about the reasons the migrants were making a mass move towards the UK. They were asked why they wanted to come to Britain….and told that ‘all the migrants want to come here.’ The reply was universal…for the money they would be given, free houses, jobs and ‘papers’, i.e. they would become ‘citizens’ of the UK with all the rights and benefits associated with that…and also their family will be able to come to the UK also. Why wouldn’t they stay in France? because ‘France wouldn’t treat them well.’ That is, it wouldn’t give them all those handouts and free housing. The deputy mayor of Calais said Britain was a soft touch…that it should change its rules if it wants to make it harder for migrants to come here. Though these were Syrian migrants it is a racing certainty that the same attitudes and expectations prevail amongst many other migrants attempting to ‘slip into’ the UK illegally, and amongst those who come openly as EU citizens able to claim many benefits as soon as they enter the country especially if they have children in tow. The reality on the streets is far different to the happy picture that the BBC paints of a multicultural society joyously embracing the ever increasing diversity that enriches our society…and makes us less racist….as we of course are in the BBC’s eyes. and nice irony that Dykes, the man who said the BBC was ‘hideously white’, should now be embroiled in his own bit of ‘hideously white’ controversy as he packs an FA commission with white faces (though he did try and recruit some of the, er…BAME community)….the ex-BBC man being bitten by the same ‘race card’ bullies that the BBC usually so readily gives airtime to. * * * * * Bookmark the permalink. « BlowBack The Race Card » 106 Responses to The BBC And Immigration…The Benefits ‘Soft Touch’ 1. Geoff Thomas says: October 20, 2013 at 8:51 am The BBC reporting admitted the argument that immigrants are of net benefit because generally they are more in work than British people and so contribute more, proportionately, to the tax take than British nationals. Such a notion of net benefit is easily challenged, even on its own narrow terms, because it ignores the fact that immigrants are taking jobs which ought to be done by British nationals, who then being unemployed, must receive state benefits. Naturally the BBC did not raise this obvious point. Vote 48 likes + doris says: October 20, 2013 at 10:47 am Wrong. They fill highly skilled jobs in many sectors because there are properly trained UK staff available. At the lower end, immigrants have always come in to do the jobs that Brits don’t want to do. Plus the employers don’t want to pay a decent wage so have to bring them in. Look at the growing number of stories of people being treated as slave workers and you get a feel some of the conditions at the bottom end. Vote 4 likes o Mark Thompson says: October 20, 2013 at 11:01 am I didnt know packing shelves was a skilled profession? Vote 43 likes # Stewart says: October 20, 2013 at 11:06 am ‘ do the jobs that Brits don’t want ‘ Makes you wonder how those jobs got done before the advent of mass immigration -perhaps you mean jobs that you feel are beneath you or your children Vote 36 likes @ Chris says: October 20, 2013 at 1:10 pm No. They were better paid, so people were willing to do them. Its all basic economics covered by Adam Smith. But socialist pro migration people don’t really concern themselves with reality. Vote 25 likes o johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 12:32 pm Dear Doris ‘The study — whose details were first disclosed in The Telegraph — showed that more than 600,000 “non-active” EU migrants were living in the UK at a possible cost to the NHS alone of £1.5 billion a year’. Do you have trouble understanding English, or just economics? Vote 32 likes o F*** the Beeb says: October 20, 2013 at 12:43 pm This whole “immigrants work harder/they do the jobs Brits don’t want to do” myth is so tedious, not to mention incredibly prejudiced. Most people here want to work. Vote 32 likes o johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 7:42 pm Dear Doris Please read the Telegraph report – you’ll find far from either ‘highly skilled’ or menial jobs the Eastern Europeans interviewed did pretty ordinary jobs most unemployed Brits should be having a go at, such as care worker and van driver. And there’s always an argument that you’re better in any kind of work than no work at all! (opportunity for recognition, new contacts, other openings, keeping up your CV etc etc – not rocket science, eh?) Sort your myths from your facts, then come back on here and have a proper grown-up debate. Vote 5 likes o Basileus says: October 20, 2013 at 10:58 pm They do the low paid jobs do they ? Explain why I walked into my local chemist to get my prescription, horrified by more than a dozen in there, only ONE other white face, (most African muslim women in hijabs) when I finally got served – by a white LOCAL face – she was fuming. With a very quiet voice, she seethed she had not been thanked ONCE, most couldn’t speak english, and the ONLY ONE PAYING WAS ME Vote 9 likes 2. RCE says: October 20, 2013 at 9:00 am The costs in terms of courts and policing are considerable. Check out these leading enrichers: https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/wanted/#7 Vote 37 likes 3. Albaman says: October 20, 2013 at 9:15 am Surprisingly (not) neither Alan nor GeorgeR picked up on this: “One tenth of Britain’s total expat population claim up to £23,318 in employment benefits each year from Germany. Official figures show more than 10,000 British citizens living in the country receive the benefits subsidised by the German government. Nine in ten of them have been deemed fit to work.” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2468189/Dont-mention-ze-dol e-One-tenth-Britains-expat-population-claiming-23-000-unemployment- payments-Germany-benefits-Europe-revealed.html Vote 7 likes + RCE says: October 20, 2013 at 9:31 am And your point is? Vote 33 likes + Stewart says: October 20, 2013 at 9:31 am In Germany? I wonder how many of those are British in any sense that Arthur Wellesley might recognise? Just a question you understand Vote 43 likes o Albaman says: October 20, 2013 at 9:46 am Is that Aurthur Wellesley, born in Dublin? Just a question you understand. Vote 5 likes # Stewart says: October 20, 2013 at 9:49 am But famously said when told that he was Irish “a dog born in a stable is not a horse” Just the answer you understand Vote 44 likes @ doris says: October 20, 2013 at 10:49 am Who would want to be Irish? Curious that Vance denies he’s Irish because the old racism (No blacks, Irish or dogs) still pervades this site! But what is British…it isn’t English nor was it such. Vote 6 likes - zoo keeper says: October 20, 2013 at 12:14 pm can you produce any evidence that there were once signs in windows saying “no blacks irish dogs”? you can’t because there wasnt any. Just great extreme left wing propaganda by a bunch of marxist muppets, just like you. Vote 30 likes - kev says: October 20, 2013 at 12:15 pm IFRAME: http://www.youtube.com/embed/168Veee6tWU?v ersion=3&rel=1&fs=1&showsearch=0&showinfo= 1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent Vote 7 likes - kev says: October 20, 2013 at 12:22 pm Doris = Nck Lowles How’s you’re friend comrade Delta doing? Vote 13 likes = Stewart says: October 20, 2013 at 12:44 pm IFRAME: http://www.youtube.com/embed/QN5TgItG Wlk?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&showsearch=0 &showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=tr ansparent Vote 18 likes - johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 12:40 pm Doris’s definition of racism: any argument condemning the Left’s internationalist agenda. Vote 29 likes = kev says: October 20, 2013 at 12:43 pm the left want a one world government with them running it. Vote 24 likes + Doublethinker says: October 20, 2013 at 9:37 am Well the Germans should toughen up their welfare rules just as the UK should. The BBC has lied so much to us about immigration being ‘a good thing’, that it is getting tangled up in its own web of deceit. Firstly , there has never been any democratic sanctioning of mass immigration. A point the BBC NEVER mentions. Secondly, how can having a several million unemployed Brits not be connected in part, to having imported millions of people, often young, who will work for less money. The BBC is always so concerned about the unemployment figures, particularly youth unemployment. Thirdly , if a substantial number of immigrants bring with them disease , eg TB , how can this not place a strain on the NHS , which the BBC is so ready to label as over-stretched. How can importing millions of immigrants not affect housing availability which the BBC is so concerned about. The list goes on and on but the BBC is caught up in its liberal left lies and deceit that it simply has to carry on with its obviously stupid contradictions and denials. Vote 59 likes o john in cheshire says: October 20, 2013 at 10:23 am Quite so, and if we hadn’t killed, through abortions, circa 200,000 English babies each year over the past many decades then we wouldn’t have needed a single immigrant to fill those vacancies that the socialists keep telling us there aren’t enough indigenes to fill them. Vote 22 likes # doris says: October 20, 2013 at 10:50 am Waooo!!!! Women have no right to decide on giving birth because we need to outbreed the immigrants. Logic of a mouse. Vote 10 likes @ kev says: October 20, 2013 at 12:19 pm IFRAME: http://www.youtube.com/embed/168Veee6tWU?versio n=3&rel=1&fs=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_ policy=1&wmode=transparent Vote 4 likes @ F*** the Beeb says: October 20, 2013 at 12:44 pm Better to have a mouse’s logic than no logic other than to take the opposite point in order to get attention. Vote 16 likes @ johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 8:08 pm It’s not all about women’s rights, you know, Doris. The teenagers who have had EIGHT abortions: Shocking figures show girls use ‘traumatic’ procedure as a form of contraception Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2149753 /Teenage-girls-EIGHT-abortions-let-appalling-wa y-38-000-undergo-termination-single-year.html#i xzz2iI4ko6MY And: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18249026 ‘In 2011, 68,105 women having an abortion had already had at least one termination – up from 64,303 in 2010. Vote 2 likes # exposed says: October 20, 2013 at 1:09 pm Careful, start making loathsome comments like that and Guest Who will accuse you of being a false flag (in his inimitable, incoherent fashion). Because it is unthinkable that any regular contributor to this site would write anything quite so distasteful. Vote 9 likes @ Guest Who says: October 20, 2013 at 2:19 pm Oo, luvly, a new name from the Borg box joins us! Welcome. It’s not as if there isn’t plenty of room to join the others in the human denial of service wave this miserable Sunday. But, what’s this, nothing to do with BBC Bias, more in hoping of covering up its being exposed, and so another debut solely gunning straight for other posters? Say it ain’t so! ‘will accuse you of being a false flag’ ‘Accuse’ is such a harsh word. And often deployed on what may simply be the view of another. Still, it can rally the troops, so why not? And in any case, why would I need to raise such a thing as it appears it is one you are sensitive enough to to introduce yourself unprompted. Your future sensibility-aware contributions of taste and relevance must be eagerly anticipated. Vote 12 likes o pah says: October 20, 2013 at 2:30 pm Not to mention the ‘minimum wage’ which allows employers to employ people from abroad at virtually slave levels whilst pricing out UK Nationals from the job market. Vote 7 likes + Span Ows says: October 20, 2013 at 9:42 am How do the BBC report it? Vote 6 likes + Guest Who says: October 20, 2013 at 9:42 am Albaman, a real joy to see you finding the.. Daily Mail… to be an original source of data you appear to find now serves, for your first post of the day… that again has nothing to do with what the national broadcaster too often misreports or fails to address. This rather pulls the rug from under at least one of the weekend team overnight of Borg-cyclers. Well done, you. But dark looks over the half of shandies at the lunchtime debrief one fears. One looks forward to you working through all others in your Philip Madoc notebook of naughtiness, naming names of those who haven’t mentioned something about political matters that suits you. Vote 16 likes o Albaman says: October 20, 2013 at 9:50 am “…………………. that again has nothing to do with what the national broadcaster too often misreports or fails to address.” Are you suggesting that Alan’s original comment has nothing to do with the BBC? “But dark looks over the half of shandies at the lunchtime debrief one fears.” Really? Once again you suggest I “work” alongside others and once again you have not a shred of evidence to support this very tedious assertion. Vote 7 likes # Guest Who says: October 20, 2013 at 10:14 am Your struggle with a life of tedium I can only sympathise with. Maybe a change in work or what passes for a life mission? That said, success in again seeing you prove your true aims here posing, but not answering, does entertain chez GW. Why are you not to be found when a supposedly impartial, professional broadcaster is caught with its frillies knotted ‘reporting’ all manner of things that end up costing innocents reputations and the licence fee payers yet more that does not go to programming? But in the literal sense of the word, if defence of the BBC is your role or desire, it is indeed clear that you here fail to “work” for them by any measure. Now, to Stewart’s most apposite question, ignoring tabloid press, how does the BBC report what so exercises you so? Just the answer would be good… It may even be on site by now. Go on, you know you want to. And who knows, maybe then a matter of BBC coverage at last to bring to the debate? Vote 16 likes @ doris says: October 20, 2013 at 10:52 am I can’t understand a word of this. Vote 6 likes - Stewart says: October 20, 2013 at 10:56 am Stay away from the left wing cant for a while and you’ll find your cognitive ability’s will improve. Vote 23 likes - kev says: October 20, 2013 at 12:17 pm IFRAME: http://www.youtube.com/embed/168Veee6tWU?v ersion=3&rel=1&fs=1&showsearch=0&showinfo= 1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent Vote 4 likes - F*** the Beeb says: October 20, 2013 at 12:45 pm Then get an education. There’s no ambiguity to that comment whatsoever. Vote 12 likes - Guest Who says: October 20, 2013 at 12:51 pm ‘I can’t understand a word of this. Or much of anything, evidently. Doesn’t seem to stop you making great show of this constantly, though. Noticing you and Alabaman are now both doing everything possible in support of each other not going near relevant questions, now today’s latest chicken run has crashed and burned. Vote 16 likes = Albaman says: October 20, 2013 at 12:53 pm “Noticing you and Alabaman are now both doing everything possible in support of each other not going near relevant questions………..” Yet another invalid assertion – are you on a “quota”? Vote 6 likes * Guest Who says: October 20, 2013 at 1:14 pm ‘are you on a “quota”?’ Happy to answer. Nope. Popped in for lunch. Just matching you, post for post. Difference being, I like this forum and want to be here. You seem… conflicted, at best, in why you are here and how it makes you feel. And my posts are simply in response to yours trying to steer away from discussions of BBC bias. So, how’s about you answer some posed of you, if the experience is not too ‘stunning’ for you? You really don’t need to look too far. Vote 15 likes @ Albaman says: October 20, 2013 at 11:03 am “Your struggle with a life of tedium I can only sympathise with. ” Stunning assertion from someone who does not even know me. This baseless comment sums you up very adequately. Vote 6 likes - Flawedlogic says: October 20, 2013 at 11:37 am Albaman, If you are unhappy with someone else’s opinion of you how can you then make the same baseless comment about them? In my opinion after reading many of your posts you constantly fail to provide any evidence to back up your own claims, you resort to name calling and strawman arguments, and it seems that when shown factual evidence which highlights your own fibs you resort to your favourite trick of calling the other posters liars. So actually I agree that you are a tedious little person. This opinion I have come too after reading your own body of work which unfortunately litter this site and your complete lack of ability to debate. Vote 28 likes = Albaman says: October 20, 2013 at 11:49 am Flawedlogic joins the band of bBBC regulars who resort to insults when anyone deems to challenge the “chosen few”. As he appears to take a great interest in my posts perhaps he can evidence where I have called “other posters liars”. Vote 6 likes * Guest Who says: October 20, 2013 at 1:06 pm ‘Flawedlogic joins the band of bBBC regulars*’ More like another who does not share or agree with your views and/or attempts to impose them by crashing around butting in with off topic comments, demanding answers and refusing to answer any yourself. And when you are pwned completely, again, you resort irony-free to flailing about making personal accusations to avoid being drawn back to areas that leave your paucity of argument totally exposed. ‘perhaps he can evidence’ Don’t tell ‘im, FL… he has ‘taken interest’ in you now, whipped out his notebook and you’re now on his ‘list’ too! *’We few, we happy few, we band of brothers” Few in number true, vs. an armada of BBC supporters, but a cheery bunch in the main. Certainly beats being like the po-faced miserabilists epitomised by today’s knackered Staffel. Vote 18 likes = Beez says: October 20, 2013 at 2:14 pm Weak, illogical points are the foundation of all leftists rhetoric. Vote 12 likes + johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 12:38 pm So that’s 10,000 compared with the 600,000 inactive European ‘migrants’ in the UK. Albaman Gun Aims Shoots Oh, no – just when his foot was getting better from his last ‘accident’. Vote 20 likes o Albaman says: October 20, 2013 at 12:47 pm You really need to look a bit further than a Telegraph “scare story”. http://fullfact.org/factchecks/are_there_600000_unemploye d_eu_migrants_in_the_uk-29237 Vote 4 likes # johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 12:56 pm And you need to read the ‘scare story’ properly. Where does it say ‘unemployed’? And are you suggesting that ‘inactive’ immigrants do not take money out of the economy? What about the impact on housing BBC/Labour are constantly bleating about? The NHS? Education? The whole infrastructure of the country put under the strain by all these additional people an unelected bureaucracy has forced upon us? Perhaps you are willing to pay any price to see your internationalist/EU superstate agenda succeed, but when the country descends into chaos I trust you will have the guts to put your hand up and say ‘my fault, mate’. Vote 28 likes @ Albaman says: October 20, 2013 at 1:24 pm Lets assume some future UK government decides that all “inactive” EU citizens currently in the UK have to return to their country of origin. In response all other EU member states reciprocate and demand that “inactive” UK residents return to the UK. Based on 2008 figures this would see a not insignificant proportion of the 350,000 UK citizens in Spain having to return to the UK. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFP UB/KS-SF-09-094/EN/KS-SF-09-094-EN.PDF Without considering the latter the Telegraph article remains a “scare story”. Vote 6 likes - pah says: October 20, 2013 at 2:36 pm So you are saying inactives come here for the weather? Vote 14 likes - johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 3:32 pm And how many of those 350,000 are retirees with their own income e.g. pensions, which they will continue to draw if they returned? – you know, mainly people who have worked most of their life in the UK? You really should think about what you write before hitting the ‘send’ key. By the way, yet again you’ve avoided answering the question. And by the way (2) if you’re an expat in Spain and can’t speak the lingo you don’t get an interpreter paid for by the taxpayer. Vote 13 likes + Andy S. says: October 20, 2013 at 8:17 pm 10,000 Brits in Germany claiming benefits would, I think, cost far less to the German taxpayer than 600,000 migrants from the E.U. cost us. Vote 5 likes + Basileus says: October 20, 2013 at 11:02 pm Groping for excuses for NINE TENTHS of the third world immigrants living UNINVITED on benefits in Britain. People like you are as big a problem as THEY are. Let me have a wild guess – you work for a publicly funded area ? Council most likely, but right up to BBC – where the corrupts get their mates and same sex lovers comfortable jobs lecturing the rest of us and ranting “homophobia” when it wasn’t even part of the discussion, eh ? Every bit as fascist as those you rant against Vote 3 likes 4. doris says: October 20, 2013 at 10:40 am Alan doesn’t seem to do much research. Indeed London is not an English city nor has it been for a long time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_London But let’s not get facts in the way of another groundless rant. Vote 6 likes + Stewart says: October 20, 2013 at 10:52 am A long time? since the last labour government you mean, based on your own evidence. control the past control the future Vote 30 likes o F*** the Beeb says: October 20, 2013 at 12:46 pm Nothing like someone contradicting their own invalid opinions with their own sources. The trolls really are out in force today. Vote 22 likes + johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 7:10 pm Have you got an Atlas, Doris? Last time I looked London was, in fact, situated fairly and squarely in the beacon to democracy, openness, fairness and tolerance that is England. Also it is still governed from England, and has an English mayor. Despite your wish for every city and borough up and down the country to be more like Newham than the New Forest, I’m afraid England and its culture very much prevails despite yours and your comrades’ undemocratic efforts to destroy everything good that we stand for and replace it with attitudes, customs and laws from some of the most primitive and inhumane cultures on this earth. So, rather than sweat your tiny little bollocks off trying to destroy what is good, go forth into the world and try to change what is bad. There are plenty of places to choose from (Syria, Iraq, Iran, Zimbabwe, Somalia, Nigeria, North Korea……) Toodle pip, old chap! Vote 8 likes + johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 7:33 pm Dear Doris A tired old myth you and your fellow England-haters repeatedly parrot: ‘Britain is a nation of immigrants’. More people have now migrated to the UK in a single year (2010) than did so in the entire period from 1066 to 1950, excluding wartime. In fact, in the nearly 900 years between 1066 and 1950 just a quarter of a million people migrated to what is now the UK, mainly Jews and Huguenots, excluding the Irish of course who were for a long period a part of the same country. http://www.migrationwatchuk.co.uk/briefingPaper/document/269 Vote 8 likes 5. Not a racist says: October 20, 2013 at 10:44 am I disagree with Justin Webb on most things. However, I used to live in London and he’s right to say that it isn’t English anymore. Nor is it British. It’s a foreign country. There are very few of the original inhabitants left there, except maybe in a few middle class enclaves. If New Labour had been honest about their plans to institute the biggest mass immigration for over a thousand years they’d never have been elected. At least the BBC is finally telling the truth about it. Now that its too late to undo it. Vote 39 likes + doris says: October 20, 2013 at 10:54 am You may not have noticed but the capital cities of the world are now very cosmopolitan. Look at the mix of people murdered in a shopping mall in Kenya. From all four corners of the world. Go to any major city in the world and the is now great diversity as people travel and move and work and fall in love and stay. What’s wrong with it? Vote 6 likes o Stewart says: October 20, 2013 at 10:59 am Everything Vote 35 likes o F*** the Beeb says: October 20, 2013 at 12:47 pm You think ‘diversity’ is only possible with state-enforced racial and ethnic mixing. Speaks volumes for the contempt you have for the British people. Vote 32 likes # Chris says: October 20, 2013 at 1:12 pm Indeed. Its comparable to the Khmer rouge amd Nazi Aryanism. The second you allow politicians to determine racial mix and ethnic make up – you cross the line. Vote 18 likes o Alan Larocka says: October 21, 2013 at 10:11 am I wouldn’t fall in love with a place where I could be shot in a shopping mall with my kids by some muslim idiots. Vote 3 likes + Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says: October 20, 2013 at 11:49 am Indeed, the only reason that the 2012 Olympics came to London is because the bid committee kept emphasising that London wasn’t British. Vote 26 likes o doris says: October 20, 2013 at 1:20 pm Wasn’t British? What games were you watching? Or are you one those sad men who hated the VERSION of Britain on display as you are no longer part of it? Union jacks dominated the proceedings because for a change the racists had lost the argument and flag could represent us all. Vote 7 likes # Demon says: October 20, 2013 at 3:43 pm The Union Flag always represented us all. It was only you left-wing fascists that tried to makee out it didn’t. You are trying to do the same for the Cross of St., George. You are such bigots. Vote 21 likes 6. George R says: October 20, 2013 at 11:34 am Continual BBC-NUJ bias for mass immigration into U.K. Even in its newspaper review for Sunday, Beeboids ignore the ‘Sunday Telegraph’s (£) main front page report on Immigration (and BBC bias), http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/viewer.aspx Instead, Beeboids go with the ‘Telegraph’s secondary story about high-cost ‘green’ agenda:- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24599964 Vote 17 likes + George R says: October 20, 2013 at 11:39 am Beeboid’s political bias in its pro-immigration propaganda:- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?pageOffset=&pageSi ze=&sel=site&searchPhrase=bbc+bias+on+immigration Vote 15 likes + Stewart says: October 20, 2013 at 11:41 am The report on the confrontation between police and native protesters in New Brunswick is very interesting but what happened to the link to the Telegraph? Vote 3 likes 7. Beeboidal says: October 20, 2013 at 11:44 am Accordng to the BBC’s Mark Easton Another figure quoted is that £1.5 billion of NHS spending goes on workless EU migrants. The Commission says this represents as little as 0.7 per cent of health service spending and EU workers contribute more into the UK economy than they take out. Mark chooses not to tell us that this 0.7% is an estimate and that the EU also estimate that it could be as much as 1.1%. According to my calculations, £1.5 billion represents 1.44% of the NHS budget for the relevant year (2012), or 1.38% if you include an additional capital spend of £4.5 billion. I think EU might be cheating here, including both NHS and private sector health spending in the total healthcare spending figure. Even so, I can’t see how they arrived at the low estimate of 0.7%. Vote 15 likes + doris says: October 20, 2013 at 1:18 pm The actual number on jobseekers is 60000. The rest are retired, students or spouses who still have to register their presence. How many similarly jobless people of British origin live in France or Spain who are retired etc? And use local services. Send them all back then? Do you want 100000 geriatrics to turn up next week in the UK? Be careful what you wish for. Vote 6 likes o Beeboidal says: October 20, 2013 at 1:44 pm Thanks for the strawman. Now perhaps you can offer a comment on what I did write about – the accuracy of Mark Easton’s reporting. Vote 18 likes o johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 3:37 pm Think about what you write, Doris. Those expats in France, mainly retirees, are living off their own income which they earned from a full working life in the UK, unlike the ‘inactives’ of mainly Eastern European extraction living here on Treasure Island and enjoying everything the country can offer for absolute zilch. Vote 11 likes # Beeboidal says: October 20, 2013 at 4:47 pm Not only that, JTF, a pensioner can get a Form S1. Armed with this, they can get their healthcare costs paid in the EU country in which they reside – paid by the NHS. A pensioner would be stupid not to do this, but do they do it? Well, the very same EU report shows us that the estimates of the cost of EU ‘non-actives’ to their healthcare budgets is 0.2% for Spain and 0%* for France (same figures for both upper and lower estimates). So it is likely that in very large part we are already covering the healthcare costs of our pensioners in these two countries. * Yes, that is correct – 0% the report says. How the French, and some others, achieve this I don’t know. It’s certainly something Mark Easton wasn’t going to explain to me. Vote 5 likes 8. John Anderson says: October 20, 2013 at 12:48 pm People here have constructed lists of the BBC’s worst “comedians”. How about the BBC’s worst “reporters”. The people who you know will be lying through their teeth, twisting the story, as soon as they come on. The ones who have proved themselves time after time after time to be totally untrustworthy as a source of unvarnished news. Mark Easton is way up there – and so is Roger Harrabin. And Mark Mardell. Any more ? Vote 20 likes + George R says: October 20, 2013 at 1:04 pm Dominic Casciani. Lyse Doucet. Vote 13 likes o George R says: October 20, 2013 at 1:13 pm Norman Smith. Mishal Husain. Barbara Plett. Vote 16 likes o chrisH says: October 20, 2013 at 4:56 pm Lyse Doucet seconded…and a lifetimes tossing achievement award for Laurie Taylor and his son Matthew…the Brian and Nigel Clough of sociology.albeit without a prize…ever! Vote 4 likes + John Anderson says: October 20, 2013 at 1:26 pm Oh Lord – I forgot Jeremy Bowen. Vote 16 likes + John Anderson says: October 20, 2013 at 1:36 pm “Framing the news” is the insidious technique they often use – to twist and distort. (But some of them just lie deliberately and directly.) So it could be the “Hall of Frame” ? Vote 14 likes 9. F*** the Beeb says: October 20, 2013 at 12:51 pm By the way, ‘doris’ is just Conspiracy Theory Central, Maurice, The Men In White Coats etc. using yet another screenname to try and make it look like his vapid, baseless comments have more support than they actually do. And yet he doesn’t even bother to change his typeset even slightly or choose any kind of different phraseology (he always makes sure to say “why let facts get in the way” among other clues). It’s pathetic how desperate he is to try and get attention from people he claims not to respect. Vote 22 likes + doris says: October 20, 2013 at 1:11 pm By the way, ‘doris’ is just Conspiracy Theory Central, Maurice, The Men In White Coats etc. using yet another screenname to try and make it look like his vapid, baseless comments have more support than they actually do. Wrong on every point but it’s an old tactic. How many other names do you have other than utterly offensive childish one? And yet he doesn’t even bother to change his typeset even slightly or choose any kind of different phraseology How do you change your typeset? Doh. Surprised you know the word phraseology. BTW not letting facts getting in the way is a pretty common phrase just like I’m not a racist but…. which about 50% of the posters have employed, most notoriously Alan and David Vance. Does that mean they are one and same. Clearly on your logic it does. Oh, and I don’t respect racists, ultra-nationalists, misogynists, bigots or fascist dipsticks but I do enjoy showing up their inanities! Bit of fun at the weekend on a rainy day. Vote 6 likes o Stewart says: October 20, 2013 at 1:44 pm “Oh, and I don’t respect racists, ultra-nationalists, misogynists, bigots or fascist dipsticks” So every one that doesn’t share your pseudo-Marxist world view or resents having demographic change forced upon them against their expressed will Vote 28 likes # Demon says: October 20, 2013 at 3:18 pm He/she has just condemned virtually the whole of the BBC, the Islamists, the UAF, Galloway, Lauren Booth etc. Strange, I thought he/she was supporting them. Vote 16 likes @ johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 8:03 pm Doris is an irony-free zone. Vote 4 likes o Andy S. says: October 20, 2013 at 8:25 pm Doris, or whatever else you choose to call yourself on subsequent posts, STICK YOUR RACISM UP YOUR FUNDAMENTAL ORIFICE!!!!! Those well worn and overused accusations are the last refuge of a bigoted leftie who knows he/she has just lost the argument. Vote 9 likes 10. Frank Words says: October 20, 2013 at 1:17 pm “London is not an English city” My atlas be out of date then because it certainly seems to be in England according to the 2012 edition. Vote 14 likes 11. George R says: October 20, 2013 at 1:24 pm Not for INBBC to report?:- “Britain: Muslim Polygamists to Get More Welfare Benefits” by Soeren Kern (2012). http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3234/muslim-polygamists-welfare-b enefits Vote 12 likes + George R says: October 20, 2013 at 1:30 pm “London is no longer an English city and that’s how it got the Olympics, says John Cleese” (2011). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2032956/John-Cleese-Lo ndon-longer-English-city-thats-got-2012-Olympics.html Vote 13 likes o George R says: October 20, 2013 at 1:54 pm “600,000 move out in decade of ‘white flight’ from London: White Britons are now in minority in the capital. “Census figures show that 620,000 white Britons left the capital in a decade. “White Britons are the minority in London for the first time. “They make up 45 per cent of London’s population, with Asians being the second largest group.” By JACK DOYLE. (Feb 2013). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2281941/600-000-d ecade-white-flight-London-White-Britons-minority-capital. html Vote 18 likes 12. George R says: October 20, 2013 at 2:05 pm “The Islamic future of Britain. “Britain is in denial. If population trends continue, by the year 2050, Britain will be a majority Muslim nation.” By Vincent Cooper. (June, 2013). http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3770/the_islamic_future_of_br itain Vote 15 likes + chrisH says: October 20, 2013 at 9:09 pm Really good article this…a must read I`d say. Vote 3 likes 13. Umbongo says: October 20, 2013 at 3:02 pm Just to observe that the BBC canteen contingent has successfully diverted this thread – as was, I suspect, its sole reason for posting comments – from Alan’s retailing of the Telegraph’s open and shut case concerning BBC bias. Not one of the canteeneer’s comments contradicted the Telegraph’s/Alan’s chapter and verse evidence on this one. All we got was an, apparently, concerted effort to obscure the fact that the BBC was caught bang to rights here. The BBC official response, which was set out in the original article in this morning’s Telegraph, was pathetic in its weakness and ineffectiveness: a weakness and ineffectiveness mirrored by its employees’ contributions to this thread. Vote 24 likes + Guest Who says: October 20, 2013 at 3:23 pm ‘Asked to reply to a series of detailed questions about its bulletin, a BBC spokeswoman said: “Our coverage of this report was fair, balanced and impartial.’ Well, if she says so. But often that is not enough for some, eh, guys? It is also intriguing that the BBC seems almost unique in being accorded the useful case closer of having un-named spokespeople whose views, doubtless, also ‘do not reflect the views of the corporation’. But this would obviously be impossible to challenge further as even staff representative names seem their unique ‘little secret’ too. Vote 15 likes + John Anderson says: October 20, 2013 at 4:20 pm I had posted a link to the Telegraph stories early this morning in the Open Thread – because the Telegraph gave a line-by-line fisking analysis of Easton’s deliberate mis-reporting. You can bet there is no-one in BBC management putting the weaselly Easton on the mat – “Why was your reporting so warped ? – the Telegraph has torn it to shreds.” Nope. Because any criticism from the Telegraph is axiomatically wrong, BBC “reporters” can do no wrong. Even if their report gets thrashed by the lead story of a major UK newspaper, there won’t even be a slap over the wrist. Just the usual a kneejerk defence – of a jerk “reporter”. Vote 15 likes o johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 7:23 pm Well said, JA and Umbongo. If you read the Telegraph’s analysis of what was being said in the report and by the politicians vs how the BBC chose to interpret it, it’s pretty clear the BBC put its own spin on things to some fine tune. Not so much clumsy misinterpretation, more downright misrepresentation to fit an agenda. And that was leaving aside the biased slant of the interviews and time afforded to the two sides of the argument. A lesson in good journalism from the Telegraph today for those grubby, arrogant, socialist hacks at the BBC. Vote 9 likes 14. johnnythefish says: October 20, 2013 at 3:42 pm Funny how the Defenders of The Indefensible have flocked here today, as though primed to expect something. In all their left wing, economically-illiterate glory they prove with their unequivocal support of everything BBC that it truly has a leftist bias. LLDD (Lefty Logic Deficit Disorder) – a sadly incurable disease. Vote 11 likes + Stewart says: October 20, 2013 at 4:08 pm I think it simply that multiculturalism is one of the most sacred constructs of their pseudo-religion , to question immigration and especially the BBC’s reporting of it , is to attack that. Also it gives them a chance to fling around words like ‘bigot’ and ‘racist’ like chimps with their faeces. Vote 15 likes o Dysgwr_Cymraeg says: October 20, 2013 at 7:55 pm I say old chap, cant have monkey jokes ya know! Vote 6 likes 15. Framer says: October 20, 2013 at 9:07 pm It may not be too late to go out and get a copy of the Sunday Telegraph’s magnificent journalism today, not to mention its editorial on BBC Bias. It has six or seven pages on the report on the 600,000 unemployed (‘economically inactive’) EU migrants and a brutal dissection of Mark Easton’s despicable reporting on the BBC’s 10 O’Clock News. Another subject of investigation is the overly well-paid BBC go-to ‘expert’ on immigration Jonathan Portes. Easton is so overtly and ceaselessly biased always exuding complacency and laziness. Buy it now. I have never its like before. Something must be happening out there. The unsayable is being said. The BBC must be actually worrying about its charter renewal. The campaign must be for a licence reduction to £100 and an end to their destruction of the local and national press with their news websites. Vote 7 likes + Guest Who says: October 21, 2013 at 8:23 am “The campaign must be for a licence reduction to £100 ” — While there is much to applaud in what you write, this seems… ‘modest’… in ambition, possibly? Such a level will serve only to enable senior management to sustain all that is wrong with the status quo but provide excuses to cut services, such as they are, on the back of continued compelled funding no matter what. Vote 1 likes 16. Dave s says: October 21, 2013 at 10:48 am It has probably already been said but needs reiterating. If any area of a once homogenous nation ceases to be lived in by the indigenous inhabitants in a majority it becomes something other than an integral part of that nation. Maybe better maybe worse but it becomes different. Such a situation is fast approaching in London. A city state in the making with is losing contact with the shires. In my small shire town there are very many people of all ages who have never been to London and have no desire to go. No historical precedent anywhere gives cause for optimism . Human nature is unchanging and we have every reason to be wary. Liberal fantasists who wish the world to be as they desire have played a dangerous game with an ancient nation. Vote 3 likes 17. Philip says: October 21, 2013 at 5:44 pm In that TELEGRAPH (19/10/13) article we learn that the BBC (and Guradian) were paid to endorse the EU Commisioners report on immigration. How odd is that ? The EU report costing 71 million pounds (for just 276 pages), will allow more freedom for migrants to visit the UK as a planned EU legal challenge). ‘The analysis was written by two private consultancies and published last week by the office of Laszlo Andor, the European Commissioner in charge of employment and social affairs. Mr Andor, a socialist, is bringing a legal action through the European Court of Justice against the Government for allegedly discriminating against EU migrants over their rights to claim social security benefits.’ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10391164/The-EU-the-consultants-the -report-on-benefit-tourists-and-71m-in-fees.html *The Telegraph reported that the NHS of non-active EU migrants is estimated at (just) £1.5 billion. i.e. BBC costs 3Bn a year. As of March 2011 the UK national debt for every household was £1900 per year just to pay off debt interest, (the full debt burden on every single person in the UK was £14,814 each and increasing). Now in October 2013: We owe £19,135* for every man, woman and child in the country (or more than £42,322 for every person in employment). That is already over 900 billion of debt that we can never pay off. The benefit system of EU ‘rights’ will cripple the country and the BBC is involved in yet more EU propaganda playing down any concern about more EU regulation ‘rights-for all’ to come to the UK unhindered until collapse. *http://www.debtbombshell.com/ Yet the BBC always pushes for more integration, no matter what the cost, no matter what the debt to push for the shangri-la socialist republic of Europe when the BBC already has condemned Russia as right wing (gay rights). Was it not Trotsky that said that the western economies must fail to bring about their new communist utopia. Are we there yet, surely we are by now? Vote 1 likes * Search B-BBC Search______________ OK * Archives + January 2014 (26) + December 2013 (71) + November 2013 (121) + October 2013 (87) + September 2013 (91) + August 2013 (83) + July 2013 (111) + June 2013 (61) + May 2013 (102) + April 2013 (90) + March 2013 (106) + February 2013 (83) + January 2013 (86) + December 2012 (66) + November 2012 (127) + October 2012 (98) + September 2012 (110) + August 2012 (107) + July 2012 (151) + June 2012 (122) + May 2012 (151) + April 2012 (105) + March 2012 (111) + February 2012 (102) + January 2012 (110) + December 2011 (106) + November 2011 (131) + October 2011 (131) + September 2011 (121) + August 2011 (140) + July 2011 (138) + June 2011 (105) + May 2011 (100) + April 2011 (77) + March 2011 (124) + February 2011 (85) + January 2011 (117) + December 2010 (94) + November 2010 (105) + October 2010 (144) + September 2010 (147) + August 2010 (153) + July 2010 (128) + June 2010 (105) + May 2010 (100) + April 2010 (83) + March 2010 (103) + February 2010 (103) + January 2010 (116) + December 2009 (118) + November 2009 (123) + October 2009 (131) + September 2009 (154) + August 2009 (135) + July 2009 (111) + June 2009 (97) + May 2009 (114) + April 2009 (101) + March 2009 (110) + February 2009 (107) + January 2009 (116) + December 2008 (75) + November 2008 (85) + October 2008 (131) + September 2008 (112) + August 2008 (70) + July 2008 (74) + June 2008 (95) + May 2008 (60) + April 2008 (55) + March 2008 (54) + February 2008 (61) + January 2008 (31) + December 2007 (18) + November 2007 (32) + October 2007 (60) + September 2007 (74) + August 2007 (61) + July 2007 (51) + June 2007 (21) + May 2007 (20) + April 2007 (24) + March 2007 (15) + February 2007 (24) + January 2007 (53) + December 2006 (20) + November 2006 (38) + October 2006 (47) + September 2006 (35) + August 2006 (44) + July 2006 (36) + June 2006 (41) + May 2006 (28) + April 2006 (18) + March 2006 (25) + February 2006 (35) + January 2006 (28) + December 2005 (66) + November 2005 (28) + October 2005 (39) + September 2005 (36) + August 2005 (19) + July 2005 (23) + June 2005 (21) + May 2005 (30) + April 2005 (35) + March 2005 (36) + February 2005 (36) + January 2005 (42) + December 2004 (14) + November 2004 (33) + October 2004 (21) + September 2004 (39) + August 2004 (24) + July 2004 (32) + June 2004 (27) + May 2004 (15) + April 2004 (30) + March 2004 (39) + February 2004 (32) + January 2004 (51) + December 2003 (49) + November 2003 (43) + October 2003 (34) + September 2003 (38) * Recent Posts + Worst Storm For Hundreds Of Years + Harrabin’s Green Bandwagon + Harrabin’s Climate Spin…or is that ‘Vortex’ + MONDAY OPEN THREAD! + Cold Discomfort + Voyage Of The Damned Fools + The BBC, Still Selling Us A Lie On Immigration + The Truth About Immigration From The BBC? + Not So Minor Miner Facts + Did The BBC Help Thatcher Crush The Miners In ’84? * Recent Comments 1. “Slightly OT: Seen elsewhere; Scotland's coast is being battered, is there nothing they won't deep-fry? ” feargal the cat on Worst Storm For Hundreds Of Years 2. “or Mao, or the so soon forgotten Pol Pot, or Armenia, Ghenghis Khan etc etc. Has anyone died in Gitmo …” flexdream on MONDAY OPEN THREAD! 3. “BBC's Sherlock attacks Boris Johnson as ‘dithering’ and ‘self-interested’ - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/10552826/BBCs-Sh erlock-attacks-Boris-Johnson-as-dithering-and-self-interested. html ” Jeff Waters on MONDAY OPEN THREAD! 4. “1362? Certainly Dimbleby was around then. ” ember2013 on Worst Storm For Hundreds Of Years 5. “Are you serious or have just omitted to take your medication. ” John fox on Did The BBC Help Thatcher Crush The Miners In ’84? 6. “It's a religion. Deeply religious people see God (or the gods or the spirits, or energy or whatever you want …” David Preiser (USA) on Harrabin’s Climate Spin…or is that ‘Vortex’ 7. “More censored Beeboid headlines on 'fracking':- 1.) BBC- "Flare 'fired at police helicopter' near Salford protest camp" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-25622863 2.) 'Daily Mail'- "Police raid anti-fracking protest …” George R on MONDAY OPEN THREAD! * [2.gif] [5.gif] [5.gif] [5.gif] [4.gif] [3.gif] [0.gif] [8.gif] * Biased-BBC Twitter Tweets by @BiasedBBCblog * Categories agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. Uncategorized USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections Biased BBC | Mantra Theme by Cryout Creations | Powered by WordPress. * follow: follow: * RSS RSS [2.gif] [5.gif] [5.gif] [5.gif] [4.gif] [3.gif] [0.gif] [8.gif] Send to Email Address ____________________ Your Name ____________________ Your Email Address ____________________ loading Send Email Cancel Post was not sent - check your email addresses! Email check failed, please try again Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email. #RSS 2.0 RSS .92 Atom 0.3 Liberal Conspiracy » Ed Miliband: ‘We didn’t get immigration right’ Comments Feed “F*cking get out of here” – BNPers intimidating people How politics always under-estimates support for left-wing views Liberal Conspiracy Twitter Facebook LC by Email By RSS ____________________ Go! Liberal Conspiracy ABOUT CONTACT CONTRIBUTE FAQs ARCHIVES Ed Miliband: ‘We didn’t get immigration right’ by Sunny Hundal 8:15 am - March 6th 2013 Tweet IFRAME: //www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http://liberalconspiracy.org/2 013/03/06/ed-miliband-we-didnt-get-immigration-right-in-government/&sen d=false&layout=button_count&width=150&show_faces=false&action=recommend &colorscheme=light&font=arial&height=21&appId=135787006459018 Share on Tumblr IFRAME: http://www.youtube.com/embed/vDELSPXMwIY The Labour party is to air a party political broadcast (above) tonight dedicated solely to tackling the thorny issue of immigration. The PPB will precede a speech tomorrow by the shadow home secetary Yvette Cooper, who will give a speech with more specifics on what a Labour party would go on immigration if in government. Miliband will talk about how Britain’s diversity is a source of our great strength as a country, but that migration needs to work for all and not just for some. In the broadcast, Ed Miliband will say: - Labour were wrong in the past to dismiss people’s concerns about immigration; - Low-skill migration is too high and we need to bring it down; - One Nation Labour would make English-language teaching a priority. In the broadcast, Ed Miliband says: I’m going to tell people what I believe. And I believe that diversity is good for Britain. But it’s got to be made to work for all and not just for some. And that means everybody taking responsibility, everybody playing their part and contributing to the country. That is what One Nation is all about, and that’s the Britain I want to build. The Party Political Broadcast will air on Wednesday night in England only, on BBC2 (17:55), ITV1 (18:25) and BBC1 (18:55). Tweet Share on Tumblr submit to reddit About the author Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF. · Other posts by Sunny Hundal IFRAME: http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/follow_button.html?show_screen_name =false&show_count=true&screen_name=sunny_hundal Story Filed Under: Immigration ,News Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time. Reader comments 8:34 am, March 6, 2013 1. cjcj Racist! 8:51 am, March 6, 2013 2. BenM @1 Framing immigration the way tabloids do is racist. 8:55 am, March 6, 2013 3. Cylux Under One Nation, how will we deal with those recalcitrants who choose to speak another language other than English? 8:58 am, March 6, 2013 4. Chris Unbelievable. Instead of fighting racism and giving those who hate racism a party to vote for, Labour is going to to try to split the bigot vote. Milliband is an utter disaster. 9:12 am, March 6, 2013 5. Jack C It’s a step in the right direction, but a little short on detail surely? There was one reference to “proper management”, but only as an aside. What matters is ensuring that we have the infrastructure to cope with planned immigration levels, and this is where the Labour government failed so badly. I’d like to hear more about the mechanics and less fluff about diversity. 9:28 am, March 6, 2013 6. Jack C Chris, The point surely is that better management would lead to lower levels of resentment, thus lower levels of racism. It’s the difference between practical action in pursuit of a stated aim, and simply saying “look at me, ain’t I wonderful”. Most people are NOT racists, so you may be a little less special than you think. The broadcast is a little dog-whistly, it has to be said, but only a little. 9:31 am, March 6, 2013 7. Tim J I’m going to tell people what I believe. And I believe… I hate this verbal tic so much. “I’ll tell you what I think. I think…”; “What I say is this, I say…”. Drives me round the bend. 9:35 am, March 6, 2013 8. Chris @Jack C “The point surely is that better management would lead to lower levels of resentment, thus lower levels of racism.” This could not be further from the truth. Racism is not justified and making out that you are managing your way to lower levels of resentment is accepting the entirely fabricated case put forward by racists. It’s striking in Britain that the areas where people are most likely to say that they have ‘concerns’ about immigration are those in which there are the fewest immigrants, even using the ridiculous language which defines Europeans who have moved house as ‘immigrants’. Free movement of labour in the EU has helped bolster our economy and has also created marvellous opportunities for British people to live and work in other EU countries. There is no case against except on motivated purely by racism. Incidentally, Labour’s belief that it has to pander to racists to get working class votes demonstrates graphically how little understanding Labour has for the British working class. Labour thinks working class people are bigots. 9:37 am, March 6, 2013 9. Chris Naden Chris @4: Labour already has a considerable and entrenched bigot vote. Mrs. Duffy was a Labour supporter. This is why the Sun and the Daily Mail agree on immigration issues, using them as a dog-whistle for xenophobia and closeted racism. Jack @6: That could only be true if you bought the idea that very high levels of immigration are the reason for the bigotry. Net immigration could be negative and we’d still here calls for less of it. 9:37 am, March 6, 2013 10. Chris Naden /gah/ here = hear. D’oh. 9:43 am, March 6, 2013 11. damon Weasel words and spin from the Labour party as usual. None of the main political parties in Britain can do much better. Is he saying that there are a lot of people now living in the UK who were allowed to migrate here, who should really have been kept out? Who exactly is he talking about, or are we just meant to make our own guesses as to who these people might be? The African population mushroomed from quite little to what it is today in a couple of decades. Does he mean them? All the people from Nigeria and places like Ghana? They wern’t asylum seekers so they obviously got permission another way. On what grounds I’ve never been quite sure. Or does he mean all the overseas spouses from the Indian subcontinent? Those numbers were about 17,000 a year the last time I checked. Quite a lot. Anyway, I know the answer – Ed will say nothing of the sort, as the whole issue is one of management and spin. It can’t really be any other way really. 9:49 am, March 6, 2013 12. DtP From Ed ‘And that means everybody taking responsibility, everybody playing their part and contributing to the country. That is what One Nation is all about, and that’s the Britain I want to build.’ I’m not completely sure that means anything at all – it’s just filler. I don’t think everybody’s responsible for migration – sure, make your neighbours feel welcome, say hello and stuff, maybe wander over with a bottle of vino or tell them where the local tip is but other than that, i’ve got no part to play. What an odd thing to say. Is this Baldwin’s work? If so, it’s not very structured. 9:57 am, March 6, 2013 13. Jack C Chris & Chris N: I don’t presume to know what lies behind every individual bigot’s bigotry, and nor do I think it can be immediately eradicated. My point is that you can disagree with recent immigration levels without being a bigot. We know that Labour managed it badly because they under-estimated the figures badly. This led to pressures on infrastructure. It was incompetence, and that had side-effects. Had immigration being managed properly there would have been fewer associated problems. 10:08 am, March 6, 2013 14. Bob B Half of the ethnic minorities in Britain live in London, where only 45pc of the resident population is now white British. How come then those recent press reports saying schools in London have dramatically improved over the last decade and are now out-performing schools in other parts of the country? “In 1997, just 16% of its students got five GCSES at grades A-C, the league table measure then. Last year, 71% passed at least 5 GCSES at grades A*-C including English and Maths.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-21534863 “London schools have improved so rapidly over the past 10 years that even children in the city’s poorest neighbourhoods can expect to do better than the average pupil living outside the capital.” [FT 13 January 2013] 10:12 am, March 6, 2013 15. cjcj Those kids will be well behaved and motivated. Those London results bode reasonably well for the future. 10:18 am, March 6, 2013 16. Freeman “We didn’t get immigration right in government” You can say that again. Immigration, both Labour and the Conservatives has been terrible. There is nothing wrong with other countries nationals coming here. They bring skills and labour, but this HAS to be subject to a few criteria. Firstly, they have to have a job in the bag already. Secondly, there has to be a need for their skills here. If we have an over supply of nurse techs, then we don’t need more coming in. Thirdly, you can’t receive benefits until you are a UK resident (3 years I think) and have been working during that time. There is simply no justification for paying out to people who are not residents and who have made no contribution to the UK. 10:27 am, March 6, 2013 17. Bob B A recap from the BBC website in May 2011: The number of low-skilled workers born outside the UK more than doubled between 2002 and 2011, according to the Office for National Statistics. The figures show that almost 20% of low-skilled jobs are held by workers born abroad, up from 9% in 2002. Workers coming to the UK from eastern or central European countries were the biggest single factor in the rise. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13561094 10:31 am, March 6, 2013 18. Renie Anjeh The comments on this page, especially from @9 and @1, is a clear example of why the Labour Party needs to expand its voting base. Talking about immigration management is not racist, discriminating against people because of their race is racist. I remember doorknocking in Tottenham, Ilford, Corby and also Eltham. The people who have been concerned about immigration, where far from racist in fact they were very nice but concerned about jobs, wages, living standards, housing and the pressure about public services and the effect that high immigration was having on these things. Instead of calling everyone under the Sun a ‘racist’ or a ‘bigot’, address their concerns and look at the effects that some immigration is having on those concerns. Ed Miliband is spot on. 10:35 am, March 6, 2013 19. Justin If people want an honest debate they’ll stop using the word ‘immigration’ and start using the word ‘foreigners’. This is all about placating the imaginary fears of the ignorant. People don’t like foreigners and the major parties need their votes. Miliband and Cameron should admit they can’t be Prime Minister without pandering to arseholes. 10:53 am, March 6, 2013 20. Bob B Xenophobia isn’t entirely a matter of irrational prejudices – it’s a matter of expectations, language nuances and trust: As Fukuyama wrote: “people who do not trust one another will end up cooperating only under a system of formal rules and regulations, which have to be negotiated, agreed to, litigated and enforced, sometimes by coercive means. . . .Widespread distrust in a society . . . imposes a kind of tax on all forms of economic activity, a tax that high-trust societies do not have to pay.” from Francis Fukuyama: Trust; (1995) p27. It tends to get overlooked nowadays that Disraeli – PM in 1868 and 1874-80 – was the grandson of immigrants to Britain. As he wrote in his novel Tancred in 1847: London is a modern Babylon. 10:54 am, March 6, 2013 21. Cylux The number of low-skilled workers born outside the UK more than doubled between 2002 and 2011, according to the Office for National Statistics. The figures show that almost 20% of low-skilled jobs are held by workers born abroad, up from 9% in 2002. As an aside, it is not exactly uncommon now to advertise for vacancies for common low-skilled labour jobs, which will be situated in the UK, in Eastern European countries. Eastern European applicants also have less hurdles to clear in the application process too. This is presumably because you can pay them less and exploit them easier, since they might not be all that well informed on their rights as workers within the UK. @13 I don’t presume to know what lies behind every individual bigot’s bigotry, and nor do I think it can be immediately eradicated. This, basically. Who here thinks Gillian Duffy was purely motivated by a knee-jerk dislike of funny smelling sausages appearing in the local market, and not say worried that her Grandchild’s quality of life was going to eroded by immigrants being shipped in and exploited for cheap labour and thus pricing everyone with dependants in the UK out of the jobs market? We’re told that we need immigration because we have an aging population, meanwhile our youth unemployment continues to rise. Surely if the problem that immigration solves is too many retirees to workers, then you would expect to see youth unemployment falling, no? 11:03 am, March 6, 2013 22. Jack C 19: “This is all about placating the imaginary fears of the ignorant. People don’t like foreigners” And another one. All this says is: “I’m better than most people, because I don’t discriminate.” Can you see the irony? By the way, there has not yet been a defence of Labour’s management of immigration when in government. Why is that? 11:07 am, March 6, 2013 23. cjcj Eastern Europeans working here may be in low-skilled jobs, but most of them are very clearly not “low-skilled” as individuals. It’s just that our low-skilled jobs pay better than many of their higher skilled ones. So the bottom 10-20% of our workforce is competing (well, it’s no competition really) with people who are far better educated and motivated. Whom, as an employer, would you prefer? 11:28 am, March 6, 2013 24. DtP I despise poor people, I think they’re a blight upon our society and fully approve of importing highly skilled, efficient, cheap labour so that poor Brits can face a life on benefits, in transient low grade housing, churning out kids for a life of crime with no education, no opportunities and just drink & smoke themselves into an early grave. I’ll definately vote Labour, they’re great. 11:55 am, March 6, 2013 25. GO *sigh* In any other area, we on the left are the first to point to the negative consequences of allowing free markets to decide everything, and to defend a role for government in regulating or shaping markets (e.g. in labour and housing), in planning the provision of public services, etc. Yet when it comes to immigration, anyone who rejects a rabidly libertarian position according to which employers should be allowed to employ any*one* they like, any*where* they like, on any *terms* they like (including housing them in slums and paying poverty wages) – with all the implications that has for driving down wages, increasing pressure on public services, etc. – is condemned as a racist by the likes of Chris @ 4 and @ 8. On the evidence so far, Labour deserve credit for trying to shift the terms of the debate on immigration by focusing on workers’ rights, low pay, training etc. rather than race/religion. 11:56 am, March 6, 2013 26. Paul Bob B @ 14: “Half of the ethnic minorities in Britain live in London, where only 45pc of the resident population is now white British. How come then those recent press reports saying schools in London have dramatically improved over the last decade and are now out-performing schools in other parts of the country?” I acceopt it’s a rhetorical question, Bob, but I answered it here http://thoughcowardsflinch.com/2013/01/18/immigration-education-and-pro sperity-building-on-the-london-success-story/; basically, immigration has been great for London. 12:13 pm, March 6, 2013 27. Raging Leftie Too little too late. 12:22 pm, March 6, 2013 28. Bob B In the news: “BEIJING—China is losing its competitive edge as a low-cost manufacturing base, new data suggest, with makers of everything from handbags to shirts to basic electronic components relocating to cheaper locales like Southeast Asia.” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014241278873237837045782452417519697 74.html Germany has retained manufacturing for longer than other west European countries so we should ask: how come? Part of the answer is not just a matter of comparative unit labour costs or the structure and prevailing sentiments of financial markets and institutions. Germany has a competitive advantage is certain kinds of specialist machines – like printing machinery, some machine tools, bottle-labelling machines etc. My concern is that the “short-termism” of financial markets will be used as a scapegoating factor to divert attention from other issues affecting competitive edge. Design, quality and skill shortages affect competitive edge, not just unit labour costs. British companies used to design and build nuclear power stations but now we are hoping a French company (EDF) will invest to build Britain’s next nuclear power station when successive governments since WW2 poured multi-millions of taxpayers’ money into pioneering nuclear power. OTOH Britain maintains a competitive edge in designing and building grand prix racing cars. Among Britain’s more successful big industries are pharmaceuticals and defense equipment – both of which are highly regulated and both depend very largely on sales to government agencies, which doesn’t say much for all that stuff about deregulation and the stifling effect of government bureaucracy, to mention other favoured scapegoats. With the reports in the mid 1990s of the losses accumulated by Credit Lyonnais in France – the biggest bank there and state owned – I think we need to be a bit more sceptical about creating a public sector investment bank. 12:29 pm, March 6, 2013 29. Jimmy Any chance David’s still available? 12:50 pm, March 6, 2013 30. Jack C @25: Well said GO. A cynic might think that Chris and his ilk have questionable motives. Perhaps: a) They’re not really concerned about racism, they just want to advertise their own saintliness. b) Burnishing their own self-image is more important to them than the concerns of others. I hope not. 1:08 pm, March 6, 2013 31. Clemente My comment is more of an advice on a productive perspective to current immigration state of our great Britain. This will require further research to establish this advice: The level of illegal immigrants can be observed to be of great benefit to the country. There are various routes of attracting best hands (skilled/talented people)by UKBA such as the talent route, tier 1 general etc; this signifies that the country really need foreign skilled professionals. The government needs to ascertain and screen the illegal migrants because some of these migrants are quality skilled professionals the country require for its economy advancement. Thank you. 1:16 pm, March 6, 2013 32. Pal Joey The liberal European imperialists of the EU have got the working class chasing their tails in pursuit of ever lower wages and ever more meagre welfare. This is the neo-liberal wet dream in practise. Labour should never have signed up to an EU that did not guarantee full employment and a standard minimum living wage across the piece. Mass economic migration and its attendant miseries and injustices (buying workers off the shelf never having had to pay for their education or training from countries that can ill afford to lose them) is a feature of late, decadent, capitalism. It would not be a feature of socialism. Labour should pledge to renegotiate the founding treaties of the EU in accordance with socialist principles not the current neo-liberal ones that are turning european workers into itinerants and forcing privatisation of everything. 1:26 pm, March 6, 2013 33. hobson @32. Pal Joey Why on earth would Labour want to re-negotiate EU treaties in line with Socialist principles? 1:53 pm, March 6, 2013 34. GO @ 30 “A cynic might think that Chris and his ilk have questionable motives.” …just as Chris cynically assumes that anyone who talks about controlling immigration must secretly be motivated by racism. I reject both flavours of cynicism. I reckon Ed Miliband really is concerned about the exploitation of migrant workers and about the negative consequences for workers in general, and for society as a whole, of a thriving market in cheap imported labour. And I reckon Chris really is worried about racism being dressed up as ‘legitimate concerns’, and justifiably so given the history of debate over immigration in this country. I would just say to Chris: if you think these supposedly legitimate concerns are just a smokescreen for racism, don’t just call your opponents names – debunk their concerns. 1:53 pm, March 6, 2013 35. Renie Anjeh @32 – That is completely unrealistic. Firstly, the EU has done so much on the working time directive, the social chapter and many of our employers’ rights. Secondly, how on earth will the renegotiation on EU treaties in accordance to socialist principles happen – it won’t, not even Francois Hollande would support it. Thirdly, if Labour wants to try and make reform in relation to the EU then it must pledge to revisit the free movement of labour directive. Although, the Free Movement is a good idea in principle, in practice there are problems because the poorest countries in the EU lose a lot of the skilled workforce for wealthier countries and that is not fair. That also relates to the problem of immigration management. Labour should call for a minimum level of GDP before a country can use the free movement of labour. 2:20 pm, March 6, 2013 36. GO Anecdotal evidence alert. I’m one of those people living in an area with a large immigrant population who doesn’t personally feel terribly concerned about immigration. But I did find myself a bit lost for words some years ago when a friend told me how all the workers at her stepdad’s firm – they were bus drivers, I think – had been sacked and replaced by cheaper Polish workers. Maybe I could have come back with some figures about the net benefit of immigration to the economy as a whole, but that wouldn’t have changed the fact that her stepdad had been left out of work because of an influx of cheap migrant labour. Now, the problem there was not evil foreigners. It was a lack of workers’ rights/labour market regulation leading to the distortion of the market by immigrant labour. That’s just the sort of problem the Left ought to be addressing, and we can’t run scared of these issues for fear of being called racists. Again, I applaud Ed Miliband for trying to frame the debate in these terms. 3:24 pm, March 6, 2013 37. damon I had lunch at this church support centre for ”marginalized and socially excluded people” in Camborne in west Cornwall last week. I’ve been travelling about visiting these kinds of places just to see what they’re like. Anyway, in general conversation with some of the unemployed and homeless or hostel living people there, I asked about local work. It was daffodil time I was told, a big industry locally it seems …. but that ”was all Lithuanians and Polish nowadays.” They wont take on locals as they prefer the foreign labour. How true that is I have no idea. Maybe it’s just an excuse to mask their reason for being unemployed and eating free food at a church charity. I was told that after work time down at the big Tesco in town, I’d see ”loads of them” all getting some shopping after a day in the fields. It’s a hard job apparently. Lots of bending down working the rows of flowers all day. Migrant labour has had a dramatic affect on communities that used to do this kind of work seasonally. Too much work for minimal pay. The foreigners move in and out of these kinds of areas as the different harvests and seasons roll around. 4:02 pm, March 6, 2013 38. GO …just on this point about cynically ascribing racist motives to people who talk about controlling immigration: I suppose I’m inclined to do this myself when it’s a right-winger doing so. But that’s because there’s no principled free-market case to be made against the free movement of workers within a lightly-regulated international labour market. There’s no free-market objection to employers seeking a competitive advantage by hiring foreign workers to pick fruit for £4.00 an hour; or to local landlords profiting from a surge in demand by asking higher prices for poorer-quality housing. Hence I can’t think of any reason *other* than xenophobia/racism for a right-winger to worry about immigration. 4:47 pm, March 6, 2013 39. Jack C Small “c” conservatism would be one reason, though this isn’t restricted to the “right”. 6:26 pm, March 6, 2013 40. Richard W Anyone could be excused for thinking there was some sort of nationality bar on UK workers crossing the channel to seek work elsewhere. You know that single market thingy does not just work one way. Of course, that would mean getting off their backside, quitting whining and blaming other people. Obviously too much to ask because their chosen job should just appear at the end of their street. Much easier to blame foreigners than look in the mirror. We get all the myths about migrant workers because that is the way people rationalise being out-competed. It is much easier to believe migrant workers have some huge advantages than accept the truth of their own inadequacies. We constantly hear from some quarters about low pay for UK workers (not true). Pay should be higher(good) because low paid workers have valuable skills that deserve higher compensation (questionable). We can just wish it into being because that would be fair. The abstract concept of fairness usually defined by the person making the case. Well if pay is so low and skills are so high then obtaining higher wages elsewhere in the single market should not be a problem. Germany, Denmark, The Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden and Austria are all in the single market and not part of the troubled EZ periphery. Could it be some people are not as valuable as we are led to believe. UK businesses do not want migrant workers because they are cheaper, they want them because they are better. However, there are few votes for politicians telling the truth. 7:50 pm, March 6, 2013 41. Shatterface The way to stop immigrant labour ‘driving down wages’ is to raise and enforce the national minimum wage. Police employers before borders. 8:02 pm, March 6, 2013 42. Shatterface Anyone could be excused for thinking there was some sort of nationality bar on UK workers crossing the channel to seek work elsewhere. You know that single market thingy does not just work one way. Of course, that would mean getting off their backside, quitting whining and blaming other people. Ah, yes, the Norman Tebbit/Marcus Brigstock argument: immigration is good because the British working class are lazy cunts. 8:16 pm, March 6, 2013 43. GO @ 41 Shatterface As I understand it, that is just the direction Miliband is trying to take the debate in. Enforcement of the minimum wage is certainly one of the things Labour are talking about. So is legislation on gangmasters. I believe one of the policy proposals is precisely to ‘police’ employers by making non-payment of the minimum wage an issue for the police rather than just the HMRC. 8:28 pm, March 6, 2013 44. Chris I’m a member of the Labour Party and I disagree with everything Ed Miliband is saying. Immigration policy was one of the few things Labour actually got right from 1997-2010. 8:42 pm, March 6, 2013 45. Richard W @ 42. Shatterface Ah, yes, the single market where people do not actually move. They find absolutely nothing wrong with German cars moving across borders to their local dealership, but people moving is beyond comprehension. If people remaining statically frozen in time to the one place forever makes no sense internally, it makes no sense externally when the EU is a single market. How absurd would it sound if we tried to stop internal migration by preventing people in Birmingham moving to Manchester for work. Weird lines that we drew on maps during the 20th century does not make the attitude any more coherent. If restrictive county borders would be absurd so are national borders. 10:06 pm, March 6, 2013 46. Bob B For an alternative perspective, try this submission on the economic impact of immigration by Robert Rowthorn, professor emeritus of economics in Cambridge University, to the HoL Select Committee on Economic Affairs, session 2009/10: This submission examines these claims. It concludes that the economic consequences of large-scale immigration are mostly minor, negative or transient, that the interests of more vulnerable sections of the domestic population may well be damaged, and that any economic benefits are unlikely to bear comparison with its substantial impact on population growth. Such findings are in line with those from other developed countries. Although it does not benefit the UK population as a whole, large-scale immigration does benefit migrants, their families and sometimes their countries of origin. It can be argued that UK migration policy should take the interests of these other parties. This issue is not addressed in the present submission. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/82/ 7100902.htm 10:13 pm, March 6, 2013 47. GO @ Chris “I’m a member of the Labour Party and I disagree with everything Ed Miliband is saying.” May I suggest that you read this in order to get an idea of the sort of policy approach Labour seem to be talking about: http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/mar/05/labour-crackdown-employers-ex ploiting-migrants Something has gone desperately wrong if avowedly left-wing anti-racists end up attacking the Labour party for pursuing an immigration policy based around preventing the exploitation of foreign workers. Can’t you just agree to disagree that such exploitation sometimes has negative knock-on effects (e.g. downward pressure on other workers’ wages), and get behind the proposals themselves? “make it illegal for employers to provide unsuitable and unreasonable accommodation, including cramming migrants into small units, by making it explicit in the national minimum wage regulations” “tougher enforcement of minimum wage legislation by using the police rather than HMRC” “extend the gangmasters legislation that tackles the employment of illegal migrants by extending it to other sectors including care, construction and hospitality” 11:12 pm, March 6, 2013 48. Bob B This from the BBC website is saying that Britain’s migration figures may be little more than informed guesswork and goes on to present what data there is on annual inward and outward migration and the balance. FWIW I don’t believe that electoral sentiment has no concerns about the economic and social pressures flowing from the contribution to population growth from annual net inward migration of around 200,000 people: The population of England and Wales has risen by 3.7 million in a decade – the largest increase since records began The growth was fuelled by increased life expectancy, a rise in fertility rates and immigration http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19646459 For starters, it is widely recognised that there is a chronic shortage of social housing. 11:42 pm, March 6, 2013 49. Bob B This is one of the social consequences of population growth pressures in London: Something quite remarkable happened in London in the first decade of the new millennium. The number of white British people in the capital fell by 620,000 – equivalent to the entire population of Glasgow moving out. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21511904 Selling a house or apartment in London can bring the wherewithal to buy a better place in another urban area away from London or in the country so the pressures on housing are transferred and homes to buy elsewhere become less available for local people. 8:40 am, March 7, 2013 50. cjcj The British working class are not all “lazy cunts” though there are plenty of examples. But, to repeat myself, the reason that the Poles etc. are better is that those who come here do not come from the bottom 10-20% of the Polish workforce. 8:46 am, March 7, 2013 51. GO @ Chris again Chris Bryant was just on BBC Breakfast, and made two specific comments about Labour’s time in office: - the ‘points system’ to control low-skilled non-EU immigration was a good thing, but should have been introduced earlier - it was right to apply transitional controls on migration from Eastern Europe from 2007 onwards, but again, that should have been done earlier I wonder what you make of that as someone who thinks the last Labour government got it right on immigration? Surely if these are policies you approve of, you agree that ideally they should have been introduced earlier; while if these are policies you disapprove of, you can’t maintain that the last Labour government got everything right on immigration? Yvette Cooper, meanwhile, is pointing to the perverse outcomes that come from a simple-minded ‘crackdown’ on net migration: “Legitimate university students are included in the target even though they bring billions into Britain – and those are being squeezed. “Yet student visitor visas aren’t included – and growing abuse in that category is being ignored…The Borders Inspector has already warned this route is open to abuse for those who are coming not to study but for low-skilled work instead” That’s about right, isn’t it: a positive defence of the contribution made by genuine migrant students, together with a warning about possible abuse of a loophole? Put all that together with the policy proposals I mentioned above: “make it illegal for employers to provide unsuitable and unreasonable accommodation, including cramming migrants into small units, by making it explicit in the national minimum wage regulations” “tougher enforcement of minimum wage legislation by using the police rather than HMRC” “extend the gangmasters legislation that tackles the employment of illegal migrants by extending it to other sectors including care, construction and hospitality” - and I struggle to see just what there is to object to (so far) in terms of the policies Labour are coming forward with. We’re moving the debate in the right direction here – towards an understanding that immigration per se is not a problem, but immigration driven by an exploitative market in low-skilled labour is. 9:11 am, March 7, 2013 52. Justin @22 ‘And another one. All this says is: “I’m better than most people, because I don’t discriminate.”’ Couldn’t agree more. People who don’t discriminate are better than those who do. 10:07 am, March 7, 2013 53. Tim J People who don’t discriminate are better than those who do. Paradoxically, this is itself an act of discrimination, meaning that if you espouse it you automatically classify yourself in the latter category. 11:17 am, March 7, 2013 54. GO I just posted this link on the ‘benefits tourism’ thread, but some of it’s relevant to this discussion too: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/06/uk-benefits-eu-migr ants-what-crisis?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487 Again, a neat demonstration that a broadly positive attitude to immigration, and a robust debunking of negative myths, is perfectly consistent with the recognition of areas in which policy might be improved. 11:35 am, March 7, 2013 55. Helen Aside from a minority of entrenched racists, arguing about immigration is code for insecurities about jobs and housing. There is no doubt that London and the South east are overcrowded, with immigrants both from abroad and the the rest of the UK. This is because, thanks to govt subsidies of billions of pounds (bailouts, QE and HMRC sanctioned tax evasion/avoidance) the finance industries which form 9% of the economy and their support are the only source of employment. What we need is not “affordable” housing, ie that which gets sold to landlords and rented out at exorbitant rates, but social housing, council housing, call it what you will. And we need hundreds of thousands of them in the S.East alone. But there’s nowhere to build without wrecking the transport, water and social infrastructure. So how about having a govt that talked less about “immigrants”, most of whom come from the EU and cannot be legally prevented, and started re-balancing the economy towards the other 99% of the employment economy who are largely based outside the South east. That might ease the pressure on the South east, maybe move substantial parts of govt out of london too. Immigration is not the problem, Governmental cowardice over housing and the financial industries is 11:40 am, March 7, 2013 56. davebones I’m going to tell people what I believe. And I believe this is the funniest Party Political Broadcast I have seen for years. Since “Are you thinking what we’re thinking?” Obviously Ed is apologising to those people who were thinking that who were being accused of racism by Labour supporters at the time. My Sikh friend and I (Oim not racialist!) were across the floor laughing. 37. Damon- You don’t know if the fruit/veg picking has been taken over by foreigners? I saw a documentary about it on TV years ago. By that guy with the strange eyes who was downstairs at the Dragons Den. Before then Couriers who used to earn 500 quid a week were priced out by foreign people doing the same job for 250. It was worth it to them they could even send money back home! I would do it if I were them. And what about the building industry? Where have you been? We were laughing a lot when we saw this last night. Especially the camera which is trying to escape from being focused on Ed’s face. It goes one way, then the other… fantastic. Personally it doesn’t bother me. The more the merrier. Nothin I dislike more in the UK than towns full of Inglish people. I don’t like Tony Blair but his vision of multi racial Ingland is the same as mine. I think all these Inglish might start changing their minds when all these Romanian babes turn up too. They are smokin! Polish chicks have the blonde down but these Romanians have dark and dusky to a T! And the racist Poles who come here are shaking the soft locals up for not being militant enough against people of colour! This country is great. It is really funny. And what about British property hunters pricing locals out of their houses in Bulgaria? and mid France? and Spain? Its enough to make you racialist. Anyway, nuff from me- You have been involved in what I believe you call “Identity Politics” for a long time, what do you think about this broadcast Sunny? 12:03 pm, March 7, 2013 57. Chaise Guevara @ 53 Tim J “Paradoxically, this is itself an act of discrimination, meaning that if you espouse it you automatically classify yourself in the latter category.” Specious. From context it’s clear we’re talking about discrimination on grounds of race/religion/nationality, i.e. prejudice, which is different from judging individuals based on their actions and views even if both can be described with the same term. 8:24 pm, March 7, 2013 58. Bob B “The dilemma posed by immigration is that it actually benefits the most privileged in our society, while those who fear they will lose out – and are sometimes right – are people at the bottom.” There is a fairly well-known academic paper, often cited in the economics literature, by Donald MacDougall on: “The Benefits and Costs of Private Investment from Abroad – a theoretical approach” (Economic Record 1960). This is available online but with a pay-barrier. The paper applies impeccably orthodox neoclassic economic theory to model inward investment and concludes that, assuming unchanged terms of trade, inward investment will tend to depress the returns to capital on existing investments while improving the earnings of the other primary factors of production: labour and land. Much the same theoretical model can be adapted to analyse net inflows of labour leading to symmetrical conclusions: the net inflow of labour will tend to depress the earnings of labour while improving the earnings of the other primary factors: capital and land. Donald MacDougall took over from Sir Alec Cairncross as chief economic adviser in HM Treasury for 1969-73: in other words, he was one of Ed Balls’s predecessors. Successive British governments have sought to attract inward investment. MacDougall’s paper is presumably known to Ed Balls, Yvette Cooper and Ed Miliband, all of whom have degrees in economics. 5:24 am, March 8, 2013 59. DisgustedOfTunbridgeWells Labour were wrong in the past to dismiss people’s concerns about immigration; What? They passed five separate acts on the matter, how the fuck is that ‘dismissing people’ – allowing the terminally stupid to live in their bizarre little simulacrum won’t do them any good in the long term. They need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the reality of a globalized market, the sooner they adjust and compete the better for all. Low-skill migration is too high and we need to bring it down Migration can’t be ‘too high’ anymore than the supply of Playstations or Toyotas can be ‘too high’, as has been proven time and time again unless you’re a consistent communist and believe the allocation of labour should be centrally planned (which would mean you would also stop people from leaving, try putting that in an EDM and see what happens) then there isn’t a whole lot the state can do about the free movement of said factor of production. @40 All that. 6:48 am, March 8, 2013 60. Dislecksick Personal Musings: Reasons I like Immigration Freedom for all Cheaper when I want to clean my car I can go elsewhere and work if I want to – 2 way street Better choice of girlfriend – have only dated E European since 2004! Far, far better choice of partner, not taken over by feminist entitlement complexes, drinks less, screws around less, and accepts you for what you are, a man, without making you guilty for it, and new rules make the “she wants a greencard” racist argument redundant. Reasons against Immigration Hundred of unemployed Somalians making a council house the impossible dream. Gangs of predatory pedo’s targetting young white girls in care homes. 3rd World immigration purely happened to create political shift towards Labour – there was no economic argument to importing illiterate unskilled workers. Losing cultural identity. I am British, and I fear when I am an old man, we will be a small minority in the Islamic Republic of great Britain. I have no problem with European peoples coming here as they share our values broadly. Why on earth we invited the 3rd world over here I have no idea. The EE’s are broadly respectful and assimilate well, whereas it seems to me the others just leech the system and look for ways to exploit our youth, our generosity and just basically shaft us in every way possible. Yes, this may make me a racist, but it’s what I see every day. I would argue it’s not, because it’s a culture which gives people their values, not skin colour, but even so probably by modern definition that still makes me a racist That’s OK because that word ceases to have any meaning or effect on me any more. 7:56 am, March 8, 2013 61. Jack C @59: “Migration can’t be ‘too high’” Of course it can, and this is the crux of the matter. Just think about it: 1) Zero nett immigration would have zero impact on infrastructure, schools, hospitals, housing etc. 2) Nett immigration of 2 million per month over the next year would be calamitous. 3) Therefore, somewhere above zero, nett immigration becomes “too high”. Labour wildly under-estimated immigration from EE, causing pressures and failures in the system. It was shocking bad planning, and they’re right to reflect on that (assuming they are). 8:44 am, March 8, 2013 62. DisgustedOfTunbridgeWells No, it can’t, you’re confusing my positive statement with your normative statement. The supply of foreign labour is no different to the supply of foreign goods and capital – all are subject to the irrefutable law of supply and demand, if you can discredit that law I and the entirety of those working in economics would be extremely interested to read your work. It can be higher than you’d like it to be, but it cannot, as a positive statement of fact, be too high in the medium to long run, it is literally impossible. Incidentally your first claim about ‘zero migration’ is nonsense, this ‘ceteris paribus of the madhouse’ is indeed the crux of the matter. 9:25 am, March 8, 2013 63. Jack C You’re missing the point. Take as just one example, the administration of immigration. Because nett immigration was significantly under-estimated, the authorities were under-resourced and unable to process applications in a timely manner, or at all (as a result we’ve had to have more than one amnesty). In practical terms, nett immigration was “too high” for the system to cope. If there is a gap between the number of immigrants arriving, and the number of immigrants that can be comfortably absorbed, difficulties will arise. Oh, and my claim about “zero nett immigration” is not nonsense, it’s self-evident fact. Schools, hospitals, etc do not need to plan for an increase of zero. This is not to say that “zero nett immigration” is a good thing. You can see that surely? 10:37 am, March 8, 2013 64. DisgustedOfTunbridgeWells There is no point to miss, you’re making a value laden claim and presenting it as a positive statement with no evidence to back it up. In short your unsubstantiated opinion does not represent a point. Ironically of course you’re claiming a failure of central planning – that the state simply cannot compete with the dynamism of the market; the circular logic of which appears to be lost on you. Oh and your claim about “zero nett immigration” is nonsense. Even given “zero nett immigration” there remain a myriad of factors to be accounted for, natural population growth, internal migrations, fluctuations in the business cycle affecting tax revenue, deficit spending or lack thereof – all other things do not remain equal out of kindly convenience to the fantasy world in your head. And net is spelled with one t. 10:50 am, March 8, 2013 65. Jack C I don’t think I can simplify it any further (oh, and both “nett” and “net” are valid, though the former used to be the convention). I am indeed claiming a failure of central planning, I’m not sure why you think it’s ironic. It is a fact that Labour significantly under-estimated immigration from Eastern Europe. That’s mismanagement. And on the zero question, why are you bringing in irrelevancies? It’s this simple: School A needs to plan ahead based on projected pupil numbers. If there is no increase or decrease as a result of immigration, then the school will not be affected by immigration. Simple really. Yes, numbers will be affected by other things, but they’re not relevant. 9:59 pm, March 9, 2013 66. Just Visiting anyone who cares about having evidence based views on immigration, should read the BBC link in Bob B’s post 48. It’s scarey that in thid big data/internet driven world, that the numbers the govt depends on are based on such flimsy methods. 1:20 pm, March 11, 2013 67. jungle DisgustedofTunbridgeWells: “What? They passed five separate acts on the matter,” Good point. Indeed they did. They took the anti-migration thing very seriously, actually, and made a lot of noise about it. Predictably, however, the tabloids continued to shout “open door policy” repetitively (and always will, by the way) and so naturally people who trust the tabloids believe Labour did have such a policy. Labour seem to be admitting to having a policy that it is easily provable they never had. This is surely very unwise, even if focus groups and polls suggest apologies are in order. It may result in the Party being held responsible wholesale for the presence of unpopular ethnic minorities in the UK. Apologising for the shambolic mess that immigration related departments got themselves into (in no small part because of endlessly changing dictats from Labour politicians trying to sound tough) would be a different matter. I don’t agree with the libertarians on here that migration should be left to the free market, though. If it were (to Africa and Asia in particular) we would have rather serious problems. There would be a very intense and rapid process of free-market-driven wage levelling between Lagos, Shenzhen and Birmingham, which would, for example, create vast shanty town slums on any available wasteland or flood plain… 2:21 pm, March 13, 2013 68. DisgustedOfTunbridgeWells I don’t think I can simplify it any further (oh, and both “nett” and “net” are valid, though the former used to be the convention). There is nothing to simplify, in the worlds of Wolfgang Pauli you’re not even wrong. It’s just nonsense built atop more nonsense. If I see Dickens I’ll be sure to let him know you’re keeping the tradition alive. I am indeed claiming a failure of central planning, I’m not sure why you think it’s ironic. It is a fact that Labour significantly under-estimated immigration from Eastern Europe. Lets put aside the fact you’ve failed to provide any evidence for this ‘significant under estimation’. What is your answer to this alleged ‘failure’ of central planning? Yet more central planning; in addition to the raft of legislation (including the much vaunted points system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Points-based_immigration_system_(United_Ki ngdom) ) that according to you and just about everyone else obsessed with this stuff, has all failed. That’s mismanagement. It is not the state’s business to manage the ebb and flow of the market, unless it happens to be a communist state. The state can’t ‘mismanage’ the flow of factors any more than I can ‘mismanage’ Goldman Sachs balance sheet. School A needs to plan ahead based on projected pupil numbers. If there is no increase or decrease as a result of immigration, then the school will not be affected by immigration. Simple really. Yes, numbers will be affected by other things, but they’re not relevant. Hold on a minute, because you’ve accepted my argument there haven’t you, let us revisit your original claim. Zero nett immigration would have zero impact on infrastructure, schools, hospitals, housing etc. So you’ve gone from ‘zero impact’ which I told you was the ceteris paribus of the loony bin to, ostensibly ‘not affected as a result of net migration’ (a situation that of course, can never occur). Incidentally the ONS disagrees that internal flows are ‘not relevant’ because they spend their time projecting exactly that. A statistical release on school capacity was published on 9 January 2012 (OSR01/2012) and included local authorities’ own forecasts of future pupil numbers, based on local level information, such as inter-authority migration of pupils. http://www.education.gov.uk/researchandstatistics/datasets/a00201305/pu pil-projections-future-trends-in-pupil-number-dec2011 You should probably tell them they’re wasting their time. Fwiw, immigrants use far fewer public services than they actually pay for – http://www.ccsr.ac.uk/research/mrpd/research/EvidenceMyths.html#seven 11:07 pm, March 25, 2013 69. Mattyboy-1965 Ed Miliband: ‘We didn’t get immigration right’ No shit Sherlock?!!?? Reactions: Twitter, blogs Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time. [trans.gif] LATEST NEWS Media doesn’t realise how right-wing Britons think Cameron is News Image 35 Comments The funniest questions Twitter asked of British Gas boss today News Image 48 Comments Listen: Tommy Robinson a “great admirer” of Douglas Murray News Image 21 Comments Britons more likely to support a party committed to public ownership News Image 49 Comments Labour to ambush Tories on their links to energy lobbyists News Image 4 Comments Even Mail readers think it should be sorry for Miliband piece News Image 14 Comments Mail reporter gatecrashed Miliband memorial News Image 27 Comments A ten point plan to strengthen workers’ rights in the UK News Image 16 Comments ED Miliband: Labour will SCRAP the Bedroom Tax News Image 34 Comments Watch: UKIP’s Godfrey Bloom hits Michael Crick in the face News Image 65 Comments Astonishing graphic: how English house prices have shot up News Image 36 Comments Labour moves much closer to repealing Bedroom Tax News Image 17 Comments Watch: presenter mistakes paper stack for iPad News Image 1 Comment Remember when Lib Dems opposed Free School Meals? News Image 19 Comments EDL supporter calls for shooting at Muslims, on FB News Image 46 Comments Model Jodie Marsh attacks Co-op ban on ‘lads mags’ News Image 53 Comments ‘Labour will outlaw abusive use of zero-hour contracts’ News Image 64 Comments Shouldn’t Jim Murphy resign over Unite allegations? News Image 28 Comments Ads shows Hindu goddesses facing domestic violence News Image 12 Comments Labour MP: Ed M needs to talk to unions with “respect” News Image 5 Comments NEWS ARTICLES ARCHIVE Liberal Conspiracy is a joint effort. © Copyright 2007 - 2013. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions of use. RSS feed. Contact us. FAQs Site design by Robert Sharp and Sunny Hundal. Based on Wordpress, PHP and MySQL. Quantcast #RSS 2.0 RSS .92 Atom 0.3 Liberal Conspiracy » How the Daily Mail twisted housing statistics to blame immigrants yesterday Comments Feed Seven ways to stop the NHS bursting at the seams How one troll went from abuse to apology in minutes Liberal Conspiracy Twitter Facebook LC by Email By RSS ____________________ Go! Liberal Conspiracy ABOUT CONTACT CONTRIBUTE FAQs ARCHIVES How the Daily Mail twisted housing statistics to blame immigrants yesterday by Owen Tudor 8:53 am - July 29th 2013 Tweet IFRAME: //www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http://liberalconspiracy.org/2 013/07/29/how-the-daily-mail-twisted-housing-statistics-to-blame-immigr ants-yesterday/&send=false&layout=button_count&width=150&show_faces=fal se&action=recommend&colorscheme=light&font=arial&height=21&appId=135787 006459018 Share on Tumblr The Daily Mail have managed again to combine two of their obsessions, migration and housing. In a highly misleading article last week that suggests migrants are preventing existing residents from getting social or council housing. Luckily the Financial Times has journalists who know how numbers work and don’t trade in scare stories – I am indebted to @StatsJournalist Kate Allen for alerting me to the data behind Steve Doughty’s nasty little piece. The claim is that nearly 500,000 council homes (the article clarifies in the text that this includes all social housing) have been allocated (“given” is the term inaccurately used) to “immigrants” (although as Kate Allen points out, the data relates to people born abroad, which stretches from Boris Johnson to many children of armed services personnel) in the past decade. The real story about housing and migration is this. People born outside the UK are much more likely to live in rented accommodation than people born here, because they are poorer. Of those living in rented accommodation, most people born abroad are in the less beneficial private rented sector. And what we need to ease the waiting lists for social housing isn’t less immigration, it’s more social housing – we need to build more homes people can afford. The Mail doesn’t point out that seven times as many people born in the UK live in social housing as those born outside, nor that the predominant form of housing tenure for those born in the UK (33 million to 15 million) is home ownership (among those born abroad, the ratio is 3 million to 4 million – they mostly rent.) One reason why people born outside the UK are more likely to be in social housing than people born here is because they’re poorer, and that’s why they concentrate in the least advantageous forms of housing. There are ten times as many native-born homeowners than foreign-born, eight times as many social renting natives, and just over twice as many native-born as foreign-born private tenants. It’s also worth noting that the more recent the arrival, the more likely foreign-born people are to be private tenants. two thirds of those who arrived before 1981 own their homes (surprisingly similar to the domestic population), but nearly two thirds of those who have arrived since 2001 are private tenants. One in seven recent arrivals are in social housing, compared with one in six of the native born (again, exactly the same proportion for those who arrived before 1981). Not surprisingly, the longer people live in the UK, the more they behave just like those born here. However, in one of those ironies of right-wing populist politics that gets people at the Mail chewing the carpet, part of the crackdown on immigration that the coalition Government is presiding over – by making private landlords less likely to rent to migrants – will force more recent arrivals into homelessness, thus triggering the requirement on local authorities to provide them with social housing. So a direct result of the Government crackdown on immigration will be an increase in the proportion of social housing going to migrants! Tweet Share on Tumblr submit to reddit About the author Owen Tudor is an occasional contributor to LC. He is head of the TUC’s European Union and International Relations Department and blogs more regularly at the Touchstone blog. · Other posts by Owen Tudor IFRAME: http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/follow_button.html?show_screen_name =false&show_count=true&screen_name=TUCglobal Story Filed Under: Blog ,Housing ,Media Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time. Reader comments 9:57 am, July 29, 2013 1. Man on Clapham Omnibus ‘The claim is that nearly 500,000 council homes (the article clarifies in the text that this includes all social housing) have been allocated (“given” is the term inaccurately used) to “immigrants” (although as Kate Allen points out, the data relates to people born abroad, which stretches from Boris Johnson to many children of armed services personnel) in the past decade’ So whats the true number of immigrants? 10:38 am, July 29, 2013 2. Ceiliog 1. For the wrong answer, go to the Daily Mail. 10:45 am, July 29, 2013 3. Tris The figures might also reflect the fact that in many countries, including EU ones, the norm is to rent rather than buy housing. Or it may be that many immigrants are young, and like many native born young, are unable to get a foot on the “housing ladder” because of the absurd cost of even the cheapest homes in some parts of the country. But you can never stop the Daily Fail twisting whatever information they have in order to satisfy the burning hatred in the hearts of their pursed lipped, tutting readership of vinegary old women and bitter old men. 11:58 am, July 29, 2013 4. hobson I always thought someone who was born in one country and moved to make their home in another country *was* an immigrant, even if their name was Boris – isn’t that the definition of an immigrant? Thanks for exposing the Daily Mail’s story but having read your piece I’m still not clear on what the true figure is. How many immigrants have actually been allocated social housing in the past 10 years if it’s not 470,000 as the Mail claims? 12:02 pm, July 29, 2013 5. vimothy There isn’t really an argument in this piece. Social housing is “allocated” not “given”. –This is hair splitting. The two terms are synonyms. “Allocation” sounds more technical and less personal, so people might be less likely to object to the “allocation” of social housing to immigrants, which is presumably why the OP prefers it. The numbers refer to people born outside the UK rather than immigrants per se. –Okay, but people born outside the UK are a proxy. What are the true numbers? People born outside the UK are poorer in general than people born inside the UK. –Hence more likely to require social housing, consistent with the Daily Mail’s article. 12:45 pm, July 29, 2013 6. Ceiliog 4. Have you read the Daily Mail article and the comments that are posted? The DM’s definition of social housing includes houses that are let by private landlords. As ever, the Daiy Mail knows how to rile their drooling, gagging, xeonophobic readers. 12:58 pm, July 29, 2013 7. hobson 6 The Mail article specifies “council or housing association properties”. No, I have not read the comments beneath it and have no intention of doing so. I’ve never found the comments section on Daily Mail articles about immigration to be very informative. Surely the question here is whether it makes sense to provide social housing to immigrants? In my opinion, housing should be provided according to need. It should not make any difference whether a person was born in the UK or overseas (in other words, whether they are an immigrant). There may be a case for saying British citizens should take priority, but that is only tangentially related to whether someone is an immigrant. Plenty of British citizens are immigrants. There is a difficulty in trying to deny that immigrants receive social housing, which is that you are tacitly accepting that there would be something wrong with it if they were. Furthermore, you will also be stating something that is untrue. If you and I both apply for a council house and I am a British citizen who came to this country eight years ago while you are a British citizen born here, the fact that I am an immigrant will not, as I understand it, affect my application. And neither should it – it would be a scandal if it did. But when people try to insist that it doesn’t happen, or attack people for stating that it doesn’t happen, they’re actually reinforcing the idea that it’s somehow shameful or wrong to treat people equally. 1:19 pm, July 29, 2013 8. Ceiliog 7. As shown by the photo of a house rented at £7,800 per month. Typical bile from the DM and its commentards. 1:48 pm, July 29, 2013 9. hobson 8 That is a photo illustrating a different story. Yes, they are both on the same web page which is confusing. 2:01 pm, July 29, 2013 10. vimothy Hobson, Good comment. It’s a puzzle as to why pro-immigration arguments aren’t more coherent. My take is this: The political establishment wants to have high levels of immigration, for both ideological (diversity, anti-racism, etc) and economic reasons. Although the establishment understands that immigration ticks two magical boxes, it is also aware that many working and lower middle class types don’t have advanced degrees in economics, and don’t realise that high levels of immigration is both morally good and economically beneficial for society as a whole. It’s like they don’t even know what Pareto efficiency is! If only they read the FT and not the Daily Mail. The problem with that is that for historical reasons, Daily Mail readers and assorted other reprobates are still allowed a vote, if little representation. So the most judicious course is obviously to avoid bringing it to their attention. The less they think about it, the less they will misguidedly try to reduce it, the better everyone will be in reality — including the thickos who don’t understand that this is in their best interests. Okay, fine. So why aren’t the arguments better? Because they don’t care about winning the arguments. From their point of view, Daily Mail readers are xenophobic louts who can’t be reasoned with. Therefore, the goal is to stop having arguments with them. Therefore whatever furthers this end is fair game — including arguments that are mutually contradictory or just hand waving. 2:01 pm, July 29, 2013 11. Ceiliog 9. Deliberate embedding and typical Daily Mail. 2:17 pm, July 29, 2013 12. Ceiliog 10. The article highlights an article, from the Daily Mail, that is misleading. "Okay, fine. So why aren’t the arguments better? Because they don’t care about winning the arguments." Your call for a pro-immigration argument is misplaced as Owen Tudor has not expressed an opinion either way. 2:20 pm, July 29, 2013 13. jungle Massive flaw in the Daily Mail’s use of this data (which the article has not noticed): The data referring to half a million recent migrants in council housing is about PEOPLE, not HOUSEHOLDS. Unless we assume migrants all live alone, this is *not* the number of houses they occupy. It is also *not* even roughly comparable with waiting lists (a comparison the Mail encourages), which only include the ‘head of household’. I’d also hazard a guess that quite a lot of these migrants live in council houses where the ‘head of household’ isn’t a migrant. I don’t dispute that there are downsides to immigration, and that a real ‘open door policy’ (which we haven’t had, by the way) would be pretty catastrophic… but as usual the Mail’s figures are yet again distorted to favour their agenda and cannot be trusted. 3:09 pm, July 29, 2013 14. Man on Clapham Omnibus 10. vimothy It’s like they don’t even know what Pareto efficiency is! Maybe the Mail is after Pareto improvement. Anyway I dont buy the immigration thing myself because what you are tacitly saying is a fixed population cannot organise its resources and wealth to the benifit of all without drawing in members of other communities. Its a limp left postulate that is entirely false and if extrapolated would mean the worlds population would all end up on the Isle of Wight which I suggest isnt a good idea. I think it far better to understand why immigration is happening and IMO its because of the need for cheaper and cheaper labour so the rich can get richer and richer. 5:00 pm, July 29, 2013 15. vimothy Your call for a pro-immigration argument is misplaced as Owen Tudor has not expressed an opinion either way. What Owen Tudor wrote doesn’t address the matter of whether large numbers of immigrants are getting social housing or are preventing Britons from accessing social housing. Instead he quibbles over some of the facts, while leaving the substantive issues off the table. So we are told that: 1, The correct term is “allocated” rather than “given,” seemingly because the optics / connotations are more better. 2, The numbers refer to people born outside the UK rather than immigrants per se, and British people can be born outside the UK, e.g., Boris Johnson. 3, Of course immigrants occupy a lot of social housing. They tend to be poorer on average. (Presumably that’s what lead them to migrate in the first place.) But you want to either say that the Daily Mail is exaggerating the numbers in order to make this seem like a much bigger problem than it is in reality, because the people who write the Daily Mail are all deranged bigots who hate immigrants. Or you want to say that the numbers are more or less correct, but the reason that the numbers are the way they are is because immigrants are typically poorer than the rest of the population. Make both at the same time, and it’s a bit like saying, “He was like this when I got here, officer. And anyway, even if he wasn’t, I didn’t kill him. And anyway, even if I did, it was in self-defence.” Well, which is it? You should pick your strongest story and stick to that. 5:01 pm, July 29, 2013 16. vimothy “Are more better”? Yeesh… 5:32 pm, July 29, 2013 17. Ceiliog 15. "Instead he quibbles over some of the facts" Facts that are, of course, not a strong point at the Daily Mail. See comment #13. 11:45 am, July 30, 2013 18. John Lloyd So the solution is just to throw money at immigrants. Balls and co are so discredited with their idea to spend spend spend out of recession, now the plan is to just go on a house building spree to give homes to benefit tourists. Will the TUC never learn their day has gone? 4:32 pm, July 30, 2013 19. phil 6 “The DM’s definition of social housing includes houses that are let by private landlords” Your comments are just as disingenuous, if not more, than anything the Mail wrote, rather like the needless hair splitting between “given” and “allocated”. Fact is that at a time when millions of British people are on social housing lists hundreds of thousand of immigrants are given social housing. 4:45 pm, July 30, 2013 20. Ceiliog 19. Read comment #13. Stating that my short posting is more disengenuous than a DM article on social housing, which includes a house that is rented at £7,800 per month, says quite a lot about you. 2:50 pm, July 31, 2013 21. Derek Hattons Tailor @15 “don’t realise that high levels of immigration is both morally good and economically beneficial for society as a whole”. Lots of countries (Switzerland, Japan, Sweden) have had highly successful social and economic models with little or no immigration. Europe had a (much) higher share of global GDP in the 1970s, when migration was far lower. In the uk specifically, real wages have barely moved since the 1970s. I’m an accountant rather than an economist, but you don’t need to be either to realise that the larger the labour pool, the lower than wages. If there are any economic benefits they are clearly not widely shared. It also depends which “society as a whole” you are looking at. If migration is good for the economy of the host country then by definition it is bad for the economy of the home country (e.g Ireland, Southern Europe). 9:15 am, August 1, 2013 22. Briar I am sure the Mail and its loyal readers will now attack Kate Allen for being so biased as to look at the actual figures and read the actual truth written in them. After all, they accused Chris Patten and the rest of the BBC Trust for being biased lefties because they criticised John Humphrys and his hit-piece on people on benefits for recycling Mail lies and not backing them with actual facts (presumably because the facts prove the opposite). 2:57 pm, August 1, 2013 23. phil 19 If you can’t understand that the house that rents at £7,800 a month is not social housing but privately rented to an immigrant on housing benefit then that says a lot about you. It would seem that you also have difficulty grasping the fact that at a time when millions of British people are on social housing lists hundreds of thousand of immigrants are given social housing. 2:59 pm, August 1, 2013 24. phil 22 “they accused Chris Patten and the rest of the BBC Trust for being biased lefties” Simply google “bbc admits bias” 3:31 pm, August 1, 2013 25. Ceiliog 23. You fail to grasp the fact that the Daily Mail misinterpreted statistics on housing. Do you think that anyone who was born outside of the UK should not be allowed to rent somewhere to live? 5:12 pm, August 4, 2013 26. phil 25. The fact is that it is you misinterpreting the statistics. As the Mail clearly states, there are 1.8 million British families on social housing waiting lists and 469,843 immigrants have taken social housing housing between 2001 and 2011. These are government statistics. Where is the Daily Mail misinterpretation? 5:35 pm, August 4, 2013 27. Ceiliog 26. Daily Mail misinformation is available every day except Sunday when it is replaced by Mail on Sunday misinformation. 10:08 am, August 5, 2013 28. phil 27. That is merely your opinion. The fact is, as the Mail reported, there are 1.8 million British families on social housing waiting lists and 469,843 immigrants have taken social housing housing between 2001 and 2011. Just because you may not like these facts it doesn’t mean the Mail is guilty of misinformation. 10:26 am, August 5, 2013 29. Ceiliog 28. It is a fact that the Daily Mail twisted housing statistics to blame immigrants. The Daily Mail doesn’t normally raise concerns about people who live in council, housing association and private landlord properties but, in this case, they have made an exception because it pushes the immigration button. The Daily Mail doesn’t give a damn about people who are in social housing. 8:06 am, August 6, 2013 30. phil 29. You keep saying the Mail twisted housing statistics, fair enough, now kindly tell me which housing statistics they twisted? It’s patently true that 1.8 million British families on social housing waiting lists and 469,843 immigrants have taken social housing housing, so how is that twisted. It would appear that the Mail gives a damn about the 1.8 million British families languishing on social housing queues whilst 469,843 foreign born immigrants are given social housing. 8:18 am, August 6, 2013 31. phil 6 “The DM’s definition of social housing includes houses that are let by private landlords” Even this comment of yours has been proved as twisted, the article clearly stated that an immigrant was benefitting from £7,800 monthly to pay a private landlord yet you twisted it to claim that the Mail was referring to social housing. Tell me, where on earth is there social housing in the UK that rents at £7,800 monthly? 9:55 am, August 6, 2013 32. Ceiliog 30. 31. No. The Daily Mail published the article because it hits the immigration button. The embedded story about an asylum seeker is there to distort matters even further. 10:53 pm, August 6, 2013 33. phil 32. Nothing wrong with hitting the immigration button, immigration control has been lax to say the least since 2001, it’s about time it was hit. The “embedded” story about the so called “asylum seeker” receiving an astonishing £7800 a month while 1.8 million British families languish on the housing list is a true and untwisted story. To pay in excess of £90,000 p.a. to house a family is plainly ridiculous. 12:16 pm, August 7, 2013 34. Ceiliog 33. What is the difference between an asylum seeker and a ‘so-called asylum seeker’? He’s either an asylum seeker or isn’t an asylum seeker. Asylum seekers do not qualify for social housing so they are not permitted to place their names on housing lists. If the asylum seeker is having his rent paid, the money goes to the landlord. Please take up the matter with the Daily Mail as I’m sure that you’ll prefer their answers. The Daily Mail is far more creative than the average estate agent when it comes to property descriptions – An East London, 1920s, end of terrace, 2 up 2 down, with a crappy dormer bedroom becomes a luxury townhouse at the hands of a DM hack. In fact, Phil, stick with the "Fail" and don’t visit any other websites. 10:40 pm, August 7, 2013 35. phil 33. The difference between an asylum seeker and an “asylum seeker” is that one is genuine and the other is bogus. If he is bogus then he isn’t an asylum seeker, he is an economic opportunist posing as an “asylum seeker”, cashing in to the tune of £7,800 monthly. I’m quite happy with your answers, we have established that the Mail was correct that 1.8 million British families are on social housing waiting lists and 469,843 immigrants have taken social housing housing and that one immigrant family was receiving an astonishing £7,800 monthly for his house rent. Reactions: Twitter, blogs Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time. [trans.gif] LATEST NEWS Media doesn’t realise how right-wing Britons think Cameron is News Image 35 Comments The funniest questions Twitter asked of British Gas boss today News Image 48 Comments Listen: Tommy Robinson a “great admirer” of Douglas Murray News Image 21 Comments Britons more likely to support a party committed to public ownership News Image 49 Comments Labour to ambush Tories on their links to energy lobbyists News Image 4 Comments Even Mail readers think it should be sorry for Miliband piece News Image 14 Comments Mail reporter gatecrashed Miliband memorial News Image 27 Comments A ten point plan to strengthen workers’ rights in the UK News Image 16 Comments ED Miliband: Labour will SCRAP the Bedroom Tax News Image 34 Comments Watch: UKIP’s Godfrey Bloom hits Michael Crick in the face News Image 65 Comments Astonishing graphic: how English house prices have shot up News Image 36 Comments Labour moves much closer to repealing Bedroom Tax News Image 17 Comments Watch: presenter mistakes paper stack for iPad News Image 1 Comment Remember when Lib Dems opposed Free School Meals? News Image 19 Comments EDL supporter calls for shooting at Muslims, on FB News Image 46 Comments Model Jodie Marsh attacks Co-op ban on ‘lads mags’ News Image 53 Comments ‘Labour will outlaw abusive use of zero-hour contracts’ News Image 64 Comments Shouldn’t Jim Murphy resign over Unite allegations? News Image 28 Comments Ads shows Hindu goddesses facing domestic violence News Image 12 Comments Labour MP: Ed M needs to talk to unions with “respect” News Image 5 Comments NEWS ARTICLES ARCHIVE Liberal Conspiracy is a joint effort. © Copyright 2007 - 2013. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions of use. RSS feed. Contact us. FAQs Site design by Robert Sharp and Sunny Hundal. Based on Wordpress, PHP and MySQL. Quantcast #RSS 2.0 RSS .92 Atom 0.3 Liberal Conspiracy » Green leader criticises “toxic rhetoric” on immigration Comments Feed Labour to push harder on financial regulation Liam Byrne actually makes a good speech on disability Liberal Conspiracy Twitter Facebook LC by Email By RSS ____________________ Go! Liberal Conspiracy ABOUT CONTACT CONTRIBUTE FAQs ARCHIVES Green leader criticises “toxic rhetoric” on immigration by Newswire 1:52 pm - July 13th 2013 Tweet IFRAME: //www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http://liberalconspiracy.org/2 013/07/13/green-leader-challenges-toxic-rhetoric-on-immigration/&send=f alse&layout=button_count&width=150&show_faces=false&action=recommend&co lorscheme=light&font=arial&height=21&appId=135787006459018 Share on Tumblr On Friday 12th July Natalie Bennett, Green Party leader, gave a key note speech on immigration where she attacked the political “race to the bottom” on immigration. While the government said immigrants were attracted to Britain by benefits, “there is simply no evidence for this claim,” she said. She said it was common currency to blame migrants for problems in schools, the health service and housing, to distract from “Britain’s long-term failure to build adequate housing, particularly social housing” The speech was given at the International Symposium on Cultural Diplomacy at the Romanian Cultural Institute. The Green party leader attacked the “race to the bottom” on immigration. The government was scapegoating immigrants instead of acknowledging its own failings and that of the former Labour government. “It’s pernicious, it’s dangerous, and it needs to be challenged.” While many in the political class are currently falling over themselves to out UKIP, UKIP Bennett argued we need to be articulating the benefits of immigration. it’s important to acknowledge the contribution of immigrants to Britain. The NHS could not operate without immigrant workers. Our social care system, and our education system are significantly dependent on immigrant workers. … But of course their contribution isn’t only through employment, whether they are young or old. The grandmother who moves to Britain to be with her family – she might be providing childcare, or she might simply be providing the solidity, the knowledge, the experience of a lifetime. The partner who moves to Britain to be a “house husband” brings not only time and love, but also the cultural experience of a different life experience. The foreign student brings to their local course a whole host of different experiences, knowledge and skills to their local classmates, to the enrichment of all. The full text of the speech can be found here. Tweet Share on Tumblr submit to reddit About the author · Other posts by Newswire IFRAME: http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/follow_button.html?show_screen_name =false&show_count=true&screen_name=libcon Story Filed Under: Immigration ,News Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time. Reader comments 3:37 pm, July 13, 2013 1. vimothy The NHS could not operate without immigrant workers. An obvious falsehood. Our social care system, and our education system are significantly dependent on immigrant workers. I’m not sure what is meant by “significantly dependent,” but let’s assume that in order to facilitate social care and education, net migration to the UK is positive for all future time periods. Then it follows as a matter of simple mathematics that the native population of the UK will be completely replaced by the migrant population. Perhaps this is a good thing, as far as Natalie Bennett is concerned? I doubt that many people would agree, though. But of course their contribution isn’t only through employment, whether they are young or old. The grandmother who moves to Britain to be with her family – she might be providing childcare, or she might simply be providing the solidity, the knowledge, the experience of a lifetime… [etc] Translation: migrants who migrate are people; as people they have had experiences; these experiences influence who they are as people; therefore, immigration is always a good. Hooray! 4:16 pm, July 13, 2013 2. Benali The NHS could not indeed survive without the NHS. Migrants routinely fill shortfalls in several key sectors (none more so than care staff and nurses), and without those places the NHS could not survive. With an increasingly larger older population and the demand for more elderly care this problem is going to only get worse. Then again these are all facts that the UKIP mentality finds hard to swallow. 4:26 pm, July 13, 2013 3. Paul peter Smith Its quite bizarre that a ‘green’ would promote migration on any kind of scale. Most of the problems addressed by that faction have as their root cause some aspect of globalisation. Surely a true green would be promoting sustainable development within nations i.e. Serious limits on the international trade of manufactured goods would force nations to be self sufficient and encourage local markets. 4:35 pm, July 13, 2013 4. Dissident Vimothy, Do you have the brains or backbone of a flatworm? Because the people who have your stated outlook in real life do. The billionaire bribe masters behind such obvious poison are laughing at you all the way to the offshore tax haven with our liquidated wealth, while you blame others who commit the heinous crime of wanting a better life for themselves and their families. Hooray for you too Btw, if those billionaire bribe masters weren’t such odious scroungers worldwide, there would be less people needing to migrate for a chance of a decent life in the first place. Not that you would ever acknowledge that simple fact. 5:16 pm, July 13, 2013 5. vimothy Dissident, I’m not sure what simple fact you refer to. However, our “billionaire bribe masters” do not, as a rule, agree with me–alas. If they did, we’d certainly have a lot less immigration. Our billionaire bribe masters generally agree with you (assuming that you believe immigration to be the summum bonum). That’s why we have so much of it. Otherwise, our billionaire bribe masters are not really worthy of the name, are they? For example, here’s Peter Sutherland, UN rep for migration arguing that EU states should do their best to undermine national homogeneity in order to make themselves more welcoming to migrants: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18519395 He also suggests that trying to limit migration is contra international law. In addition to his role at the UN, Sutherland is a chairman at LSE, a member of the Bilderburg steering group, a chairman at Goldman Sachs, former head of the WTO and a former chairman at BP. That’s a very incomplete list, though. You can find out more about the life and times of one of our billionaire bribe masters at his Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Sutherland 5:27 pm, July 13, 2013 6. Dissident @ Paul Peter Smith The flip side of such migration are entire forests regrowing in Eastern Europe! As for global trade, yes definitely manufacture as much of the goods we need locally. It is slightly daft to have say a bog standard cupboard built in China, shipped thousands of miles in a container only to open it and find its broken due to said journey. The company I work for has had about a hundred million pounds worth of losses over the past decade due to that little niggle. 6:40 pm, July 13, 2013 7. the a&e charge nurse I agree that such attacks do indeed ‘distract from “Britain’s long-term failure to build adequate housing, particularly social housing” But since there is no realistic possibility that this need will ever be met (especially following right to buy 30 odd years ago) surely it can only mean more, and more people from the lower strata in a perpetual fight to avoid the least worst housing option? According to Shelter there are nearly 1.8 million households in England on local authority housing registers but many waiting on housing lists for years and years still have little prospect of a decent home each time their application is trumped by another family deemed more in need. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwMe4YBcE0o 8:14 pm, July 13, 2013 8. Ceiliog 3. Are you suggesting that a member of the British Green Party, addressing a symposium on cultural diplomacy, should have made an anti migration speech? 8:59 pm, July 13, 2013 9. Paul peter Smith No Ceiliog I was pointing out the strangeness (to me) that someone who should be promoting local and regional solutions to poverty and access to opportunity, would effectively promote migration. The reasons people flee poverty to wealthier climes are many of the same issues organisations like the greens rightly take on. If the greens are consistent with their core message then they should be opposing the brain drain from under-developed countries and pushing programs that mean an engineer, doctor or candlestick maker can earn a good living almost anywhere. 9:24 pm, July 13, 2013 10. Ceiliog 8. The speech was about the British Government’s rhetoric being at odds with reality. I’m sure that Ms Bennett is a supporter of sustainable development, localism, green energy solutions and other socio-economic issues but you need to bear in mind that the speech was on one topic. 5. That’s why MI5′s flat pack furniture empire collapsed and why there will be no new episodes of Spooks! 9:44 pm, July 13, 2013 11. Paul peter Smith Ceiliog I read the speech in its entirety and agree with much of the sentiment there in. My puzzlement arose from the contradiction of supporting ( in general terms ) the human asset stripping of the third world ( economic migration ) by a representative of an organization defined by localism. Regardless of the audience or subject an argument needs internal consistency. 10:34 pm, July 13, 2013 12. Ceiliog 10. ICD Conference Details. http://www.culturaldiplomacy.org/academy/index.php?en_2013-iscd-uk_time table Natalie Bennett’s lecture and discussion slot took up 30 minutes. 10:46 pm, July 13, 2013 13. Paul peter Smith Thanks for the link Ceiliog, I will give it more attention tommorrow. But I stand by my opinion. 12:34 am, July 14, 2013 14. Ob Serious limits on the international trade! The billionaire bribe masters! Hahahahahaha. Usual crap from meaningless partys and loons, its never been so funny to witness the dysfunctional destroy them selves hahahahahaa. The sooner the uk has a population of 100 million and the EU control tax budgets and foreign policy, the better! 3:56 am, July 14, 2013 15. Dissident Ob – is that short for obnoxious? Just wondering… Is your Amygdyla hyper stimulated at all, I believe there are some good medications available. The combination of corplormazine and lithium can work wonders I hear. 4:50 am, July 14, 2013 16. Ob Uhuh little dissent the eco warrior. The uk NEEDS to double its population, the UK needs to hand all major control over to the EU, get over it pal, racist little englander. For the amount the EU and immergrants have done for this country, little bstards will always refuse to acknowledge its value. 5:32 am, July 14, 2013 17. Dissident Wow, such a coherent argument there, Ob. Which ‘dissident’ are you on about? My moniker is spelled with a capital ‘D’ – understand the difference? 6:16 am, July 14, 2013 18. Ob What ever you say kid! The sooner we make the transistion to super state the better, for the world finally gets to stop hearing the opinions and suffering the votes of self important little shits. 8:41 am, July 14, 2013 19. Bitethehand UKIP Bennett ????????????????????? 9:29 am, July 14, 2013 20. Earl 15 million Brits living abroad. (Foreign & Commonwealth Office figures) 7.5 million immigrants living here. (government’s own statistics) So for every one immigrant who came in… two Brits went out. Nuff said. 9:38 am, July 14, 2013 21. M15 Yes yes we get it. Immigration is wonderful. Everyone should have some. Except of course for the countries that are losing all their productive workforce. If the NHS is being supported by immigrants, that really says to me that the society cannot effectively produce the necessary skills indigenously. Conversley if they bring in skills they ,by the same logic, are taking away skill from whence they came. The logic is greater population growth will need greater amounts of immigration. Unforunately Ponzi with people is a hiding to nothing. Anyone that dresses up asysmetric population distribution as desirable is insane. But one should imo not forget that this asymetry is driven by the same mechanism as the continuing development of underdevolpment of the third world. Until nation states are allowed to keep the procedes of their national wealth instead of being robbed by multinationals and the political infrastructure thats supports them (eg IMF,World bank etc) then individuals will be left running around the globe looking for personal betterment instead of developing their own communities. 9:39 am, July 14, 2013 22. Bitethehand Yes I’m also surprised that the Green Party is encouraging skilled health workers from the developing worold to come to the UK – to do what? To spend an increasing amount of time caring for those who are obese and alcoholic? Are there not far more pressing health and social care needs to be met in the developing world and shouldn’t the Green Party be encouraging skilled Britons who are finding it difficult getting employment in their own country to volunteer elsewhere in the world where their presence will be of greater value? 12:00 pm, July 14, 2013 23. TONE Natalie Bennett has skewed her argument in favour of immigration by stating (a) that governments could and should have solved the housing shortage (which is undoubtedly exacerbated by immigration) and (b) maintaining that “the NHS could not operate without immigrant workers”, when the NHS’s dependence on immigrant workers is something that could be changed – just as the housing shortage could be rectified. If we can deal with (a), we can deal with (b), particularly when we have a couple of million unemployed people. That said, dealing with (a) and (b) would take time, and meanwhile immigration both exacerbates housing shortages and helps staff the NHS. 12:19 pm, July 14, 2013 24. Dissident @ 19 so imagine if repatriation was enforced worldwide. 15-7.5 million is 7.5 million. The population of London. Be ironic if it happened… @ 20 asymmetric population densities are what we have always had since we started to settle down in agriculturally based communities. The most successful eventually grew into cities – and now, with a population of billions worldwide it will be necessary to start building urban arcologies, unless we want to concrete over even more of the countryside. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcology Whether people would actually want to live in mega skyscrapers over a mile tall is another issue, given our propensity to turn utopian fantasies into dystopian realities! 12:28 pm, July 14, 2013 25. Ceiliog 22. Natalie Bennett, in her lecture at a symposium on cultural diplomacy, highlighted how the current Government is using immigrants as scapegoats. Given that Ms Bennett only had a 30 minutes talk plus discussion slot at the centre, I think that she made an important point. 1:04 pm, July 14, 2013 26. Lamia “The flip side of such migration are entire forests regrowing in Eastern Europe!” That’s great for Eastern Europe. Please let us know how that is to the benefit of a country which is struggling to cope with a booming population while facing an energy capacity crisis. 1:33 pm, July 14, 2013 27. Benali Sustainable migration can only be achieved by ending the trade barriers, corporate stranglehold and subsidies that strangle third world economies. The answer is not to impose barbarically brutal migration policies that split up couples, deport vulnerable asylum seekers & set up immigrants as the scapegoats for society’s ills. A humane migration policy would stop forcing people out of their country of origin, through war, foreign intervention, ecological disaster and ecomomic abuse. It would make conditions in those countries liveable rather than continuing to profit from inequality. Equally it would acknowledge that our wealth, our quality of life, is fundamentally indebted for the ways we’ve taken advantage of third world countries. We have a debt to pay to those that can’t get by in their own countries. I’m proud the Green Party gets this, when no other party does 2:09 pm, July 14, 2013 28. Dissident @ 25 The whole world is facing a booming population. The projections are another 2-4 billion, on top of the current 7 billion by 2050. Unfortunately if we don’t solve the problems of resource depletion and environmental degradation worldwide, that boom will precede a crash back to as little as 2 billion by 2100. What makes you think Britain would or should somehow be exempt? Since the only parts of the globe that are facing a local fall in population also happen to be areas with a moribund economy, like Eastern Europe, shouldn’t the cause of said economic stagnation be dealt with, as others have pointed out? Or do you want this country’s economy to be just as bad, after all if it was, people wouldn’t move here for a better life. Lets imagine if this country’s economy collapses due to the current austerity measures (which benefit only the rich) your options would then be stay or go elsewhere. Which would you choose? As far as infrastructure is concerned, what did the Victorians do? They built it. In an era when the population of this country doubled from 16 to 30 million in the space of 50 years, with technology little better than pickaxes and shovels. We now need to rebuild most of it anyway as it is crumbling away beneath our feet after decades of poor investment and maintenance. Energy security is tougher, yet even there we have many options as you should be aware. Lets not forget, large areas of this country were deliberately depopulated a couple of centuries ago, so a bunch of self proclaimed nobles could indulge in the über important pastimes of ‘gentlemanly’ sports like deer hunting as an example. To say nothing of cramming way too many sheep into country estates, which are keeping much of this country looking like the scenes from quite a few post apocalypse films. 7:57 am, July 15, 2013 29. Ob Lets imagine if this country’s economy collapses due to the current austerity measures (which benefit only the rich) LOL how do they beneift “the rich” then? 12:31 am, July 16, 2013 30. Dissident @ 29 obtuse Here’s an analogy for you – a tapeworm (or flatworm) inhabits your gut. Then it not only evades your immune response, but takes so much from you that you become weak. Your body can only cope with so much, but in the short term it is boom time for the parasites infesting your body. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-01/billionaires-worth-1-9-trillio n-seek-advantage-in-2013.html Lol indeed 1:44 am, July 16, 2013 31. Ob You cant answer how it benefits the rich then, just an analogy and a link stating there are rich people in the world, fuck off and crawl back under your rock you self hating scum. 2:24 am, July 16, 2013 32. Dissident @ 31 obdurate obviously I am too kind to you in your obstructively defined obedience of the scum that rise to the top. How much are you obliged to obstinately troll? And how much are the scum observing you in your obnoxious and all too obvious attempts to be obtuse? 4:06 am, July 16, 2013 33. Ob More bullshit. If you can not explain how the uks austerity measures benefit the rich specifically then do not make the claim that they do. We could Really do without idiots trying to promote class war and Hate in this country, especialy idiots thats give analogys about tap worms in the gut and links to rich people getting richer as economic activity recovers, when simply asked for evidence of their claim. I am sick to death of leftists with big words and zero substance, you literaly think if you type with some style it no longer matters that you are saying nothing, big words were made for big minds with something big to say my freind. 7:56 am, July 16, 2013 34. Paul peter Smith Ob Here’s a quick example of how the financial plan for recovery is a scam. Quantitative Easing was supposed to improve credit flow throughout the economy, instead the banks used the money to speculate on the commodities markets causing huge rises in the price of oil & food. No money ‘ trickled down’, the cost of living went up and the rich got richer. Why do you assume the rest of the shell game is any different? 8:45 am, July 16, 2013 35. Ob Why do you assume the rest of the shell game is any different? Most around here have the economic literacy of a rat and would cut a siblings legs off in the name of equality if they could run faster than them. The world would be a cesspit if they were not pushed out of the way of development. Burn her shes a witch! vs burn her shes rich! Kill him its witchcraft! (no actualy its an invention) vs Ban all cars! Ban trade! Wash with your urine! Its save the planet! Mind set of the stupid & incapable still very much with us. 8:49 am, July 16, 2013 36. Strawman Why is some guy called Ob kicking the fuck out of me? 9:23 am, July 16, 2013 37. Paul peter Smith Ob Is it lonely under your bridge? And by the way, I have the economic literacy of at least a monkey maybe even a chimp on a good day! 9:28 am, July 16, 2013 38. Ob And by the way, I have the economic literacy of at least a monkey maybe even a chimp on a good day! In that case the bad bankers used the money to buy bananas. 9:29 am, July 16, 2013 39. Ob Why is some guy called Ob kicking the fuck out of me? Would you prefer some analogys about tap worms because them rich peoples iz bad dey is! Ban cars! Ban trade! 9:35 am, July 16, 2013 40. Strawman He’s doing it again! It’s damn lucky I have no flesh to bruise. 9:37 am, July 16, 2013 41. Paul peter Smith Ob Check out Oxford English Dictionary – Sarcasm. And then kiss my arse. 9:46 am, July 16, 2013 42. Ob Check out Oxford English Dictionary – Sarcasm. I think it would benefit you more. And then kiss my arse. The “burn the witch” mind has not yet evolved to the point of hygiene, I think I will give that a pass sweety. 11:11 am, July 16, 2013 43. Paul peter Smith Ob I used sarcasm, the lowest form of wit, easily countered with any other kind of wit or a reasoned argument. You respond with sarcasm showing you understand neither wit nor reason. Likewise the invitation to ‘kiss my arse’ was purely metaphorical, do you understand metaphor? 11:32 am, July 16, 2013 44. Ob I used sarcasm, the lowest form of wit, easily countered with any other kind of wit or a reasoned argument. You respond with sarcasm showing you understand neither wit nor reason. I have little time to reason with someone who claims the recovery to be a “scam” because “the banks bought grain” Likewise the invitation to ‘kiss my arse’ was purely metaphorical, do you understand metaphor? Why yes, yes I do, there goes your mental snobbery right out the window so BAN TRADE! IS EVIL!!! SAVE EARTH! WASH IN URINE!!! 11:34 am, July 16, 2013 45. Benali Dear God! Both of you shut up! 11:50 am, July 16, 2013 46. Paul peter Smith Sorry everybody, forgot golden rule – dont feed the trolls. 12:16 pm, July 16, 2013 47. Ob Sorry everybody, forgot golden rule – dont feed the trolls. Or anyone unfortunate enough to live in a poorer country than you, save the earth!!!! Turn their food into fuel so you can drive to tesco and they starve to death!!! Ban trade! 12:56 pm, July 16, 2013 48. Dissident @ Obtuse, various posts 33-47 Your statements there have proven that the last thing you want is substantive arguments. To the rest of us, how about using what I wrote or variants thereof to feed it with every time it tries to obfuscate… 1:00 pm, July 16, 2013 49. Ob Your statements there have proven that the last thing you want is substantive arguments. Your previous statements on this site prove you want to starve countless individuals to death to adress a dysfunctin within your own mind..well done! You arent worth arguing with. Reactions: Twitter, blogs 1. Liberal Conspiracy: Green leader challenges “toxic rhetoric” on immigration | moonblogsfromsyb [...] via Newswire Liberal Conspiracy http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/07/13/green-leader-challenges-tox ic-rhetoric-on-immigration/ [...] Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time. [trans.gif] LATEST NEWS Media doesn’t realise how right-wing Britons think Cameron is News Image 35 Comments The funniest questions Twitter asked of British Gas boss today News Image 48 Comments Listen: Tommy Robinson a “great admirer” of Douglas Murray News Image 21 Comments Britons more likely to support a party committed to public ownership News Image 49 Comments Labour to ambush Tories on their links to energy lobbyists News Image 4 Comments Even Mail readers think it should be sorry for Miliband piece News Image 14 Comments Mail reporter gatecrashed Miliband memorial News Image 27 Comments A ten point plan to strengthen workers’ rights in the UK News Image 16 Comments ED Miliband: Labour will SCRAP the Bedroom Tax News Image 34 Comments Watch: UKIP’s Godfrey Bloom hits Michael Crick in the face News Image 65 Comments Astonishing graphic: how English house prices have shot up News Image 36 Comments Labour moves much closer to repealing Bedroom Tax News Image 17 Comments Watch: presenter mistakes paper stack for iPad News Image 1 Comment Remember when Lib Dems opposed Free School Meals? News Image 19 Comments EDL supporter calls for shooting at Muslims, on FB News Image 46 Comments Model Jodie Marsh attacks Co-op ban on ‘lads mags’ News Image 53 Comments ‘Labour will outlaw abusive use of zero-hour contracts’ News Image 64 Comments Shouldn’t Jim Murphy resign over Unite allegations? News Image 28 Comments Ads shows Hindu goddesses facing domestic violence News Image 12 Comments Labour MP: Ed M needs to talk to unions with “respect” News Image 5 Comments NEWS ARTICLES ARCHIVE Liberal Conspiracy is a joint effort. © Copyright 2007 - 2013. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions of use. RSS feed. Contact us. FAQs Site design by Robert Sharp and Sunny Hundal. Based on Wordpress, PHP and MySQL. Quantcast #Guy Fawkes' blog of parliamentary plots, rumours and conspiracy - RSS GuyNews.tv - RSS Guy Fawkes' blog » James Tobin: Lefty Tax Campaigners Misuse My Name Comments Feed Ed’s Evening With Evil Eric TORY WARS: Madness Continues alternate alternate Guy Fawkes' blog WordPress.com Order Order Media Guido Guy News About Tweets by @GuidoFawkes May 21st, 2013 James Tobin: Lefty Tax Campaigners Misuse My Name A great little nugget in the FT this morning: before he died Professor James Tobin, he of the ill-advised Tobin Tax, accused loony lefty tax campaigners of misrepresenting his ideas: “I have absolutely nothing in common with these anti-globalisation rebels. They’re misusing my name”. The 2001 interview with Der Spiegel makes for very interesting reading: “I appreciate attention to my proposal, but many of the praise comes from the wrong side. Look, I’m an economist and, like most economists, an advocate of free trade. Moreover, I support the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization — everything that these movements are attacking. They’re misusing my name… I feel that I’m being misunderstood and that my name has been wrongly co-opted for other people’s priorities. The Tobin tax offers no platform for the reforms that these people are seeking. But what can I do? Their intentions are good, I assume, but the proposals are badly thought out.” For some reason you don’t hear that quote from today’s ‘Robin Hood’ wannabes… * IFRAME: http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http%3A%2F%2Forder-or der.com%2F2013%2F05%2F21%2Fjames-tobin-lefty-tax-campaigners-misuse -my-name%2F&layout=button_count&show_faces=false&action=like&colors cheme=light&height=21&locale=en_US&width=90 * IFRAME: http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.html?url=http%3A%2 F%2Fguyfawk.es%2F10hNKZJ&counturl=http%3A%2F%2Forder-order.com%2F20 13%2F05%2F21%2Fjames-tobin-lefty-tax-campaigners-misuse-my-name%2F& count=horizontal&text=James%20Tobin%3A%20Lefty%20Tax%20Campaigners% 20Misuse%20My%20Name%3A&via=guidofawkes&related=wordpressdotcom * * IFRAME: http://www.reddit.com/static/button/button1.html?width=120&url=http %3A%2F%2Forder-order.com%2F2013%2F05%2F21%2Fjames-tobin-lefty-tax-c ampaigners-misuse-my-name%2F&title=James%20Tobin%3A%20Lefty%20Tax%2 0Campaigners%20Misuse%20My%20Name * Email * Tags: Loony Left, Tax at May 21, 2013 at 12:05 pm [facebook.png] IFRAME: http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.html?url=http://order- order.com/2013/05/21/james-tobin-lefty-tax-campaigners-misuse-my-name/& counturl=http://order-order.com/2013/05/21/james-tobin-lefty-tax-campai gners-misuse-my-name/&count=horizontal&text=James Tobin: Lefty Tax Campaigners Misuse My Name Comments are closed. Older Post Home Newer Post Seen Elsewhere PM Honours His Hair Dresser | Standard The Price of the Things | Iain Martin The Bar is a Limit to the Power of the State | Alex Deane Tories Preparing for Cabinet Reshuffle | Speccie Milibelievers Destroying Labour’s 2015 Chances | Labour Uncut LibDems Spin Mythical Voters with Fiction | BuzzFeed Gove is Right | Nick Wood Hunt Should Resign | Boris Simon Hoggart Obituary | Guardian Gove V Clegg | Ben Brogan Was Cameron’s Help To Buy Photoshoot Fake? | Trending Central [hotbuttons.gif] Guido-hot-button (1) [qotdtext.png] David Blanchflower finally admits… “I was wrong, I hadn’t expected the economy to grow as much as it did last year or for the welcome drop in unemployment.” [EMBED] [comment-of-the-day.png] Mr Nobody says: January 2, 2014 at 2:45 pm Ha! Apparently, the NUT has commisioned a poll and excluding don’t knows, 16% of teachers would vote Tory. Honestly, if the Tories are in double figures among teachers, Labour really do have a serious problem with their leader. Ed’s going to get annihilated… Tip off Guido __________________________ ( ) Web (*) Guido's Archives Google [guidogram.jpg] Email Address ____________________ Subscribe me to: * [X] Guidogram (weekly) * [X] Happy Hour (daily) Subscribe Receive Guido's Headlines By Text Message Guido on your Amazon Kindle RSS AddThis Feed Button Archive [Select Month_________] * View Guido's archive page Labels * Alan Johnson * Alan Rusbridger * Alastair Campbell * Alistair Darling * Al Jazeera * Andrew Mitchell * Andrew Pierce * Anyone But Gordon * Anyone But Gordon? Where's Gordon? Cash * AOL * Attack Ads * AV * B* * Balls * Bank of England * BBC * Bets * Big Brother Watch * Blair * Blair Foundation * Blears * Blogging on Blogging * Boom to Bust * Boris * Boulton * Brillo * Bryant * Bureaucracy * Burnham * BuzzFeed * By-Elections * By Election * Cabinet * Cabinet Office Spy * Calamity Kenny * Caption Contest * Cartoon * Cash * CBS * CCHQ * Change * Charlie Whelan * Cherie * Chris Bryant * Chris Huhne * Christine Lagarde * Chuka Umunna * Circular Firing Squad * City AM * Civil Service * Claire Perry * Clegg * CNN * Constance Briscoe * Coulson * Crick * Crime * Crime Must Not Pay * Cuts * Damian McBride * Danny Alexander * Darling * Data Journalism * Dave * David Davis * David Miliband * Dead Tree Press * Debates * Deborah Mattinson * Debt * DECC * Demos * Derek Draper * Disintermediation * Dods * Don't Unseat Ed Miliband Association * Donorgate * Douglas Alexander * Douglas Carswell * Downing Street * Drugs * Drunk * Early Day Motions * Economist * economy * Ed Balls * ed mil * Elections * EMOs * Energy * EU * Evidence Based Blogging * Exception Française * Expenses * Express * Farage * FCO * Ferrets-in-a-Sack * Financial Times * FOI * Francis Maude * Freedom for Scotland * Freedom for the Press * Freedom of the Press * Freedom to Party * Free Scotland * Free Speech * G20 * Gabby Bertin * Gallery Guido * George Osborne * God * Godfrey Bloom * Google * Gordon Brown * Gove * Green Totalitarianism * Guardian * Guido's Fashion Tips * Guido Forks * Guidogram * GuyNews.TV * Hacked Off * Hague * Hammond * Hancock * Harman * Heir to Blair * Hilton * Hodge * House of Lords * Huffington Post * Huhne * Hunt * iCampaign * ID cards * IDS * IMF * Independent * Indy * IPSA * Iran * Ireland * Irony * ITV * Jack Straw * Jim Murphy * Johann Hari * John Rentoul * Jon Snow * Keith Vaz * Kevin Maguire * Labour * Labour Leadership * LabourList * Labour Party * Lad Points * Lasagne * Laurie Penny * Lembit Opik * Leveson * Liam Byrne * Liam Fox * LibDem * LibDem Race * LibDems * Loans for Lordships * Lobby * Lobbying * Lobbyist * Lobbyists * Looney Left * Loony Left * Luciana Berger * Lynton Crosby * M'learned Friends * MacShame * Maggie Thatcher * Mail * Mandy * Manifesto * Market Watch * Marr * Max Clifford * Mayor of London * McBride * Media Guardian * Media Guido * MessageSpace * Michael Dugher * Michael Gove * Miliband * Mirror * MoD * Moonbat * MSNBC * Murdoch * Myners * Mystery * Nadine Dorries * New New Labour * News International * Newsnight * News of the World * New Statesman * New York Times * NHS * Nick Clegg * Nick Robinson * NIMBY * NO2AV * NO2ID * NoFront * Norman Tebbit * NUS * Observer * OLR * Order of the OTT * Osborne * Owen Jones * Parliamentary Reform * Pesto * Peter Hain * Peter Hitchens * Peter Mandelson * Peter Oborne * Pickles * Piers Morgan * Pilgrims * PMQs * Policy for Sale * Poll * Polls * Polly Toynbee * Prezza * Private Eye * Profundity of the Punditry * Quote of the Day * Raving * Rebekah Brooks * Red Book * Red Ed * Remember, Remember * Rennard * Reshuffle * Restore * Rupert Murdoch * Sadiq Khan * SamCam * Saturday Seven Up * Scilly Season * SHAC Attack * Shadow Cabinet * Shaggable * SideBoob * Sir Peter Stringfellow * Sith * Sky * Sleaze * Sleazy Levy * Smeargate * Smith Institute * Snouts in the Trough * Snouts in Trough * SNP * SpAd * Speaker * Speccie * Spectator * Spelman * Spin * Spinbusters * Spinwatch * Sponsored * Standard * Star * Statistics * Stats * Stewart Wood * Sun * Sunday Sleaze * Tactical Voting * Tax * Telegraph * Tessa Jowell * The Cuts * The Lobby * The Reshuffle * Thought Crime * Times * Tim Montgomerie * Tim Yeo * Tips * Toby Helm * Tom Baldwin * Tom Watson * Tories * Totty Watch * Trending * Twat Watch * Twitter * Twittery * UKIP * UN * Unions * Unite * US Politics * Vanity Fair * Vince Cable * Wandsworth Cover Up * WAR! * Webcameron * Wegg-Prosser * Where's Gordon? * Where's Gordon? Anyone But Gordon * Whips * Whitehall Wars * Wingnut * Won't Someone Think Of the Children * Wonks * Wonk Watch * WSJ Guido Reads * Biased BBC * Big Brother Watch * Brian Micklethwait * BUCF * Coffee House * ConservativeHome * Conservatives * Daily Referendum * Devil's Kitchen * Douglas Carswell MP * Downing Street Says… * Englishman’s Castle * Home * Iain Dale’s Diary * Jag Singh * Labour * LabourList * LibDem Voice * Liberal Democrats * Liberal England * MessageSpace * Nick Robinson * PoliticalBetting * PoliticsHome * Polling Report * Public Whip * Red Rag * Samizdata * Slugger O’Toole * Speccie blog * Spy Blog * TheyWorkForYou.com * Tim Worstall * Tory Bear Published by Global & General Nominees Limited © Global & General Nominees Limited 2004 - 2013. Powered by WordPress.com VIP. Privacy Policy. All Rights Reserved DesignBy counters for myspace Send to Email Address ____________________ Your Name ____________________ Your Email Address ____________________ loading Send Email Cancel Post was not sent - check your email addresses! Email check failed, please try again Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email. REFRESH(1800 sec): file://localhost/home/ulianap/Documents/p3/s1/PROJET-MOT-SUR-LE-WEB/PAG ES-ASPIREES/en/ASP_REP_Blogs_forums/16.html Britain's leading Conservative blog for news, comment, analysis and campaigns, edited by Paul Goodman. Conservative Party News ____________________ Search ConservativeHome Newslinks for Monday 6th January 2014 * Newslinks * ToryDiary * Columnists * Comment * MPs ETC * Local Government * Deep End * ThinkTanks * Majority * Left Watch * International * Video Published: November 1, 2013 89 comments Work: Have immigrants “taken our jobs”? Ryan Bourne By Ryan Bourne Follow @RyanCPS Full employent small Full employent small Related Articles * WATCH: Osborne – 2014 is a “year of hard truths” * Osborne tries to define the politics of growth ahead of 2015 * WATCH: Cameron on cracking down on those who migrate for benefits, not for work * Tobias Ellwood MP: Between Little Englanders and Open Doorites, there is room for a rational immigration policy * David Cameron, human shield I BOURNE Ryan BOURNE Ryan mmigration and border controls are going to be a key issue going into next Spring’s EU Parliament elections and any subsequent EU referendum. Ipsos-Mori has found, for example, that “Race Relations/Immigration” is regarded as the third most important issue facing Britain, behind the economy and unemployment. This view will likely be exacerbated in January 2014 with the free movement of Romanians and Bulgarians. After years of suppression of discussion of the subject, debate in this area – particularly with regard to the economic impacts of migration – is welcome, but often heated. In truth, it is an area which can expose divisions within the conservative movement itself, with the classical liberal wing more likely to be relaxed about immigration per se than the socially conservative wing. This column is about jobs and pay. The views of many on this theme tend to be entrenched: either “they’ve taken the jobs” on the one hand or “immigrants boost the economy” on the other – with little public analysis of the nuanced impact, more difficult to explain, that is the reality. But it’s worth setting aside all the social, public service and fiscal concerns to hone in on the question of how immigration in the UK has affected native employment and wages. Between the first quarter of 1997 and the second quarter of 2013, the number of people employed in the UK rose by 3.4 million. Of this total, an additional 988,000 people born in the UK were employed, compared to 2.4 million more foreign-born individuals (just over a million from the EU and the rest born outside). Over that period then, the proportion of people in total UK employment born outside the UK increased from 7.3 per cent in 1997 to 14.8 per cent by 2013 Q2 (shown below). Screen shot 2013-10-31 at 16.05.04 Screen shot 2013-10-31 at 16.05.04 It is extremely intuitive yet wrong, however, to think that the number of jobs created over this period would be the same if there had been no immigration and that, as such, the increase of employment of foreign born workers came at the expense of UK workers. This is known as “the lump of labour fallacy”. In fact, by increasing the supply of labour, which can fill gaps, complement existing skills, or create new markets for other or new products through the demands of the immigrants, immigration could actually increase employment of native workers. Whether it does or not is therefore purely an empirical question, albeit a very difficult one to examine accurately. The result will depend on: 1) The complementarity/substitutability of immigrants to native workers – often dependent on skills. If migrants are complementary, filling job gaps for example, they can actually increase productivity and wages. But if substitutes, they bid down wages and can cause unemployment if native workers are unwilling to accept lower wages. 2) Whether the economy is booming or in recession – i.e. what the overall demand for labour looks like. 3) Whether immigration has significant long-run effects on productivity levels and thus general prosperity. But that’s just the aggregate impacts. Which groups are affected by immigration likewise depends on the skill levels of immigrants, their location decisions and their willingness or otherwise to take jobs “below” their skill range. This all means results tend to be time and place specific, and cannot always be extrapolated to “predict” – which many people want to do today. Due to all of these factors pulling in different directions, then, attempting empirically to measure the impact of immigration is quite problematic. Some studies divide the UK into regions to examine the effects, but simple correlation analysis between immigrant numbers and native jobs in regions as a means of highlighting a relationship can be distorted as a general result if migrants move to areas where demand for labour is particularly strong. Likewise, some studies assume that migrants compete with people of similar skill levels to them. Yet we know that many immigrant workers do not compete with similarly skilled people, but instead work “below” their levels of skills. Nevertheless, the trends in much of the literature which seeks to deal with these problems are clear. Most studies suggest that immigration has had no statistically significant effect on the overall employment or claimant count rate outcomes of UK natives. In many cases the models predict a small negative association, but this is not statistically different from zero. Some, like Cambridge’s Bob Rowthorn, have suggested that this is simply because of noise in the data, and that there is indeed displacement – but the breadth of studies which obtain this broad result is overwhelming. An aggregate impact doesn’t mean a uniform impact, however. In fact, there is evidence that immigration can damage the job prospects of the lowest skilled; that immigration from outside the EU in particular has hit job prospects for natives, and that immigration leads to more displacement of native workers when the economy is below potential. Dustmann, Fabbri and Preston (2005), for example, found that immigration between 1983-2000 harmed the employment prospects of those with O-level qualifications, but boosted those with A-level qualifications or higher. A detailed Migration Advisory Committee report from 2012 found that although overall immigration of working age migrants had no real effect on native employment between 1975 and 2010, non-EU migration in a sub-sample for 1995-2010 did. Their results suggested 100 additional non-EU migrants in that period was associated with a reduction in employment of 23 native workers (although migrants from the EU were found to have no significant impact). This study also found that when the economy was operating below potential, each 100 additional working-age non-EU migrants was associated with 30 fewer native jobs. Screen shot 2013-10-31 at 16.06.49 Screen shot 2013-10-31 at 16.06.49 On wage,s the story is similar. On aggregate most studies suggest little overall effect – some showing a slight average uplift as a result of immigration, some a slight fall. However, the effects along the income distribution can be very different. The chart below, taken from this study, looking at the UK between 1997 and 2005, can explain some of this phenomenon. Screen shot 2013-10-31 at 16.07.40 Screen shot 2013-10-31 at 16.07.40 The predicted line shows where you’d expect immigrants to be in the income distribution, compared to the non-immigrant population, if just judged by their skill levels (immigrants are on average better educated than natives). But the researchers found that many immigrants, probably due to language barriers and the incentives relative to home, were bunched near the bottom of the wage distribution – lower than where their skills suggested they should be. In other words, highly skilled migrants often compete with lower skilled Brits, keeping wages lower than they otherwise would be for that group. This means that while immigration has depressed wages below the 20th percentile, it contributes to wage growth above the 40th percentile. Thus, immigration has boosted average wages by a small amount, but squeezed them slightly for those near the bottom. The results overall, therefore, throw up some inconvenient evidence for those who think immigration has had profound consequences for British jobs and pay. On the jobs front, the evidence suggests little overall effect on unemployment or pay, with negative effects constrained to the particularly low skilled, from non-EU migrants and particularly in times when the economy is struggling. These effects on the low-skilled are not unimportant of course, but the magnitudes of and the circumstance in which the effects arise are nowhere near large enough to suggest restricting immigration would lead to full domestic employment. In reality, skills, welfare reform, and business regulations are likely to be more significant supply-side factors to try to solve. Whether my CPS colleague Fraser Nelson is right that relatively open borders make politicians less likely to address these real underlying issues is a question for another day. There are two final points to consider. First, caution should be used in using existing evidence to inform us of the likely effects of Romanian and Bulgarian immigration, because skill levels and incentives are likely to be different from the immigration we’ve already faced. Second, the immigration issue is clearly not just about employment and pay – but also about social cohesion, identity, the effects on public services and many other factors. This column has merely sought to cast light om direct labour market impacts, where, as conservatives who support markets, we must be more enlightened than assuming a static economy with a fixed number of jobs. Economy Employment immigrants Immigration Migration Migration Watch Unemployment Share this article: Tweet Recent articles Osborne-Headshot3 Osborne-Headshot3 Osborne tries to define the politics of growth ahead of 2015 Published: January 6, 2014 Conservative-UKIP pact Conservative-UKIP pact Toby Young’s Tories Before UKIP plan Published: January 6, 2014 LESLIE Charlotte red LESLIE Charlotte red Charlotte Leslie MP: Why we need a Royal College of Teaching Published: January 6, 2014 SCRUTON Roger SCRUTON Roger Roger Scruton: What do Conservatives believe? Published: January 6, 2014 BOYS SMITH Nick BOYS SMITH Nick Nicholas Boys Smith: How to increase house-building at no ultimate cost to the taxpayer Published: January 6, 2014 Democracy (Deep End) Democracy (Deep End) Get ready for a general election without precedent – 2015 is year zero for British politics Published: January 6, 2014 Umunna on Marr Umunna on Marr More quangos and resurrecting regionalisation? Chuka Umunna’s plan to save democracy needs a rethink Published: January 5, 2014 CONSERVATIVE tree red white and blue CONSERVATIVE tree red white and blue The latest poll from Lord Ashcroft shows the Tories’ reputational problem Published: January 5, 2014 ASHCROFT blue shirt ASHCROFT blue shirt Lord Ashcroft: My latest polling – and the mountain the Conservatives must climb to gain a majority Published: January 4, 2014 BURFITT DONS Louise black and white BURFITT DONS Louise black and white Louise Burfitt-Dons: The successes and failures of feminism Published: January 4, 2014 89 comments for: Work: Have immigrants “taken our jobs”? * * Leave a Reply Cancel You must be logged in to post a comment. * Highlights * Latest * Comments * Osborne tries to define the politics of growth ahead of 2015 January 6, 2014 * Toby Young’s Tories Before UKIP plan January 6, 2014 * Charlotte Leslie MP: Why we need a Royal College of Teaching January 6, 2014 * Roger Scruton: What do Conservatives believe? January 6, 2014 * Nicholas Boys Smith: How to increase house-building at no ultimate cost to the taxpayer January 6, 2014 * WATCH: Owen Paterson visits a flood relief scheme January 6, 2014 * WATCH: Should UKIP be involved in the 2015 television debates? January 6, 2014 * WATCH: Osborne – 2014 is a “year of hard truths” January 6, 2014 * Toby Young: How a tactical alliance between UKIP and the Tories could work January 6, 2014 * Osborne tries to define the politics of growth ahead of 2015 January 6, 2014 Tweets from @PaulGoodmanCH/news-tweets Editors Blog List [ ] Select blog link * Adam Smith Institute Blog * Allister Heath * Andrew Bolt (Australia) * Andrew Kennedy * Archbishop Cranmer * Australian Conservative * Bagehot (Economist) * Benedict Brogan (Telegraph) * Bow Group * Centre for Policy Studies Blog * Cobden Centre * Comment is Free * Conservative Christian Fellowship * Conservative Friends of India * Conservative Friends of Israel * Conservative Friends of Pakistan * Conservative Middle East Council * Conservative Muslim Forum * Crash Bang (Mark) Wallace * Daniel Hannan MEP * David Frum (The Daily Beast) * Douglas Carswell MP * Egremont * Evening Standard Politics * Foreign Affairs * FT Westminster blog * Gary Gibbon (Channel 4) * Guido Fawkes * Harry's Place * Huffington Post * Iain Dale * Iain Martin * Institute for Economic Affairs Blog * James Chapman & Mail Political Team * John Redwood MP * Labour Uncut * LabourList * Left Foot Forward * LibDemVoice * Liberal Vision * Mark Reckons * National Review Online * Norman Tebbit * Open Unionism * Platform 10 * Policy Exchange Blog * Quilliam Foundation * Right Minds (Daily Mail) * Spectator Coffee House * Telegraph Blogs * The American Conservative * The Guardian's data blog * The Week * UK Polling Report * Weekly Standard Latest Tweets Latest Tweets A selection of must-read blogs and news stories, chosen by the @ConHome team Follow @MustBeRead * .@iainmartin1 sums up George Osborne’s New Year message: Labour is rubbish http://t.co/7jpx2huBR92 hours ago Reply Retweet Favorite * From @rafaelbehr: The Tories need a better message than "don't let Labour back in" http://t.co/cA41Yvg6ni4 hours ago Reply Retweet Favorite * .@pete_hoskin on the five major political messages in @George_Osborne's speech: http://t.co/tUzKtPNKgc5 hours ago Reply Retweet Favorite * From @BrotherIvo: Who is responsible for the rising cost of Legal Aid? http://t.co/OenVt8ai277 hours ago Reply Retweet Favorite * From @AlanCochraneSez: Labour and Tory 'ultras' must learn discipline to fight Nats http://t.co/wcBEp0nqgd8 hours ago Reply Retweet Favorite Join the conversation Browse by Tag Councillor and officer remuneration Conservative strategy George Osborne MP Transport Liberal Democrats City Hall David Cameron Environment Ed Miliband Andrew Lilico By-election results Council tax Tax and spending Local Elections (general) Council finances Housing Economic policy Europe Education David Cameron MP Show all tags [conhome-footer.png] Britain’s leading Conservative blog for news, comment, analysis and campaigns, edited by Paul Goodman. We are independent of the Conservative Party but supportive of it. Site Information * About ConservativeHome * Advertise * Contact Us * Comments Policy * ConservativeHome’s Daily Email * News feeds from ConservativeHome What’s happening inside the Conservative Party? ConservativeIntelligence has the answers. A weekly ‘Intelligence Letter‘, email alerts, high quality events, extended briefings and an online, searchable databank. Website by Tjugo Tjugo ©2014 Conservative Home, All rights reserved #Left Foot Forward » Feed Left Foot Forward » Comments Feed Left Foot Forward » We repeat, migrants are *less* likely to claim benefits than indigenous Britons Comments Feed The failure of the Swiss referendum demonstrates the need to tackle high pay globally Remembering Harvey Milk * About * Our writers * Donate * Volunteer Skip to content * Economy * Foreign Policy * Public Services * Social Justice * Media * Environment « The failure of the Swiss referendum demonstrates the need to tackle high pay globally Remembering Harvey Milk » We repeat, migrants are *less* likely to claim benefits than indigenous Britons By James Bloodworth | Published: November 27, 2013 Tweet In a sop to UKIP, David Cameron has pledged to bar migrants from claiming out-of-work benefits for three months after their arrival to the UK. Polish passport The measure is supposed to put off ‘would-be benefit tourists’ from coming to Britain. What David Cameron probably won’t tell you, however, is that migrants from Eastern Europe are less likely to claim benefits than indiginous Britons. Most migrants from the EU do not come to Britain to sign on, but to work. Migrants who came to the UK after the year 2000 have made a ‘substantial’ contribution to public finances, according to a recent study by University College London. Those from the European Economic Area (EEA – the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein) made a particularly strong contribution in the decade up to 2011, contributing 34 per cent more in taxes than they received in benefits, the study found. Other data backs this up. In 2008-09, at the height of Labour’s policy of so-called ‘uncontrolled immigration’, A8 immigrants paid 37 per cent more in direct or indirect taxes than they received in public goods and services. A8 immigrants contributed 0.96 per cent of total tax receipts and accounted for only 0.6 per cent of total expenditures (see table). Benefit tourists And before someone makes a boring argument about Britain’s benefit system being ‘the most generous in Europe’, that isn’t true either. A study by the Economic and Social Research Council’s Centre for Population Change (CPC) carried out last year found that the UK had below average levels of welfare spending among developed nations. (See graph). Benefits graph There is no reason to view Britain as any more attractive to benefit tourists than other EU countries, and no reason to view the latest ‘crackdown’ on ‘welfare tourism’ as anything other than an attempt to shore up the right-wing vote. Benefit tourism just isn’t a significant problem. This entry was posted in A Britain We All Call Home and tagged benefit tourism, Immigration, migration. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. * « The failure of the Swiss referendum demonstrates the need to tackle high pay globally Remembering Harvey Milk » * https://mikestallard.virtualgallery.com/ Mike Stallard James – I work at a Centre which welcomes immigrants and has done since the Poles first arrived. What you say is absolutely true – at first they were exemplary. They worked like demons for our centre (and church) voluntarily AFTER 12 hour shifts at the factory or in the fields! But things have changed a lot now. There are professional human traffickers around who shove people in here for money. There are professional hucksters who show how, if you just get rid of your partner, you can get free housing and so on. There are a lot of Europeans now, collecting all the welfare they can get – and then collecting it at home too. Oh yes, the vast majority do in fact do us the honour of becoming British. They learn the language, dress and behave just like us and their children are as British as you or me. Lovely people most of them too. Overall I am very positive about immigrants: they have saved our (Catholic) Church. But there is enormous amount of swindling too. * SimonB It’s been pointed out elsewhere that much of what was announced today is already being done, and the new bit, the minimum earning threshold, is probably illegal. So another triumph for tabloid-led policy. * Sparky James Bloodworth’s thinking: 1. Migrants are less-likely to claim benefits than the indigenous population, but 2. Migrants don’t take jobs away from the indigenous population. Which is it? Either they’re competing in the job market or they’re not. Perhaps he could clarify. * Two Bob I care about all of the youth that are leaving our education system and are being left on the scrap heap because it is cheaper for big business to hire immigrant pre trained labour than directly train our youth for the work (not because our boys and girls are lazy – mere propaganda). I was talking to a check out girl at Aldi the other day, lovely 26 year old woman from Poland, got a good degree and works shelf stacking at Aldi and has been there for a few years. If that is not a waste of her education and potential I do not know what else is. Why is her country not providing her with the opportunities she deserves and why is our country not giving our school leavers the opportunities they deserve, relative to their education rather than leaving them to wither away on benefits? Everyone has to start somewhere, but why would an employer want to give a basic job to a school leaver with no experience if the rotten system allows them to have someone (and an unlimited supply of people) with a degree and a couple of years of experience ready and willing but prepared to work for the same salary (or less)? The fact this system allows that to happen is what disgusts me, but of course organisations like the CBI love the EU – this sort of thing benefits them. Westminster is a mess and the EU is a mess. There is nothing wrong with a free trade area but there is everything wrong with having a federal cancer attached to it. For Britain, France, and Spain and Greece etc all to be successful in the future is to have politicians that work soley for their own people, not the so called European project. Being more country orientated is not going to start a war, Europe would not suddenly go back 70 years – but chronic youth unemployment alonemay cause it. Because of immigration the jobs being created are quickly being taken by migrants. There is a crisis in the NHS and Education because of the sheer volume. The birthrate is out of control, pushing our population up to unsustainable levels. There is also a housing crisis which can only be appeased by building on greenbelt land which would be a nothing other than a catastrophe, becoming apparent in the near future. Unfettered immigration is wrong for Britain and will eventually be the straw that broke the camels back. It is eroding the quality of our lives piece by piece year after year. Just remember how limited in size our country is. If Britain leaves the EU it will be much better for all of us. Britain could create its own Common Market with its former colonies, from India to Australia, from South Africa to Canada. And will save alot of money. We wont be alone or isolated in the world – our ultimate goal would be to broker and associate with many of the trading blocks around the world without having to join at the hip – it is a huge opportunity. Those people who accuse us Ukippers of being Little Englanders are themselves infact Little Britainers or Little Europeans. We are not even remotely suggesting turning our backs on Europe or clicking our fingers to bring online our defensive shield, so why say that? Many of us Ukippers love Europe itself and spend considerable holiday time in France, Spain, Italy, not to mention dear old Scotland. We are proud Britons, and proud members of the family of Europe. But we cannot stomach having a tsunami of regulation and legislation handed down to us by mediocre, unelected bureaucrats, presiding over a monetary union that has been disastrous for several smaller nations and bodes ill for several larger. We cannot accept that our independence has beengiven away by the slitherers of new labour, and we are going to reclaim it. We accept that controlled immigration can welcome talent to Britain through stringent admission procedures, but for people with degrees from poor countries to come here and work minimum wage jobs, out competing our school leavers simply because their minimum (and average) wage is a fraction of ours is immoral and is quite frankly a kick in the teeth. Anyone can have huge work ethic if they are given the opportunity to earn 5 times more than they usually would, so the playing field is hardly level, not to mention the people in semi skilled jobs formerly earning a living wage having to re-price themselves in the jobs market, widening the gap between rich and poor. Free movement between Britain, Holland, France, Germany, Italy Finland etc was never the issue. The amount of free movement a country and its citizens can have access to should be directly linked to the wealth of their country, their economic performance should reach a minimum standard per capita before full free movement can be initiated, otherwise it is simply a race to the bottom for the working class of western Europe, and extremist parties will get the opportunity to take advantage, and massively take advantage they will if things carry on as they are. Expect an huge army of eurosceptics from France, Britain, Holland, Denmark, Finland, Italy in May 2014 based on this issue, and also the issue of the euro, both which are dragging ordinary people (and countries) off the edge of a cliff, the process of turning Europe into a country, slowly but surely (deny it all you like europhiles, but that is the ultimate goal and you cannot fool us) is harming its citizens. I cannot fathom how any normal person from any country, let alone England/Britain can disagree with any of this, unless they have a serious vested interest, whether that is their hiring of a cheap cash in hand nanny from Latvia, or their gravy train in Brussels waiting for them to climb aboard once they get booted out of government. So please, get a grip and look at society as a whole, not just GDP, human nature is far more important. Boston & Skegness will get its first UKIP MP (among many) for a reason. Britain is the dustbin of Europe, and Poland is now thriving, yes because less people mean less unemployment, whilst we pay for their kids at home and go to foodbanks. Limited imigration is good. Uncontrolled mass economic migration is not. You are a typical chattering class stooge. Any left winger who thinks the system is fine as it is needs to look at themselves in the mirror and think about the working class of Britain for a change. Champagne socialists make me sick. * Dave Roberts James. I was about to go on the offensive when I saw the main title but by the time I got to the article itself I saw you had changed the story somewhat. Poles are not Somalis and it is totally disingenuous to to suggest that they are. A book well worth reading is ” The Diversity Illusion” by Ed West who totally demolishes the current liberal/extreme left consensus on immigration. Ignoring benefits received at the point of delivery such as education and the NHS Poles take a half of one per cent of other applied for benefits. With Somalis the figure is over seventy. Poles, Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians and others, but not all, from the former Soviet empire are essentially Europeans with all that that implies. Their religious, family and general social values are very similar to our own. That cannot be said of a culture like the Somalis, and I realise that there are sub groups and cultures among them, that believe in female genital mutilation. Sub Saharan Africa isn’t and never will be largely Catholic eastern Europe. To point that out isn’t, as Simon B seems to be saying, a victoryfor tabloid led something or other, it’s just true. * TM The Left is indeed full of the chattering classes of London, basically the affluent Middle class socialists who pretend to care. Why do they care so much about immigrants and not poor Working class people in Britain? Anyone care to answer that? Immigration is about one thing: CHEAP LABOUR!!!! Do the Middle class suffer here? Well if they were believe me there’d be a change of tune coming from them, but as it’s only poor people being affected, who cares about them anyway? As long the Middle class of whatever political persuasion have their affluent careers and nice housing and access to good education and wonderful lifestyles, well why would they care? Have they ever? They are the archetypal do gooding class, either contemptuous of the white Working class or patronising. That about sums up the Right and the Left in this country. And anyone who disagrees with a Middle class person is either a racist or a pleb!!! So there’s no debate either. Welcome to 21st century Britain. I will never vote for UKIP however because we would be swapping one load or rich posh Southern boys with privileged lives, for another. Some choice that would be. * Sparky This is why I am against more migrants: 1. They are competing for jobs that unemployed people here could do. 2. They are prepared to work for less so they drive down wages 3. They put added pressure on housing and infrastructure and public services What are your top three reasons for more migrants? I don’t mean a critique of my reasons, I mean three positive benefits. * Sparky Come on James, how about an article addressing that question? They’re not going to claim benefits but they’re also not going to compete with British workers for jobs? * Boston_scoundrel 1. They make a massive net fiscal contribution to the UK economy. EEA migrants contributed, net, about £22bn between 2001 and 2011 (according to the Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration at University College London). 2. They are, therefore, making a proportionally bigger contribution to infrastructure and services than UK natives 3. They stop us becoming insular and mono-cultural * Dave Roberts Boston_ scoundrel. Two points. How much do they take out and what is the political orientation of the think tank you use? * Boston_scoundrel It’s a NET fiscal contribution – that is, they put in much more than they take out (unlike the average of the native UK population, which are net takers). I didnt quote a think tank – I quoted an academic source (the clue is in the name: University College London) * TM Yes this may be true, and there are many benefits we have accrued because of immigration, but the basic premise all seem to forget is that it is now essentially about cheap unlicensed labour that means more profits for the affluent and a lack of jobs for millions unemployed here. Of course, if you are wealthy or one of those affluent Middle class Lefties it won’t affect you will it??!! * Boston_scoundrel That’s simply not true. Ignoring Daily Express headlines (not noted for their accuracy) proper academic studies have shown that the displacement effect at the lower end of the labour market – which is what you are referring to – is pretty small. About 1 in 13 jobs held by a migrant worker displaces one which could be done by a UK native. The really worrying issue is with high skill, high value jobs where something like 20% of jobs are held by non-native employees, because UK schools and universities aren’t producing young people with the right skills. Without the immigration you are worried about, those employers would pack up and go somewhere else. The issue you should early get your arse in your hands about isn’t immigration, it’s the woeful state of British education. * TM OK, that’s a fair point and you engaged with me lucidly and intelligently. But the fact is that a lot of immigration is about cheap labour ultimately. The perception, whether right or wrong, is that many work in jobs that should be better paid so that people here could do them and not be ruthlessly exploited. Incidentally, where do you get your stats from? Another problem I have is people dismissing an argument because they say it’s false and misleading, but then everyone and his dog can do that can’t they if they disagree with an opinion? Most realities, harsh ones, involve some kind of economics at their core, and immigration seems to be about exploitation and getting away with paying low wages to people who see those wages as high. It’s not rocket science mate! * TM Yes. That is rather contradictory isn’t it? I guess he won’t feel the need to answer but do what they all do, issue statements from on high. That’s why most politics is a game played by the affluent. * Boston_scoundrel The point is that the perception is wrong. The 1 in 13 figure comes from the Government’s Migration Advisory Committee, from work they did on the economic implications of immigration, published 18 months or so ago. The 20% figure comes from the Office for National Statistics. Immigration may seem to be about cheap labour and driving down wages. But the reality is that it isnt. The problem is that people form a view on the basis of perception, or headlines in the Daily Mail, and dont bother to investigate the real facts… * LB Tell us again why we need any migrants on benefits? Look at the cost. Bugger all in tax. Lots of paying money out. If you want migrants like that, there’s a simple test. You personally sponsor them and pay out of your pocket. * LB How does a migrant on welfare make a net fiscal contribution? They don’t. Now look at how much a migrant needs to pay in tax to make a net contribution. The government spends 11.5K a year per person. You need to be on 44K a year to break even. Each and every migrant. And that ignores the pensions. So the Cream report from UCL is bonkers. No numbers as to earnings. Huge numbers are not earning 44K a year and so are not making a net contribution. They are paying a few quid in tax, and getting all their services for free, paid for by other people. e.g 1. Abu Hamzah – benefit claimant. 2. Abrambovich. Hamzah isn’t making a net contribution is he? He cost over a million and paid no tax. Why are you trying to claim Abu Hamzah is good for the UK? * LB They don’t. How does Abu Hamzah make a net contribution? How does the 29% on welfare make a net contribution? * LB Put up a reference. The growth in the number of employed and the growth in the number of migrants shows where the jobs are going. If you haven’t noticed, there has been an increase in employement, increase in migration, and bugger all decrease in unemployment. ie. There is a huge displacement going on. * Boston_scoundrel What’s Hamza got to do with it? Nothing. The fact is that EEA migrants make a massive net fiscal contribution. That’s a fact. No amount of huffing and puffing about one man makes any difference. And it’s a fact that migrants make up about 13% of the total workforce! but only7% of out of work benefit claimants. EEA migrants make up about 10% of the workforce but about 5% of out of work benefit claimants. In other words, migrants are less likely to be claiming benefits than UK natives and EEA migrants much less likely. They are facts. They might be inconvenient for you, but they are facts. The source of these facts is the Office of National Statistics. Which, no doubt, you will claim to be biased in some way… * Boston_scoundrel It’s obviously nonsense to suggest that all the new jobs in the economy have gone to migrants. I don’t know about you, but where I work almost all new job starters are UK natives. That’s true of most jobs. Something like 20000 people start a new job each week and the vast majority were born here. About 85% of new jobs go to UK natives. That’s a fact. (Source – Jonathan Portes writing in the Spectator in 2012) * LB Abu Hamzah has everything to do with it. I asked a question and you won’t answer it. Abu Hamzah was a migrant. Did he or did he not make a net contribution to the UK? Simple question. You’re claiming migrants make a net contribution. Hamzah is a migrant. Just finding out whether or not your claim is true. Did Hamzah make a net contribution? * LB In other words, migrants are less likely to be claiming benefits than UK natives and EEA migrants much less likely. ============ That may well be the case. My figures based off research you’ve quoted put the number higher. However, you’re not answering the question I’ve asked you’ve dodged it. For those migrants on welfare, do they make a net contribution? The answer is no they don’t. They consume money from other people on welfare and from the tax payer. * LB I never claimed they did. I said that employment has gone up. Migration has gone up. Unemployment hasn’t changed much. That means that most of the new jobs have gone to migrants. If that was not the case, then unemployment would have gone down dramatically. You can’t explain that away. * Boston_scoundrel The same way a UK native on benefits makes a net contribution. They don’t. But migrants are much less likely to be on benefits than U K natives and there are far fewer of them. I’ve said nothing about Hamza, he’s irrelevant to the argument * Boston_scoundrel We don’t need anyone on benefits. But we have a welfare state which pays benefits to people judged to need them, wherever they were born. * LB Notice the generalisation. e.g. Because one migrant is good, all migrants must be good. Imaging Boston’s reaction if someone claimed that a black man had committed a crime, and all black men must be criminals. He would rightly go apoplectic, but he’s prepared to use the logic of the BNP in arguing his case. * LB I’ve asked you to comment because he’s entirely relevant. You are using BNP logic. e.g If one black man commits a crime, then all black men must be criminals is their way of thinking and logic. You’re applying that to migration. You’re saying because some migrants make a net contribution that all migrants must make a net contribution. They don’t. Hence the question about Hamzah. By your logic he must make a net contribution and so must be good for the UK. I’m asking you to back that up. Now you know that’s not the case, so you’re dodging the question. The reason why its relevant is that migration is a choice. The UK can say no and it can say yes on an individual basis. It should do that. It should reject all migrants on welfare because the migrant on welfare is not making a net contribution. Are you going to deny that? [My prediction is you'll make another BNP like statement about all migrants being good for the UK] * LB Yes. And we have a migration system that could say, we don’t want migrants on welfare. We can refuse to accept them into the UK. * Boston_scoundrel You are misunderstanding the point quite spectacularly.. Of course not every migrant makes a net contribution. I havent claimed that they do and noone, to the best of my knowledge, has argued that they do. Migrants as a whole make a massive net fiscal contribution. Some individuals, of course, do not. But the point is what happens in the aggregate. That is why any individual case is basically irrelevant – it doesnt change the aggregate position. I am not saying that some migrants make a net contribution therefore individually they all do. I am saying that the fact is that, in the aggregate, migrants make a net contribution. Some give, some take, but the former more than outweighs the latter. So of course Hamxa doesnt make a net contribution. I never claimed that he did, you just misunderstood my point. Do migrants on benefits make a net contribution? It depends on the timescale over which you measure. While they are claiming benefits, no they dont. But if they then get a job and make a positive contribution for then next 10 years, they may well might. So it isnt quite as simple as yu would like it to be. * Boston_scoundrel Except, of course, that some migrants we force onto welfare whether they want to work or not (those seeking asylum). * Boston_scoundrel You’re wrong. The fact is that the vast majority of new jobs have gone to UK natives. The number of jobs has gone up and most have them, the vast majority of them, have gone to UK natives. Because the number of new jobs has outstripped the rate of migration and the majority of new entrants to the labour market are UK natives. See, that was quite easy to explain away. * Boston_scoundrel No, of course not. I have never claimed he did. You have just misunderstood my point. * Boston_scoundrel Yes, of course they do. That’s obvious. I’ve never claimed otherwise. But it doesnt change the fact that, in the aggregate, migrants are net contributors to the UK economy. In the aggregate – which does not mean that ever single migrant is a net contributor – just that more are than are not. A relatively simple point. * Boston_scoundrel I have never used that logic. I’m afraid you’ve made that up * LB Of course not every migrant makes a net contribution. I havent claimed that they do and noone, to the best of my knowledge, has argued that they do. =============== So why are we accepting the migrants who don’t make a net contribution? eg. Abu Hamzah. For the migrants who do make a net contribution, I’m all for them. Migration is an option. The country can choose to accept or reject. So accept the factual part, now progress. So where do you set the boundary. How big a contribution does a migrant have to make to make a net contribution. You claim that over all they do, so you must know where that boundary is (on average). * TM Statistics. There is a saying you might do well to learn ‘there are lies, damned lies…and statistics.’ And as for that rag the Daily Mail, I would not use it for toilet paper. The problem I have with the whole immigration debate is that it is an ‘all or nothing’ kind of debate, or ‘you are either for us or against us’ or you are either saint for agreeing with it, or an evil Right wing racist if you don’t! So, only extreme views are heard and moderates like myself with misgivings are dismissed. This is a democracy and there are other voices other than the polarised ones. That’s what is wrong with all politics at the moment. * Boston_scoundrel And there’s more to sensible analysis of the facts than tired old cliches. My views aren’t at all extreme. There’s a debate to be had about migration and it’s impacts. I have no problem with that. All I am saying is that it is better on the whole if one’s opinions are based on facts and evidence rather than supposition and assumption * TM ‘There’s a debate to be had about migration and it’s impacts.’ That we can agree on then my friend. There is no real debate on it at all, it is too polarised. It is too black and white and the world is usually infinite shades of grey. I notice that even in Left leaning newspapers like the Daily Mirror most people are also concerned about immigration too. I was the archetypal sort of trendy Lefty too, applauding multi culturalism and immigration. But I am not so sure now. The debate is beyond politics, it is a whole raft of issues that have been sidelined, marginalised or ignored. Yes my friend, we need an OPEN debate on it. I won’t hold my breath waiting for ANY party to open it though, until it gets too big to be ignored, as I think it almost is now. Watch this space… * TM ps I never said your views were extreme either!!! Even Sparky makes the odd valid point here and there. That my Boston scoundrel is what we call participatory democracy, opinions you or I may not agree with but should be heard all the same, not stifled for some political or other agenda. If someone then says something provocative or racist or whatever, they can then be argued down effectively. That is democracy. It is not all agreeing for politeness’ sake. We can in the end agree to disagree. * Boston_scoundrel No one would ever accuse me of being trendy, but I am absolutely sure that multiculturalism is to be applauded and encouraged. The alternative, in which we all look and sound the same, is too awful to contemplate * TM Perhaps I overegged the trendy bit! I tend to see the trendy Lefties as very Middle class too, which is something I am most certainly not. It can be a stance after all. What you say I agree with, and I love many cultures, and many different foods, and love to learn about many places. The problem may be that what happens when the people who are supposed to integrate, on all sides, don’t particularly want to? It seems almost enforced to me and it is obvious in many towns in the UK and the West in general that often people stick to their own communities. Middle class people eulogise community and multiculturalism because it is something alien them, often growing up in all white affluent and perhaps rather bland suburbs filled with respectable suburban folk with similar mentalities and a clipped accent. Don’t many Middle class people all look and sound the same, certainly where accents are concerned? I have a regional accent myself, the type of accent that is looked down and sneered at by white Middle class people, strangely enough the same no doubt who would be promoting equality and diversity!!! I do agree with difference, in fact being a cook I love variety and difference, I just find that there is an agenda behind some of it which is or can be disingenuous. Why isn’t white Working class culture celebrated in England, or Irish culture? Thirty years ago the Irish were being demonised, now it’s the Muslims. Nothing changes. * Lance If there were no jobs for taking, why would they come here? * * YouGov Tracker IFRAME: http://widgets.yougov.com/UKWidget/widget-xsmall.html?referral_code = * Touchstone Economic Tracker IFRAME: http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/economic-dashboard/widget.php?w=280&h= 230 * IFRAME: //www.facebook.com/plugins/likebox.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.faceb ook.com%2Fpages%2FLeft-Foot-Forward%2F119855314479&width=292&height =290&show_faces=true&colorscheme=light&stream=false&border_color&he ader=true&appId=138959422912841 * Best of the web * Archive [Select Month__] * [join-twitter-followers.jpg] Published by Left Foot Forward Ltd, registered in England and Wales number 06978729. Hosted in Texas, USA by Rackspace US, Inc. Powered by WordPress, Thematic Theme Framework and W3 Total Cache. #Left Foot Forward » Feed Left Foot Forward » Comments Feed Left Foot Forward » It’s now clear that Tuesday’s immigration proposals were pure dog whistling Comments Feed SNP EU plans in serious doubt You don’t have to be in government to be in power * About * Our writers * Donate * Volunteer Skip to content * Economy * Foreign Policy * Public Services * Social Justice * Media * Environment « SNP EU plans in serious doubt You don’t have to be in government to be in power » It’s now clear that Tuesday’s immigration proposals were pure dog whistling By Jill Rutter | Published: November 28, 2013 Tweet David Cameron was evidently in a panic on Tuesday. He had 50 or so of his back-benchers chomping on their bits and demanding amendments to the Immigration Bill that would call for a continuation of transitional controls on Bulgarian and Romanian nationals. UK border agency The quarterly migration statistics were due and he was also expecting a visit from Laszlo Andor, the EU Commissioner on Employment. There is growing concern about Roma immigration. And then there is UKIP and the lifting in the new year of transitional controls on Romanian and Bulgarian nationals. Yet the statistics tell a more complex picture and a consensus is emerging that Tuesday’s proposals are either ineffective, unworkable, or a re-articulation of existing policy. As such, they will do little to allay public concerns about migration. The migration statistics paint a complex picture. Net migration has increased, but this can mostly be explained by a decrease in emigration. This only highlights the perversity of the net immigration policy. Overall, immigration has fallen, but compared with the previous year to 1 September there has been an increase in work visa migration (up 5 per cent), student migration to the higher education sector (up 7 per cent) asylum migration and EU migration. When these statistics are broken down further, the increase in asylum migration can be explained by an increase from a small number of countries, particularly Syria. Trends in EU migration are interesting when set alongside the DWP’s National Insurance Number (NiNo) data. Over the last 12 months to September 2013 New National Insurance number registrations from Bulgarians and Romanians have fallen by 17 per cent and 22 per cent respectively. This suggests that the Bulgarians and Romanians who have arrived are return migrants, having come to the UK on a previous occasion (the peak year for Romanian National Insurance number registrations was 2006/07). The NiNo statistics show a large increase in new registrations from nationals from the ‘old’ EU, from Spain (up 50 per cent), Italy (up 35 per cent), Portugal (up 43 per cent) and Greece (up 44 per cent). So today’s immigration statistics are a story about the Eurozone crisis and the weak economies in southern Europe. This makes the Cameron proposals – targeted at Bulgarians and Romanians – somewhat irrelevant. Tuesday’s proposals include a suggestion that no EU migrant will be able to claim jobseeker’s allowance for more than a maximum of six months unless they can prove that they have a genuine prospect of employment. Yet 2004 Treaty regulations mean that new migrants forfeit their European Economic Area (EEA) worker status – which gives them freedom of movement – if they lose their job. Essentially, a new migrant must be in employment in the UK to secure EEA worker status. Already any protracted period of unemployment of an EEA national who does not have settlement rights in the UK is likely to disqualify that person from benefits and rights of residency in the UK. Cameron also suggested that any EU national sleeping rough or begging will be deported and barred from re-entry for 12 months “unless they can prove they have a proper reason to be here, such as a job”. Any mass round-up of rough sleepers would be very difficult to implement, as some London local authorities have discovered. In summary, Tuesday’s proposals are pure dog whistling. A more considered approach is needed. If Cameron wants to reduce EU immigration he needs policies that focus on the ‘push’ factors that cause migrants to move to the UK. EU migration is a European issue and economic policy needs to focus on youth unemployment in southern European. If we want to reduce immigration from Romania and Bulgaria, we need to improve the lot of the Roma population. In Romania, where this minority makes up an estimated 7 per cent of the population, recent research showed that just 10 per cent of Roma adults had regular work and 52 per cent had no work at all. Even though educational outcomes have improved recently, some 20 per cent of Roma adults are illiterate and access to healthcare and education, particularly for those who have moved to the cities, is difficult. It is unsurprising, therefore, that Roma move to the UK. Instead of empty rhetoric, the government needs to use its foreign and economic policy, and the institutions of the EU to improve conditions in eastern and southern Europe. In the UK there are real concerns about the integration of Roma immigrants, particularly from Romania. Yet some Roma have integrated into their new neighbourhoods. This has been achieved by the hard work of community leaders, teachers, police, third sector organisations, Brits and the migrants themselves. We should be promoting integration and replicating success, rather than issuing unworkable policy statements. This entry was posted in A Britain We All Call Home and tagged Immigration, immigration statistics, migration. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. * « SNP EU plans in serious doubt You don’t have to be in government to be in power » * Adam Thank you for a great article which I enjoyed reading. When I saw the PM’s comments re immigration on Tuesday my first reaction was one of dismay because I wish the PM paid as much attention to youth unemployment as he did to Immigration. * Simon Masters Good to read your words Jill. LFF! * Dave Roberts He is paying attention to immigration as much as Labour is because it is a hot button issue. People are genuinely concerned about the level of immigration and it is useless to try and say anything else. While we are on the subject can someone tell me what whistling dogs has got to do with this issue? * TM ‘EU migration is a European issue and economic policy needs to focus on youth unemployment in southern European.’ Yes agreed. And perhaps also focus on youth unemployment in North West Europe as well, and the growing class and wealth divides across North West Europe too. Instead of flying off somewhere and being the saviours of the world, the leaders of the West would do well to sort out problems in their own countries. And that’s aimed at both the Left and the Right. ‘If we want to reduce immigration from Romania and Bulgaria, we need to improve the lot of the Roma population.’ Yes agreed. And perhaps we also need to improve the lot of the poor, the disabled and the pensioners who can’t afford to heat their homes in the UK as well. All this do gooding is welcome but where are the concerned voices for the now tens of thousands of pensioners who will die this year? The Bible says charity begins at home. Again and again, we wake up to the fact that if we want a fairer and more equitable Europe, we have to ensure that wages in wealthy countries are living wages, and that checks and balances have to be in place, and these things have to be paid for in the first place by the acceptance of a fair tax system. Because if we don’t pay now, we will pay later, in ways we might unforeseen. Greed will destroy everything. * Dacus Thank you for the links to the DWP, they gave me ammunition in all discussions. The number of Romas in Romania has been greatly exaggerated, they are less than a million . roughly 4% of the total population. Yet the British Media has presented all Romanians as Romas (all recent newspaper pictures show exclusively Romas, not Romanians). Finally, Cameron’s legislation meant to “deter” Romanians and Bulgarians will end hurting Italians,Spaniards and other old EU citizens far more. Now, that is hilarious! * john ‘Dog Whistle’ is when you gain electoral support by making statements which people want to hear but in reality not acting on them. To put it simply: Talk the talk but not walk the walk For example after UKIP got success in the local elections for a week the main parties were publicly saying they would be tough on immigration, that they understand people etc to try and claw votes back from UKIP to the main 3. Will they end mass immigration? Nope but they will put the wool over peoples’ eyes and tell them what they want to hear yet do the opposite * * YouGov Tracker IFRAME: http://widgets.yougov.com/UKWidget/widget-xsmall.html?referral_code = * Touchstone Economic Tracker IFRAME: http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/economic-dashboard/widget.php?w=280&h= 230 * IFRAME: //www.facebook.com/plugins/likebox.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.faceb ook.com%2Fpages%2FLeft-Foot-Forward%2F119855314479&width=292&height =290&show_faces=true&colorscheme=light&stream=false&border_color&he ader=true&appId=138959422912841 * Best of the web * Archive [Select Month__] * [join-twitter-followers.jpg] Published by Left Foot Forward Ltd, registered in England and Wales number 06978729. Hosted in Texas, USA by Rackspace US, Inc. Powered by WordPress, Thematic Theme Framework and W3 Total Cache. #Liberal Democrat Voice » Teather slams Home Office “Go Home” billboards as “straightforward intimidation” Comments Feed Martin Horwood MP writes… Balance of competence reports shows EU membership is crucial for UK jobs An Open Letter to The New Prince Liberal Democrat Voice latest posts Liberal Democrat Voice latest comments Liberal Democrat Voice Our place to talk – an independent website for supporters of the Liberal Democrat party in the UK. The most-read website by and for Lib Dem supporters. Not paid for by trade unions or millionaires. Skip to content * Home * Member surveys * Video * Archive * Members' forum * Donate * Write for us! * About us * Cookies * Mobile * libel-reform-campaign-logo Julian Huppert: defending free speech with libel reform * immigration Immigration: 87% of Lib Dems back free movement within EU * caron lindsay Caron Lindsay: How can we do politics better? * LibDemVoice Who is your Liberal Voice of the Year? Vote now... Caron Lindsay Teather slams Home Office “Go Home” billboards as “straightforward intimidation” By Caron Lindsay | Mon 22nd July 2013 - 7:47 pm Follow @caronmlindsay Tweet The Evening Standard reports that the Home Office is planning on sending large billboards with “Go home or face arrest” on them around six London boroughs: The billboards will also display the number of illegal migrants arrested recently in the relevant part of the capital. Ministers say that the hardline message is intended to encourage visa overstayers or others here unlawfully to return voluntarily. A phone number offering help – including potential free flights and other travel assistance – will also be shown on the adverts along with the promise that those who come forward voluntarily will not be detained while they arrange their departure. The use of the advertising vans, which will be deployed initially to six London boroughs including Ealing, Barnet and Hounslow, forms the latest stage in a renewed Home Office drive against illegal migrants in recent months. Some critics are likely to see the move as evidence of an excessively hostile attitude to migrants. Sarah Teather, whose Brent constituency is one of the targets of this campaign has taken great exception to the plan: This is the latest in a string of Home Office announcements that are designed to make the Government look tough on immigration. But I fear that the only impact this deeply divisive form of politics will have will be to create tension and mistrust towards anyone who looks and sounds foreign. Instead of trying to grab cheap headlines, the Government would be much better advised to tackle the real issues that undermine confidence in the immigration system. Home Office statistics show that decision making by officials is extremely poor and leads to a quarter of initial decisions to refuse asylum being overturned on appeal. And many of those people who the Government are targeting with these policies are either those whose case has been mishandled by the Home Office, or who Ministers acknowledge cannot be sent home because they wouldn’t be safe. Vulnerable individuals who are fleeing persecution and violence are treated with disbelief and a complete lack of compassion in a rigid and inhumane system. But rather than tackling these problems head on, Ministers are choosing to once more crank up the anti-migrant rhetoric. These adverts are nothing less than straightforward intimidation and can only have bad consequences for communities like those I represent in Brent, where people from all faiths and races have mixed for decades. We will all be much poorer for it. It worries me that this sort of thing will just generate hatred towards people, including those who have every right to be in this country. It certainly has the potential to make everyone who has made their home in this country feel very uncomfortable. My instinctive reaction is to want to stand with the people who are or who will feel they are the target of these billboards. One person suggested on Twitter that she’s tempted to have a suitable reply printed on a t-shirt and to wear it round Brent. It got me thinking that this initiative actually deserves to be mocked into retreat. Sometimes the best way to deal with these deeply divisive things is to come up with some humorous, eye-catching riposte. Any ideas? * Caron Lindsay is Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings Read more by Caron Lindsay or more about home office, immigration or sarah teather. This entry was posted in News. Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/35421 for Twitter and emails. « Previous Post Next Post » 39 Comments * Simon Titley 22nd Jul '13 - 8:50pm This really does reveal the Tories in their true colours. Will this decision be disowned by Nick Clegg or Jeremy Browne? I am reminded of a story about the late, great Clement Freud. He was canvassing in his constituency one day when he met a woman who told him, “I’ve half a mind to vote Tory.” “Madam,” he replied, “that’s all you need.” * Jennie 22nd Jul '13 - 9:53pm Sarah is spot on about this. Shame the rest of the parliamentary party are letting it happen. * CP 22nd Jul '13 - 11:41pm :O This is really bad. Its terrible. I don’t even have any funnies for this :( * Tim13 22nd Jul '13 - 11:46pm This is an absolute disgrace – such f*scist tactics are unworthy of any democratic government. Party Conference should consider sanctions on any elected Lib Dem who supports such bully boy nastiness. ALL Liberals without exception in the past would have totally condemned it. * Chris 22nd Jul '13 - 11:58pm I presume there’s some small print somewhere saying these billboards aren’t directed at everyone who looks a bit foreign? You lot really do have a lot to answer for. * Lee_Thacker 23rd Jul '13 - 12:11am I want the T-Shirt! * Lee_Thacker 23rd Jul '13 - 12:11am I want the T-Shirt! * David Allen 23rd Jul '13 - 12:20am Let’s round up anybody we suspect might be an illegal, and let’s make them all display a demeaning symbol, which shows all the rest of us who they are. The Nazis made their targets wear the Star of David, but we’ll find something else to mark out our targets. It’s only harmless fun, sort of. Next we smash up their buildings. Let’s call that Crystal Nite. And next…. * Alistair 23rd Jul '13 - 12:22am Its funny how when the Tories have aussie advisors like Crosby or Plattell they always play the immigration card, with no sense of irony whatsoever. It is a source of eternal shame that we facilitate this kind of thing. * Tony 23rd Jul '13 - 12:22am Stop using immigrants as scapegoats. The public are beginning to realise it as a ruse to draw attention away from failings in policy, especially economic policy. Enough! * Duncan Stott 23rd Jul '13 - 1:04am The Home Office posters encourage overstayers to send a text to begin their own deportation procedure. An interesting idea I spotted on Twitter earlier today was to organise a mass text to the number in protest at the campaign. * Joe Taylor 23rd Jul '13 - 1:14am It does deserve to be mocked into oblivion. Is there really a ‘text us to be deported’ service? That’s the daftest idea I’ve heard of since John Major’s ‘Cones Hotline’ – yes, the one that had people ringing up for an ice cream, or pretending to be a depressed traffic cone… * BrianD 23rd Jul '13 - 8:03am According to Guardian there is a new Ministerial group on Migrants Access to Benefits. David Laws is a member of that group alongside the Tory Immigration Minister Mark Harper. This is a disgraceful cabal and Laws shames our Party by his participation in it. * R Uduwerage-Perera 23rd Jul '13 - 8:45am As has already been mentioned this tactic is reminiscent of Nazi Germany, and personally I am disgusted that we as a Party are associated with such abuse. I joined this Party because it had a genuine history of doing the right thing with regard to equality and diversity, but since the birth of this Coalition a small percentage in our Party have actually colluded with the Right to further erode equality and human rights in this country, and to chase the votes of the bigots. Demonising people in the way that this latest tactic does, may well lead to further verbal and physical abuse of supposed ‘immigrants’, and this reality will be the responsibility of those people who implemented the programme, and those who are quietly sitting back and remaining silent even though they know that this is totally disgraceful. We could all well learn from the words of Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me — and by that time no one was left to speak up. When will we put ‘liberalism’ back as the central tenet of the Liberal Democrat Party? * Suzanne Fletcher 23rd Jul '13 - 10:26am Words almost fail me at this outrageous, ill thought out, insulting, dangerous and even stupid act. Are the people that thought this up fit to live in our society one has to ask ? I would like to know exactly which politicians knew about this and condoned it, to say nothing of whose idea it was. As Sarah Teather rightly says, the Government should be addressing their failings in how badly they are managing the immigration system. where is the compassion, humanity and dignity in all of this ? At the risk of making this a long posting, and realising this is not just about asylum seekers, I have pasted below what Liberal Democrats for Seekers of Sanctuary stand for. WE BELIEVE in standing up for those who seek sanctuary in our country. Asylum seekers should be treated with compassion, humanity and dignity. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT the way that the present system is working with unfair deportations & removals; dawn raids; detention centre atrocities; returns to unsafe countries; unlimited detention; insecure asylum housing, and lack of support for failed asylum seekers who cannot return to their own countries. WE AIM TO co-ordinate work already being done, share ideas and experiences; be a point of reference for decision makers; and work to formulate new policy. OUR VALUES are embedded in the preamble to the Liberal Democrat Constitution. Our policies, and how they are carried out need to reflect this. * tpfkar 23rd Jul '13 - 12:43pm Totally agree with the comments here; this is appalling, and we should distance ourselves from this – and try to stop it if there is any way. 2 key campaigning points: 1) This is all part of turning sections of society against each other – we’ve seen it on benefits and we should be loudly saying that this isn’t how Lib Dems work, we seek to bring communities together not divide them. 2) The real news on immigration is the further worsening of determination figures. We should be firmly focussed on getting the backlog down, implementing the policies we have at the moment, rather than daft gimmicks playing to the crowd. Sarah Teather is fast becoming one of my favourite Lib Dem MPs and she’s shown real courage in standing up on the issues she has this year. I hope she is some way towards redemption in the eyes of many on here. * Tony Greaves 23rd Jul '13 - 3:58pm Why has no-one in this government, let alone Laws or Clegg, replied here to explain why they have allowed this despicable and very harmful Tory publicity stunt?? Pehaps Mr. Laws can tell us whether it was discussed or approved or even set up by this committee he is a member of? Tony Greaves * Suzanne Fletcher 23rd Jul '13 - 4:58pm As Tony Greaves says – I do think answers need to be given to these questions. * Eddie Sammon 23rd Jul '13 - 5:05pm I don’t see what’s so bad about this. Nobody legal has anything to worry about or should feel targeted in any way. It’s a disgrace that the “liberal” hate mob is out again, trying to bash anyone trying to tackle illegal immigration with the bigot stick. R Uduwerage-Perera demonstrates this with his quote: “…since the birth of this Coalition a small percentage in our Party have actually colluded with the Right to further erode equality and human rights in this country, and to chase the votes of the bigots.”. * Eddie Sammon 23rd Jul '13 - 5:08pm 18 comments on the trot jumping to condemn, a level of ideological conformity unhealthy for any party, backed up with the hate speech to frighten others from speaking out to support it. I don’t love these bill-boards, but I’m pretty indifferent given I want the government to tackle illegal immigration. * Eddie Sammon 23rd Jul '13 - 5:16pm Many of you are also intolerant to opposing views, the famed hypocritical liberal bigotry, yet you call others bigots. “Bigotry: intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself” * Caron Lindsay Caron Lindsay 23rd Jul '13 - 6:31pm @DuncanStott: that mass text of the number sounds like a great idea. Where did you hear it? @eddiesammon: Imagine you are married to a British citizen. You are here perfectly legally. Then these vans start coming round your area saying that there are loads of illegal immigrants there. The local EDL starts to think its area is being (in its own terms) overrun with immigrants. They decide to challenge anyone who looks or sounds a little bit foreign. That’s the way to total breakdown in community relations. It is a lot harder to get into this country than the Daily Mail would have you believe. If people are here illegally, it’s likely that at some point the Home Office has mucked up their case in some way. I wish I could get over to you how horrendously and inhumanely we treat these people. The immigration system is probably our biggest shame as a nation. I’ve seen breastfeeding babies separated from their mothers who have been made to go to the other side of the world so that they can apply to come back (against Home Office policy), I’ve seen mothers threatened with being deported without their babies, I’ve seen people who are obviously abuse victims being denied asylum and being afforded no respect or dignity. And now the government does something that might see them and others hunted down on the streets. * Mark Valladares Mark Valladares 23rd Jul '13 - 6:31pm Eddie, You are, I suspect, quite lucky, in that you aren’t a target of such a campaign. Brent is where I grew up and my parents still live there. The campaign appears to be targeted on areas where there are large BAME communities – Brent North, my old patch is predominantly South Asian these days – and sends out a barely subliminal message that is unhelpful to say the least. Indeed, I tend to agree with Chris on this, not something I often do. And, given that we went into the last General Election with a policy of earned amnesty for illegal migrants, a policy I believed to be pragmatic and liberal at the same time, it might be fair to say that whilst the majority aren’t always right, they do, I suspect, reflect the opinion of the community, in this case LDV readers. * Eddie Sammon 23rd Jul '13 - 7:24pm Caron, Mark, I agree that Lib Dems need to fight negative attitudes towards immigrants, I just get worried about the opposite “bury your head in the sand and call anyone who tries to tackle immigration a bigot” approach, just like what happened to Gillian Duffy. * Stephen Donnelly 23rd Jul '13 - 7:37pm Our claim to be a restraining influence has really taking a beating over the last couple of weeks, this is on a par with Jeremy Hunt’s outrageous claims about ’13000 excess deaths’. * Alistair 23rd Jul '13 - 7:41pm @Eddie – you only have to speak another language in public in this country to get strange looks from people. Xenophobes get plenty of encouragement from the Daily Mail, the EDL and the BNP as it is, they dont need tax funded billboards to spur them on further. In any case, its a stupid idea. What next, billboards in the City encouraging those who manipulate Libor to turn themselves in? Maybe a billboard outside Westminster to tell MPs that expenses cheats will be jailed. Its a publicity stunt and a particularly dumb one at that. * Anon MP's Caseworker 23rd Jul '13 - 8:42pm After the Oldham riots in 2001 Simon Hughes said: “we must be very careful with our language and that’s why some of us have been very critical of some of the language particularly William Hague and his colleagues have used over the last two years and it doesn’t help”. “It may not have a direct effect but it doesn’t help and in some cases it may well encourage people to think they can get away with intolerant language and intolerant attitudes and sometimes intolerant behaviour.” * Eddie Sammon 23rd Jul '13 - 9:00pm I have just seen a photograph of one of the vans and it confirms my suspicion that the level of outrage over this is unfair. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-23419848 The most prominent words on the van are actually “In the UK illegally?”, not “go home or face arrest”. The Evening Standard have been deliberately misleading to provoke outrage. The Evening Standard article doesn’t even mention that the vans have on it “In the UK illegally?”, never mind as the most prominent text. * Hywel 23rd Jul '13 - 9:34pm An Open letter to Nick, Jeremy and Tim Farron which I’m seeking signatures for so any further welcome Open letter on the “Go Home or Face Arrest” billboard campaign Dear Nick, Jeremy and Tim We write as Liberal Democrat members to express our absolute disgust at the current Home Office billboards which are “touring” parts of North London carrying the message, “Go Home or face arrest”. We believe that this is an ill thought out, insulting, and even stupid act. Like Sarah Teather we believe these billboards amount to nothing more than straightforward intimidation. Like the director of Migrant Rights Network we believe this campaign will damage community relations, and increasing mistrust and suspicion of minority ethnic groups in the areas being targeted. Demonising people in this way, may well lead to further verbal and physical abuse of supposed ‘immigrants’, and this reality will be the responsibility of those people who implemented the programme. They represent a crude bit of dog whistle politics, tactics which no person standing up for liberal values should engage in. Nothing the Coalition Agreement the party signed up to suggests support for such a divisive tactic. If Liberal Democrat ministers cannot stop the promotion of such divisive campaigns then we question what use they are serving either the party or the cause of liberal values. We call on the leadership of the party, and Lib Dem ministers with Home Office responsibility to make a clear and unequivocal statement repudiating this campaign and announcing what steps that are taking to terminate it within 72 hours of the publication of this letter. Hywel Morgan, Calderdale, Author of the party’s guide on “Beating the BNP” Stephen Clarke, Tower Hamlets Executive Member Caron Lindsay Angharad Bethan Jones Rhondda Cynon Taff Welsh Liberal Democrats * * Janet King 23rd Jul '13 - 9:49pm Any Government would want to avoid detention for immigration purposes, which costs £43,000 pp per annum and causes real human misery. The UK’s DFT (Detained Fast Track) system actually uses detention as a first resort (against UNHCR detention guidelines ).Furthermore we have a system of indefinite detention so, unlike criminals, innocent refused immigrants can be detained with no time limit. Presumably the Home Office believes that the warning notices on its vans will motivate some refused asylum seekers, overstayers and possibly trafficked immigrants to come forward and accept voluntary return without detention, for which Sweden is widely praised. If we had a just and humane immigration system that could work. However our system is neither and needs to be thoroughly overhauled and frightening whole communities is not the way to do it.I still support an amnesty for settled but `illegal’ immigrants and I look forward to debating this at Spring Conference 2014. Final thought – presumably the van billboards will all be in English so thankfully quite a lot of immigrants will not be too upset by them! * David Allen 23rd Jul '13 - 10:05pm Eddie, “Go home or face arrest” appears in large capital letters on the poster, doesn’t it? Yes, it does also say “In the UK illegally?” in marginally larger lettering. What difference does that make? It also says “Text HOME to (number)”. Now, who do you suppose is going to actually do that? If it told burglars to “Text LOCK ME UP”, do you think it would get any takers? No illegal immigrant is going to send that text. Of course not. It’s just a deliberate wind-up, courtesy of government. But plenty of other people will send the text. If we’re lucky, they’ll just be practical jokers. If we’re less lucky, they’ll be neighbours with grudges, racists, far-right activists, and troublemakers. They’ll all use the opportunity to make trouble for other people they don’t like. Meanwhile, right-wing hooligans will be cheering whenever they see the vans, chasing around after them, and laughing at anybody who doesn’t like it. Do you really think these vans are a good idea? * Eddie Sammon 23rd Jul '13 - 10:50pm David I never said the vans were a good idea, I don’t have much of an opinion on them because I think they are clearly targeted at illegal immigrants, rather than all immigrants and descendants of immigrants. Disagree for sure, but I just wanted to say that I think the level of outrage, including comparing the government to Nazi Germany and calling people who want action on illegal immigration bigots, is unfair. I might even disagree with the vans, I don’t know, I just know I don’t agree with the level of outrage and the misleading Evening Standard article. * tim13 24th Jul '13 - 12:20am Oh Eddie – for goodness sake don’t be so naive! Extreme right wing regimes that re violent and cruel to people they don’t like don’t spring out of nowhere you know. All these kind of tactics act as a run-up to the really violent nasty stuff. Consider what Suzanne Fletcher says – we already have indefinite detention here. * R Uduwerage-Perera 24th Jul '13 - 7:44am Eddie, some of us live in the real world where we are acuttely aware of the fear that currently exists within some BME communities as a result of growing tensions. To believe that the entire immigration rhetoric is only about ‘illegal migrants’ is to be niave. There is as one would expect in an economic recession increased intolerance towards ANYONE who appears different. If the Party genuinely wishes to not only attract but retain BME members then it may well benefit by adopting a more evidenced based approach to what it supports and promotes, rather than making assumptions and generally chasing the Right Wing for votes. When it comes to racism, sexism, homophobia, and others forms of bigotry, even liberals would benefit from ‘drawing a line in the sand’ for otherwise they will be too late to make a difference. Bigotry is not only theoretical topic to be discussed amongst friends, or merely being called ‘nasty words’, but it very commonly involves not getting or losing a job, and equally commonly a boot in the stomach and a fist in the face, as I can vouch for. This is why I am intolerant of intolerance and may appear as not particularly “fair” or liberal on the subject. As for drawing parallels from history, this is actually rather useful, for it gives us a steer as to what may well happen next, and when it comes to the current rhetoric with regard to Immigration, and specifically Muslims, there is much that we could learn from history, I would suggest. * * nuclear cockroach 24th Jul '13 - 11:17am It’s a bloody disgrace, which would shame a BNP election poster. Theresa May should hang her head in shame. As for the Lib Dems, they should demand this poster is withdrawn and never repeated. If not, they should leave government. They cannot allow themselves to be associated with such offensive crap. I’m glad I spent some time leafleting for ST during the 2010 GE campaign and will happily do the same in 2015. * Eddie Sammon 24th Jul '13 - 11:30am R Uduwerage-Perera, I’ve been attacked by both white and ethnic minority gangs, so I do live in the real world. I just don’t make a connection between race and crime. I can’t stand prejudice! I understand the notion that if you permit intolerance then there is more of it, I just prefer to seek to understand and explain, rather than the hardline approach. * David Wilkinson 24th Jul '13 - 12:18pm I wonder if Nick will mention it in his weekly letter or will he run out of bottle. There are times when lines in the sand have to drawn. I have copied Hywel’s letter and sent it to Nick, I think I might not get a reply this time * Roland 24th Jul '13 - 12:38pm Having seen the picture of the van billboard in the BBC article Eddie posted and seen the context for the sound-bite quote , I think many are just sounding off without really thinking. From an advertisment point of view, the question that arises is what is the real intent of the campaign? I suggest from the copy the ad is intended to be scanned as: “In the UK illegally? … Text HOME to 78070″. Hence the real question is what is the purpose of the offending line, since it gives no rationale for a person to make a text. Whereas if it were to say words to the effect “Need help getting home” then I could see it having a purpose. Also is the assumption that illegal immigrants have unhindered access to functioning mobile phones. So whilst I agree with the intent of the campaign, I do disagree with the language and messages it is using. * Lester Holloway 24th Jul '13 - 3:22pm The Home Office’s “Go Home” poster is the kind of divisive stunt I would have expected if the BNP were in government. Touring the multicultural boroughs of Hounslow, Barking & Dagenham, Ealing, Barnet, and Brent today it was nothing more than a modern version of the infamous “No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs” B&B signs of the 1950′s on wheels. The choice of London boroughs displays the same kind of racial profiling that Home Secretary Theresa May says she wants the police to stop. Immigration officials are well known for their racial profiling at border control and they have conducted ‘sweeps’ outside tube stations like Brixton pulling over anyone they think looks like an illegal immigrant, ie. they are of colour. To say nothing of the prisoner-style treatment meted out to detainees of immigration detention centres or the violent conduct of security contractors when deporting people. Brent Central MP Sarah Teather recently blew the whistle on a ministerial working group on immigrants which was initially named the “Hostile Environment” group with a brief to make Britain as hostile as possible to immigrants.The “Go Home” poster looks like it as come from exactly this mindset. The leader of Brent council, Mohammed Butt, said that the government haven’t learnt the lessons of the 1950s and 60s but I believe they know exactly what they are doing. Theresa May and her ministers and officials know full well the impact of this billboard will be on multicultural communities in general rather than the odd illegal immigrant who might be passing by. It reads like a message to the whole community, an attempt to divide communities and harvest the racist vote from UKIP. People need to stop asking David Cameron if he has talked to No.10 spinner Lyndon Crosby about cigarette packaging and start asking if the pair have discussed this campaign which has all the hallmarks of the brash anti-immigrant stirring Crosby masterminded in Australia. It is an attempt to poison the 2015 election regardless of the consequences which may well be a green light to the Far Right to increase violent attacks just as anti-immigrant sentiment led to white youths beating up foreign-looking men on their sun-kissed beaches. The recent imposition of a £3,000 visa bond on visitors from Nigeria, Ghana, Bangladesh, Sri-Lanka, Pakistan and India is another example of racial profiling. Visa overstayers are just as likely to come from Australia or South Africa. All this measure will achieve is denying families in Britain the visits of relatives for weddings and funerals. Like the touring billboard, it will create resentment and a sense of unfairness within multicultural communities. And it will surely impact on British business as entrepreneurs in the fast-growing economies of Ghana, Nigeria and India think twice about investing in the UK. Combined with the arbitrary cap on foreign university students, which business secretary Vince Cable has warned will harm Britain’s interests, these policies are a huge break on the country’s faltering recovery. Instead of parading a”Go Home” message through London’s multicultural communities ministers need to ‘Go Study’ the economic and social benefits of fostering a welcoming and diverse nation and contrast this with the prospect of becoming an insular, culturally-impoverished struggling nation if they continue down the divisive Lyndon Crosby road. * Post a Comment Click here to cancel reply. Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site. If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password. Your email is never published. Required fields are marked * Name * ______________________________ Email * ______________________________ Website ______________________________ Comment _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ Post Comment Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...? ____________________ « Previous Post Next Post » Subscribe 1. Twitter Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter 2. Facebook Like us on Facebook 3. RSS Subscribe to our feed 4. Email Sign-up for our daily email digest ____________________ Subscribe Most Read 1. NEW POLL: Who is your Liberal Voice of the Year? 2. 2014 - looking for a dark horse, or a safe pair of hands? 3. Opinion: Going it alone 4. How can we do politics better? 5. Opinion: Putting the facts into Britain's fraudulent EU migration debate Search _______________________________ Search Op-eds * Norman Lamb writes… managing offenders with mental illness (Norman Lamb MP) * Julian Huppert writes… an end to the chilling effects of libel action on free speech (Julian Huppert MP) * How can we do politics better? (Caron Lindsay) * Opinion: Going it alone (John Knox) * Lord Roberts writes: It is time to open our doors to some of the most vulnerable people in the world (Lord Roger Roberts) Tweets from @libdemvoice/team [libdemblogs.png] * My Own Little Boxing Match: Conflicting Emotions On Evander Holyfield * Debi The Five Best Things about the NHM * Placing citizens at the heart of citizen science | Michelle Kilfoyle and Hayley Birch * Chris Smith Vice Chancellors gather in the tuition fees gold * Peter Wrigley "When is a horde not a horde"? * Colin Hall More free parking in Beddington Gardens * Caron Lindsay Moves to close Edinburgh saunas show illiberal and centralising effect of Scotland's Police merger * Matthew Inequality should be at the heart of the economic debate * Mark Mills Voter Suppression Laws: a US import we don't need * Mark Pack When chocolates featured in political ads Recent Comments * User Avatar Rebecca Taylor 6th Jan - 8:24pm Some comments: 1) The right to free movement has always been conditional; it has NEVER been possible for an EU national to arrive in a... * User Avatar Sue Render 6th Jan - 8:16pm This poll is fabulous and underlines our unique selling points. I have always been a passionate devotee of the EU and I am just so... * User Avatar Stuart Mitchell 6th Jan - 8:02pm I think you should have given a little more acknowledgement to Simon Singh and Sense About Science's libel reform campaign, which kick-started the whole thing... * User Avatar Stuart Mitchell 6th Jan - 7:51pm @Simon Shaw "As I said before it is meaningless in fiscal matters to say that 'A pays for B'. I know that politicians say it... * User Avatar Roland 6th Jan - 7:43pm Chris - thanks for the link, although the article does present a few facts it is a rather "light weight" treatment of the issue and... * User Avatar GF 6th Jan - 7:17pm "How can we do politics better?" Caron's question is so central that there is no simple or single answer but I would like to suggest... [flocktogether.png] Thu 9th Jan 2014 20:00 Winchester Liberal Drinks Tue 14th Jan 2014 19:00 Manchester Liberal Drinks Thu 16th Jan 2014 Trafford MBC, Broadheath by-election Sat 18th Jan 2014 10:30 St Ives Regional Action Day Thu 23rd Jan 2014 Stapleford Town Council, Stapleford North (1) by-election Stapleford Town Council, Stapleford North (2) by-election Southend on Sea Borough Council, West Leigh by-election Sat 25th Jan 2014 19:30 Lewisham Lib Dems Burns Night Supper Sat 1st Feb 2014 10:00 Charlton Park and College Day of Action 10:00 Waltham Forest Day of Action 10:00 Winchester Campaign for a Workers' Bonus 10:00 Day of Action 10:00 Action Day 10:00 North East and Central Fife Day of Action 10:00 Day of Action 10:30 BathNES Action Day 12:00 February Day of Action 12:00 North East and Central Fife Day of Action 12:00 East Dunbartonshire Action Day 12:00 Bath & NES Action Day 12:00 Bath & NES Action Day Powered by Wordpress | Theme by Artesea | Content © 2006-2014 Liberal Democrat Voice and its contributors. All rights reserved. #The Green Benches - Atom The Green Benches - RSS The Green Benches - Atom publisher The Green Benches Dr Éoin Clarke (PhD) - TheGreenBenches@Hotmail.com Follow @DrEoinCl Monday, 14 October 2013 10 facts about Migrants to the UK that the Daily Mail hopes you never discover Tweet IFRAME: http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http://www.greenbenchesuk .com/2013/10/10-facts-about-migrants-to-uk-that.html&layout=standard&sh ow_faces=true&width=520&action=like&font=arial&colorscheme=light Most recent data shows 1. Just 2.7% of Unemployment Benefit Claimants [JSA] are EU Migrants 2. 99% of National Insurance Numbers issued to foreigners are for workers not the jobless 3. EU Migrants from Poland & A8 Countries contribute a net £16bn+ benefit per year to the UK economy [2009 data] 4. Just 38,000 EU Migrants claim JSA at a cost of £140m to the taxpayer 5. NHS ‘Tourism’ from overseas visitors using the NHS costs 0.1% of the NHS Budget 6. EU Immigrants from Poland and other A8 countries pay 39% more in taxes than they get back in state expenditure on them 7. A UK born person of working age is 150%+ more likely to be receiving benefits than a foreign born person resident in the UK 8. 93% of foreign born persons of working age in the UK do not receive benefits 9. EU Migrants from Poland and other A8 countries are 60% less likely to live in Social Housing than UK citizens. 10. In 2011, 67% of Poles & other EU (A8) nationals who attempt to claim benefits in the UK were refused Sources: here & here IFRAME: http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http://www.greenbenchesuk .com/2013/10/10-facts-about-migrants-to-uk-that.html&layout=standard&sh ow_faces=true&width=520&action=like&font=arial&colorscheme=light Tweet at Monday, October 14, 2013 2 comments: MaxyB said... While I am utterly against almost anything that the DM says I would like to inquire if you have the breakdowns of British unemployed by ethnic group. I suspect that in this case we would see an over representation of immigrant parents in poor inner city areas.It is an important point as it would tell the story in a more complete way. We all know the problems that all of our children are having with good affordable accommodation, working conditions and wages. Migration, while as I say, I have not axe to grind on a cultural level, must have some effect on the willingness or otherwise of companies and corporations to offer a living wage to their staff. In effect companies and corporations are taking advantage of the poverty in other less well off countries by encouraging people (mostly young and active) to come to this country to make a little money. They, the corporations, do this in exactly the same way as they do when they off shore altogether. In this case it is work that requires their presence but the rule still applies. Many of these young kids come here thinking they will live a bit rough in HMO's, make a bit of money and return home. They may even stick to the plan and it may help them but what does it do to the the internal job market for all of our young unemployed. It is all very well for employers to trot out the old flannel that 'young people in this country do not want to work' but could this have anything to do with the divide between what it costs to build a life at something resembling a reasonable standard of life and the rates of pay offered. The thing is that not everyone is a genius but just because of that should they have no opportunity to a fare wage? The statistics you provide are, although the opposite in nature to anything in the DM, just as misleading. If you were being entirely honest you would provide resolution to the figures. That's what I find so often, point scoring between right and left and thats getting us nowhere. Although at the opposite end of the spectrum Another factor is that of Training and Education. I have one personal story that exemplifies the situation. My daughter, has a degree in archaeology, even with much help it has left her with about £12,000 in student debts. Before the crash she obtained work (on 3 month (reducing to 2 week contracts)) as an archaeologist with a well known London museum. During her time there she had a supervisor. Her supervisor was Polish, she was the supervisor because she had a masters degree. While my daughter had a degree she did not go on to her masters for one simple reason, she would have had to fund the thing entirely by herself. On the other hand her supervisor paid nothing for her degree or her masters. Now I here that EU students can get free education in Scotland and not English Students, is this right or just another DM lie? Going further down the education scale I have one last point, whatever happened to all our builders? At one time we had an over supply of these skills and now we cant even supply enough for the building that is still going on in these depressed times. It doesn't make any sense. A full and honest discussion is in order please, not skewed incomplete statistics, whatever they appear to represent. Thursday, 28 November 2013 13:58:00 GMT [icon_delete13.gif] MaxyB said... In my last comment I meant, the children of immigrant parents, not immigrant parents, as I wrote and found when I pasted into a notepad. If you use the comment could you kindly. Regards, Trevor Thursday, 28 November 2013 14:12:00 GMT [icon_delete13.gif] Post a Comment Newer Post Older Post Home Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom) Support my Research PayPal — The safer, easier way to pay online. Popular Posts * The Cost of Cameron: 100 Worst Failures of David Cameron's Government from May 2010 to Dec 2013 * LIST: See all of the NHS Contracts worth £12 billion tendered to Private Health in the last 2 years. * 10 evidence based reasons why Michael Gove's #FreeSchools should be opposed. * Database of Tory MPs fibs & porky pies and evidence needed to disprove their claims. * Launching: #ToryLies (A database of lies told by Tory MPs to UK Voters) * Revealed: The list of Sure Start Centres listed in May 2010 now #deleted from the Government Website * The time has come to Re-Nationalise our Railways. * MPs who've tweeted to say they won't be attending Parliament Today * List: The 100 worst failures of David Cameron's Government. #LestWeForget. * David Cameron's personal legacy summed up in a graph #SureStart #FoodBanks Page Views Favorite Tweets by @DrEoinCl What I read? * Steve Walker * Tax Research UK * UK Polling Report * Liberal Conspiracy * Left Futures * Labour Left Powered by Blogger. #LabourList RSS Feed LabourList » More Tory dog-whistling Comments Feed This isn’t one of *those* pieces… The market is broken Monday, January 6th * Write for LabourList * Donate * Contact * About Us LabourList * News * Comment * Video * Seats & Selections * Local Government * Scotland * Wales * Unions * Events Sign up to receive our daily email Email* _________________________ Forename ____________________ Surname ____________________ * denotes required field Subscribe Proudly sponsored by unison speaking up unison speaking up [CWU-logo-e1326368978941.jpg] LabourList Videos * David Cameron's NHS Pledge * Sarah Tether's Stand-Up Routine Recent Posts Latest Posts * A “hard lesson” for George Osborne * We’re throwing you a party (and it’s a celebration) * Lib Dems reveal Hung Parliament plans – in bizarre Buzzfeed post… * After the water recedes – a long-term approach to flood risk * Labour voters want to talk about immigration – so why don’t we? You are here: Home » Uncategorized » More Tory dog-whistling October 21, 2013 9:42 pm Author: Kingsley Abrams Tags: Immigration Share this Article * Twitter Twitter * Facebook Facebook * Delicious Delicious * Digg Digg * Stumbleupon Stumble * Reddit Reddit General Election 2015 is now on the horizon. One of the consequence of the fixed term Parliament – a constitutional fix to bind the two parts of the coalition together – is that we can see the fingerprints of Lynton Crosby their election ‘guru’ on proposed Tory policy all over the Immigration Bill going through Parliament. Crosby’s crude dog-whistle tactics have returned the Conservative Party to the ‘nasty’ party. To their relief they can return to their right wing roots. Creating ‘hostile environments’ for migrants in an attempt to outbid UKIP and appeal to the lowest common populist denominator. We’ve had ad-vans blazoned with a message and in language reminiscent of the National Front telling so called illegal-migrants to ‘Go Home’. Blatant propaganda on the streets that seemed to have a narrow focus but which in reality was aimed at keeping immigration on the political agenda. And now this latest policy – albeit with more finessed language fit for the rarefied atmosphere of the Houses of Parliament – has the same underlying strategy, garnering votes generally and specifically those that are going to UKIP. Creating ‘hostile environments’ is now the name of the game and the Immigration Bill, is part and parcel of this. Landlords are to be the new border control as they seek to establish migrant’s residency status. Civil servants in the DVLA will also become border control officials as new powers are given to check driving licence applicants’ immigration status. Other ways of creating this ‘hostile environment’ and make life as difficult as possible for migrants is to restrict access to the banking system and crucially restrictions are to be imposed on using the National Health Service. Immigration Minister Mark Harper said: “The Immigration Bill will stop migrants using public services to which they are not entitled, reduce the pull factors which encourage people to come to the UK and remove people who should not be here.” This statement beggars belief. Don’t just take my word for it. Research undertaken by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) found that migrants are net contributors to a country. We’ve always known that the NHS that is held up by migrant labour in the wards and in the operating theatres. Unite health workers and others have already said that they aren’t going to be border guards and we will support them. Restricting access to our health provisions is not only morally wrong it is also pretty stupid. Imagine the scenario. Scare someone who falls ill and has an infectious disease – TB say. Instead of being treated and if necessary isolated the disease will spread Who would care about so called ‘health tourism’ then? As Dr Kailash Chand wrote in a recent piece for the Guardian we need to listen to health professionals not be spellbound by tabloid headlines: “Denying healthcare to people who need it – including pregnant women, survivors of torture and people with communicable diseases – is both inhumane and unpragmatic. It also contravenes our professional codes of conduct. Ministers who refuse to argue the case calmly on the facts, and instead sell the pass to the fear, will inevitably create public services which can only operate on the basis of checks that result in a divisive system.” The Bill is back in the House of Commons for its second reading on tomorrow. We want as a country to go forward and not backwards to days we thought we’d left behind. The Labour frontbench should oppose this latest attempt at fermenting division which will be the inevitable consequence of Theresa May’s and Lynton Crosby ‘s wish to create ‘hostile environments’ for migrants. Related posts: 1. What Blue Labour should say about immigration 2. A growing economy needs immigration 3. Don’t cut immigration checks, Yvette Cooper warns Theresa May 4. Tory Minister blaming problems on migrants – same old Nasty Party 5. Tory MP gives up communicating with constituents over NHS YARPP Latest * Featured A “hard lesson” for George Osborne A “hard lesson” for George Osborne By Tom Blenkinsop In 2011 George Osborne proclaimed that “We have already asked the British people for what is needed, and today we do not need to ask for more.” Yet today, in 2014 on the feast of the epiphany no-less, George Osborne commands that this will be “A year of hard truths”. Of course Osborne will no doubt wish to forget most of the “hard truths” of 2013. A year which saw the Conservative dominated Coalition Government accrue more UK state debt […] Read more → * News We’re throwing you a party (and it’s a celebration) We’re throwing you a party (and it’s a celebration) By Mark Ferguson The days after New Year are rarely a fun time. The weather is grim, many of you will have returned to work, the Christmas tree is about to be taken away and there are no bank holidays on the horizon. You’re probably not looking forward to this week. So to blow away the cobwebs, we’ve decided to throw you a party. And it’s a celebration, because on Thursday January 9th, LabourList is five years old. LabourList hasn’t always had an […] Read more → * News Lib Dems reveal Hung Parliament plans – in bizarre Buzzfeed post… Lib Dems reveal Hung Parliament plans – in bizarre Buzzfeed post… The Lib Dems have been understandably coy about what they might do if there were an unprecedented second successive hung parliament. One assumption might be that the yellows would stick to what they did last time – supporting the largest party – although assuming that the current Lib Dem leaderships will be consistent is a questionable judgement. And then there’s the small matter of what “largest party” means – is that seats or voteshare? But some small shred of clarity […] Read more → * Comment After the water recedes – a long-term approach to flood risk After the water recedes – a long-term approach to flood risk By Andrew Pakes Amongst its beauty nature has a devastating ability to prove its dominance over human activity. No-one should doubt the terrible damage that flooding does. Rushing to deal with flood warnings, the sandbagging, the high-water mark and the long, slow process of putting homes and communities back together. Flooding poses a stark dilemma to governments about dealing with immediate devastation and responding to long-term risk. Exactly two years ago the government published its first ever Climate Change Risk Assessment as mandated […] Read more → * Featured Labour voters want to talk about immigration – so why don’t we? Labour voters want to talk about immigration – so why don’t we? By Mark Ferguson There’s a strange fiction that abounds in the country that Labour doesn’t want to talk about immigration. Well, actually, it’s only half a fiction. It’s certainly not the Labour leadership who are afraid of talking about immigration. On the contrary, in the past they party leadership has been more than happy to talk chapter and verse about immigration. About how “tough” they are. About what arbitrary limit they might seek to place upon something as unknowable as immigration (which, quixotically, […] Read more → ← previous next → LabourList * Home * About * Comments policy * Contact * Donate * Legal search: search...___________ Go © All content is the copyright of LabourList but we give permission for its use, unless otherwise stated. The views expressed are those of the individual contributors and not necessarily those of LabourList.