The BBC made a huge fuss over its claim that the government was hiding a report that undermined a previous one upon which the government was basing its immigration policies.
Newsnight generated a massive amount of headlines that were damaging for the government and suggested that the government’s policies were wrong….the BBC got what it wanted regardless of the fact that their story was completely baseless.
The Newsnight story was hocum…..telling us that:
Downing Street has withheld publication of a cross-governmental report that suggests one potential impact of immigration is smaller than claimed.
This was considered potentially incendiary, BBC Newsnight has learned.
The BBC makes this claim about the figures in the new report:
The BBC understands the report suggests the number of UK workers unemployed due to non-EU immigration is well below the figure previously cited by ministers.
Problem with that? There is no figure state in the new report….so the BBC made that up.
Newsnight continues to polish the turd that is their ‘scoop’…..
The report has now been published and here is Cook’s second stab at it:
Analysis
Chris Cook Newsnight policy editor
[The new report which] Newsnight revealed was being suppressed by Downing Street, showing a weaker link between immigration and unemployment than the government had claimed.
- The new report, now published, says that there is “relatively little evidence that migration has caused significant displacement of UK natives… when the economy is strong.”
- While it does find “evidence of some labour market displacement, particularly by non-EU migrants in recent years when the economy was in recession“, it adds this is a short-term effect – one that is “likely to dissipate”.
Spot the difference with what the 2012 report said.….
- We find no association between working age migrants and native employment: (i) in buoyant economic times; (ii) for EU migrants; (iii) for the period 1975-1994.
- By contrast, we find a negative association between working-age migrants and native employment:(i) in depressed economic times; (ii) for non-EU migrants; (iii) for the period 1995-2010.
- We found a tentative negative association between working-age migrants and native employment when the economy is below full capacity, for non-EU migrants and for the period 1995-2010.
- A ballpark estimate is that an extra 100 non-EU working-age migrants are initially associated with 23 fewer native people employed.
- We estimate that EU migration had little or no impact on the native employment rate, even when testing the relationship over the periods 1975 to 1994 and 1995 to 2010 separately.
The report in 2012 states that there is a definite short term negative impact of immigration on employment…but, in theory, long term, the economy may adjust to improve things….but that is just, as yet, a theory.
The only difference is that the 2012 report states an actual number, tentatively, and the new one doesn’t.
And yet the BBC manages to claim that the non-existent figure is somehow less that the previous 2012 one.
The BBC has some explaining to do.
Making false claims about the contents of a report in order to bolster their own pro-immigration narrative.
Making false claims that the government actively hid the report because of its ‘incendiary’ contents….even today when the report’s innocuousness is apparent Cook is still claiming the government ‘suppressed’ it.
As you can see the contents are not at all incendiary and make the very same claims the 2012 report makes.
So the BBC has exaggerated, lied and slandered its way to an ‘exclusive’ scoop.
Tony Hall should start asking questions before people start asking questions of him.
And remember in 2012 the BBC said this about the MAC report:
‘The Mac report is arguably the most persuasive because it draws on in-depth analysis and research – and it just makes sense.‘
And here the BBC is fact checking itself yesterday and backstabbing Newsnight:
So the new report, when it comes out, may not disagree that dramatically with the original one from MAC.
Anthony Reuben Head of statistics, BBC News
I shall be watching tonight. I’m sure there will be a retraction and a sincere apology.
Yes – I gather a special edition of QT is being organised with the culprits making formal public apologies.
No surprise that the BBC tells lies on a regular basis. What they are doing goes way beyond bias , its just telling us lies , liberal left propaganda day in day out.
If the Tories get a majority at the next election can they please close this stinking cess pit down.
Don’t your breath.
The immigration ‘suppressed’ story was the main headline ALL day yesterday; imagine my surprise when it turns out to be more lies and omission…
“The BBC’s immigration scare story”
By Andrew Green.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/the-bbcs-immigration-scare-story/
Luvaduck, old Saviles grave is going to be full of BBC landfill right now.
Harman/Dromey?…Falkirk?…Balen and EU funding?…and now this corpse of a story which ought to smell a while yet?
And that doesn`t even include this one…or Andrew Neather from 2009?
No wonder they continue to blow fetid air into Stephen Lawrences lungs to resurrect the story…next up?…Hillsborough, Finucane, Gibralter/IRA, Belgrano…and Blair Peach?
Anything but current news that might matter a damn…time to take old Yella out to the barn and shoot the f***in BBC…
The BBC are using semantics for their political purposes. While the original report said, ‘The Migration Advisory Committee said there were 23 fewer UK jobs for every 100 migrants from outside the EU,’ Cook and the BBC cannot possibly argue with the bigger picture; That of the jobs created in recent years 90% of them went to jobseekers who had arrived from out side the UK.
Quite simply, those were opportunities lost to UK jobseekers. Why can’t the BBC get their slimy, cheating heads around that?