Labour deception on immigration
Setting aside the rights and wrongs of immigration, what is clear is that there remains a deliberate policy by Labour to preside over a massive increase in immigration on the one hand while deceiving the people of Britain on the other.
The deception takes the form of official pronouncements that the scale of immigration is not abnormal and denouncing those who say it is as scaremongerors. It also tries to present the immigration that takes place as beneficial to the nation.
Over the past few weeks two more pieces of evidence have come to light to demonstrate this fact. Firstly you may not recall but the Home Office under the direction of its political masters tried to suggest that the entry of Eastern European countries into the EU would make only a minor impact on our net entry figures. When early concerns about long lines of "Polish plumbers" did not materialise the Governments PR machine sprang into action and claimed its estimates of no more than ten to twenty thousand were proven correct. Of course, some year on the actual figures are sneaked out. Nearly 200,000 are now expected each year for the foreseeable future. So we are some 15x more than forecast - we can either believe that the Home Office is utterly incompetent or we can believe something else. I believe it was deliberate. The Government knew exactly what it was doing when it tried to make this a non-issue before the last election. Deliberate deception by the Government on this matter is endemic and a disgrace.
The second line of attack by Labour is that mass immigration is beneficial.
Today we get detailed analysis by Cambridge University which concludes that "the economic consequences of large-scale immigration are mostly trivial, negative or transient; that the interests of vulnerable sections of the domestic population may be damaged and any small fiscal benefits are unlikely to bear comparison with immigrations substantial demographic and environmental impact". Pretty clear.
There are also some fairly uncomfortable numbers in here for those who think immigration is good for the country. It is quite clear that immigration is not homogeneous - 90% of New Zealanders and Australians are in a job while 80% of those born in Canada and the Phillipines are in work. This compares with 12% of Somalis, 30% of Angolans and 42% of the huge Bangladeshi population. The report concludes that "some immigration is very beneficial but this benefit is cancelled by the influx of low-skill migrants". As a total proportion immigrants are 50% more likely to be inactive or unemployed. Immigration may increase total GDP (and economic growth) but it does so while REDUCING the most important indicator - GDP PER HEAD.
When "The Business" Sunday paper is able to point out that average disposable income in the UK is BELOW that of Louisiana and that (prior to the Hurricane) New Orleans would have been the richest city in the UK - this is what they are talking about. The reason is that per head we are not wealthy enough. And that perhaps the biggest threat to our wealth today is the gradual climb in taxes to sustain a growing welfare state. A welfare state that is looking after a growing number of poor and unskilled.
And finally to yet again hammer the Labour myth that our current immigration is somehow the same as always, the number born and settled in the UK has DOUBLED in the last 10 years. The proportion of people born in the UK has risen from 5.75% to 7.53% with London's population now comprising 25% foreign born. And that is part of the problem - immigrants do not come here to go and live in the Shetlands. They come here to live in the South East. We are not America with ample land. The South East is now the 2nd most densely populated area in Europe (after Holland) and will soon be the the most dense. You don't have to live here to see the effect on the local infrastructure.
We need to be clear. A deliberate policy of the British Government is in action. It implies a substantial increase in our population, mostly in London and the Home Counties. It implies a level of immigration that cannot be absorbed by the host nation in a way that avoids the worst aspects of "multi-culturalism". And it is put into effect through a policy of deceipt, spin and lies.
The deception takes the form of official pronouncements that the scale of immigration is not abnormal and denouncing those who say it is as scaremongerors. It also tries to present the immigration that takes place as beneficial to the nation.
Over the past few weeks two more pieces of evidence have come to light to demonstrate this fact. Firstly you may not recall but the Home Office under the direction of its political masters tried to suggest that the entry of Eastern European countries into the EU would make only a minor impact on our net entry figures. When early concerns about long lines of "Polish plumbers" did not materialise the Governments PR machine sprang into action and claimed its estimates of no more than ten to twenty thousand were proven correct. Of course, some year on the actual figures are sneaked out. Nearly 200,000 are now expected each year for the foreseeable future. So we are some 15x more than forecast - we can either believe that the Home Office is utterly incompetent or we can believe something else. I believe it was deliberate. The Government knew exactly what it was doing when it tried to make this a non-issue before the last election. Deliberate deception by the Government on this matter is endemic and a disgrace.
The second line of attack by Labour is that mass immigration is beneficial.
Today we get detailed analysis by Cambridge University which concludes that "the economic consequences of large-scale immigration are mostly trivial, negative or transient; that the interests of vulnerable sections of the domestic population may be damaged and any small fiscal benefits are unlikely to bear comparison with immigrations substantial demographic and environmental impact". Pretty clear.
There are also some fairly uncomfortable numbers in here for those who think immigration is good for the country. It is quite clear that immigration is not homogeneous - 90% of New Zealanders and Australians are in a job while 80% of those born in Canada and the Phillipines are in work. This compares with 12% of Somalis, 30% of Angolans and 42% of the huge Bangladeshi population. The report concludes that "some immigration is very beneficial but this benefit is cancelled by the influx of low-skill migrants". As a total proportion immigrants are 50% more likely to be inactive or unemployed. Immigration may increase total GDP (and economic growth) but it does so while REDUCING the most important indicator - GDP PER HEAD.
When "The Business" Sunday paper is able to point out that average disposable income in the UK is BELOW that of Louisiana and that (prior to the Hurricane) New Orleans would have been the richest city in the UK - this is what they are talking about. The reason is that per head we are not wealthy enough. And that perhaps the biggest threat to our wealth today is the gradual climb in taxes to sustain a growing welfare state. A welfare state that is looking after a growing number of poor and unskilled.
And finally to yet again hammer the Labour myth that our current immigration is somehow the same as always, the number born and settled in the UK has DOUBLED in the last 10 years. The proportion of people born in the UK has risen from 5.75% to 7.53% with London's population now comprising 25% foreign born. And that is part of the problem - immigrants do not come here to go and live in the Shetlands. They come here to live in the South East. We are not America with ample land. The South East is now the 2nd most densely populated area in Europe (after Holland) and will soon be the the most dense. You don't have to live here to see the effect on the local infrastructure.
We need to be clear. A deliberate policy of the British Government is in action. It implies a substantial increase in our population, mostly in London and the Home Counties. It implies a level of immigration that cannot be absorbed by the host nation in a way that avoids the worst aspects of "multi-culturalism". And it is put into effect through a policy of deceipt, spin and lies.
posted by Richard John | 11:07 am
<< Home