Remember the sneers and gloating from various parties when the first planes and buses from Bulgaria and Romania didn’t bring in swarms of migrants in a first mad rush? Seems they were wrong…as most people knew they were…and Migration Watch, which predictied a probable 50,000 immigrants a year from these two countries was spot on, as always…
53,000 Romanian and Bulgarian (EU2) citizens immigrated to the UK in YE March 2015, a statistically significant increase and almost double the 28,000 in the previous 12 months.
We also hear that net migration is at a record high of 330,000…but that doesn’t tell the real story, it hides an uncomfortable truth…that the real foreign net migration into the UK is in fact 379,000 once the British citizen figures are removed form the statistics…..
Net migration of EU citizens showed a statistically significant increase to 183,000 (up 53,000 from YE March 2014). The increase in non-EU net migration to 196,000 (up 39,000) was also statistically significant.
In other words 379,000 foreigners came to live in the UK last year….the 330,000 figure, bad as that is, conveniently hides the reality. Any wonder housing, schools, the NHS and the roads are all nearing crisis levels? How can you maintain a cohesive society when the very fabric of that society is being ripped apart…the unity of the people, the common sense of being part of one nation, the common values and cultural references that make communication and relations easier, the trust and the willingness to accept the principles of the welfare state…all being eroded by a massive inflow of people who don’t respect British values, culture or history and come essentially for the money.
The BBC is indulging itself with a two day examination of why immigrants want to come here….what an utter waste of time….we know why they want to come here…but then the BBC knows this and has deliberately chosen this line of discussion in order to push the more emotive narrative of immigrants fleeing some horror in their own country and the ‘fact’ that they all want to work and will benefit the UK. The real question that should be asked is should they be allowed to come here and what are the effects, not just on businesses but upon the whole of society…and that includes cultural, social, legal, political values and beliefs as well as the pressure on the infrastructure. The BBC likes to avoid such discussions as the effects of migration are more often than not negative despite the BBC’s gleeful assertion that Britain’s favourite food is the curry….we like curry, therefore immigration must be good.
The BBC has been spinning the immigration figures today and added in various narratives to the mix that reinforce the BBC’s own preferred line of being pro-immigration and anti-Tory…..and if you want to hear a classic sneer from a BBC reporter listen to Ross Clark when he is talking about migrants (09:43) who are ‘trying to get into ‘our country’ if you like’.(09:44:40) ‘Our country’ said in a tone suggesting there is no such thing as ‘our country’ and it is rather baffling that anyone should think of it in that way…it should be open to all to come and go as they please and take all the benefits they please.
The BBC has been attacking Cameron and Co for their abject failure to reduce immigration, curiously I don’t remember the BBC being similarly aggressive when Labour flung open the borders and the migrants started swarming in, far, far more than the 13,000 figure Labour lied to us about.
Patrick O’FlynnR4 going for an “immigration controls are too strong” line at the top of the news. Bizarre call.
Another attack line is that businesses are demanding more immigration…apparently Cameron is ‘punishing business’ with his limits on immigration….not sure how they get that when immigration is at a record high. They claim that the alleged block on immigration means they just can’t increase productivity. A limit on skilled migration is clearly only imposed upon non-EU citizens….are these businesses seriously suggesting that they can’t get these people from inside the whole of Europe or upskill their own workforce?
Is a reduction in immigration really a block on productivity? The BBC’s favourite meme since 2010 has been that the ever increasing employment numbers have been a ‘puzzle’…well it wasn’t a puzzle…it was the result of businesses being able to employ more people due to low wages and cheap imported labour. Then the BBC switched its line of attack to the ‘productivity puzzle’….remarkably at the same time it became a Labour Party concern. The BBC just couldn’t work out why productivity was so low. Of course that is also the result of low wages and the mass importation of that cheap labour….all of which makes it a bit of a cheek for these businesses to now claim that reducing immigration will reduce productivity when it is their own use of cheap, immigrant labour that has held down productivity per worker. The BBC fails to raise that anomaly or the point that perhaps the businesses should get off their arses and train their workers, invest in better machinery, become more efficient and sell more if they want to improve productivity…not by importing more cheap labour. Maybe their defintion of productivity is somewhat different to everyone elses.
We also hear that migrants aren’t coming for the benefits….they come to work…
Meanwhile, Jamil Dhanji an immigration barrister told the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme migrants were not coming to the UK to claim benefits.
“Migrants I see are not coming to this country for that reason,” he said.
They do come to work, or most of them do…but of course they know that they will also receive in-work benefits…not to mention a free health service, an education for their kids and all the stability, security and infrastructure that a country like the UK can provide….in other words they get an awful lot of benefits, not all of them coming in the form of cash payments.
No society can sustain the massive levels of immigration that are being forced upon the UK….even if they were all people who loved fish and chips, played soccer and drank warm beer, the figures still wouldn’t be viable…..but add into the mix huge numbers of people who have no interest in maintaining British society, and many who in fact intend to take no part in it at all and will seek to undermine that society, and you can guess that the future is not bright. The BBC did a survey of Indians who wanted to come here a few years back and the result showed that the majority had no intention to integrate…naturally the BBC didn’t publicise that part of the survey.
The BBC is supposed to be helping to maintain civil society and citizenship…as far as I can see they are doing the precise opposite campaigning for open borders which will result in the break down of the fabric of society and the end of the welfare state with all that that entails.
Time the government took a good look at the BBC’s politics and did something about it. Fraser Nelson at the Telegraph suggests Cameron is too complacent, too idle, to do so. I think he’s right.
”Net Foreign Migration Is 379,000.” To get the true figure, just double or treble it.
Net foreign migration may be 379,000, but there is also a hidden figure that no one can account for and that is the amount illegal immigrants that are already here. You wont get much about that on AlBeeb broadcasting.
Remember the term ‘net migration’ really means the replacement of the indigenous population with third world immigrants !
”English is now a foreign language in London, says Terence Stamp”
‘‘It’s very sad how few English people there are in London now,’ he tells me at a party in Mayfair, where he lamented what he seems to see as a lack of integration among some immigrants.
‘When I grew up in East London everyone seemed to speak English, and now you can barely get by speaking our own language.’
‘I don’t live in the East any more, but I absolutely love mangoes and so occasionally I go back there to buy these wonderful Alphonso mangoes from the market on Green Street.
‘I’m lucky if I can buy one now at all because no one speaks English.
‘It’s changed so much in such a short space of time, that God knows what London will be like in another decade or so.’
‘You see these mums wandering around with their prams and four out of five of them have these scarves wrapped around their heads. I feel like it’s not London any more; not the one I used to know anyway.
‘I do think a multicultural society can be a good thing, but when it’s at the cost of your own culture and history, then it’s gone too far and it would be very sad if London stopped being predominantly English.’’ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3167654/SEBASTIAN-SHAKESPEARE-English-foreign-language-London-says-Terence-Stamp.html
it would be very sad if London stopped being predominantly English
Too late! Tony Blair decided 18 years ago to give away our capital city, without asking any of us.
”RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: 8million foreign newcomers is far too many for a small country like Britain to absorb. Meanwhile, it’s reported that 26 per cent of all births in Britain are to foreign-born mothers.
In order to silence public resistance to mass immigration, the ‘liberal’ establishment decided to redefine every illegal immigrant, economic migrant and tourist visa ‘overstayer’ as an ‘asylum seeker’.
Only a heartless, racist bigot could object to giving refuge to those genuinely fleeing oppression.
As a general rule, I’d agree. But consider the case of Lady Njaimeh Jawara, wife of a former president of Gambia. Actually, she is one of his three wives — since polygamy is legal in Gambia, where 90 per cent of the population are Muslims.
She was granted asylum in Britain after her husband was ousted by a military coup in 1994 and has been living here on benefits ever since.
Fair enough, you may say, since she would obviously be in mortal danger if she was forced to return home.
Er, not as such.
It turns out she regularly flies back to Gambia for as long as three months at a time.
Far from being in danger of arrest, imprisonment or worse, she is a keen golfer and a leading light in the Gambia Golf Association.
We only know this because Lady Jawara has just appeared in court in Sussex, where she pleaded guilty to a £20,000 benefit fraud.Hang on a minute. If Gambia is safe enough for her to return to play golf for weeks on end, why is she still here?” Check out the photos of the invaders. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3213551/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-8m-migrants-bring-friend.html
The BBC continue to focus on the the most ‘pressing’ of issues in relation to uncontrollable immigration –
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34061097
Also, I wonder if Keith ‘and all that jazz’ Vaz is still at the airport shaking hands with the Romanians? Hand must betting sore!
I like their use of the phrase “the battle over the words used to describe migrants” – hardly a battle when only one side is allowed to participate. It’s a classic cultural marxist technique: control the words, control (i.e. shut down) the debate. To ensure ‘balance’ we have input from: Alexander Betts, director of the Refugee Studies Centre at Oxford University; Don Flynn, director of Migrants Rights Network; Zoe Grumbridge from Refugee Action and Judith Vonberg, a freelance journalist “who has written for the Migrants’ Rights Network about the issue”. Do you kind of get the impression that these people prefer the terms ‘migrant’ and ‘refugee’, which they see as ‘neutral’?
Whilst there are undoubtedly real migrants and refugees in the world, here are some alternative descriptions that more realistically apply in most cases:
Unwanted immigrants
Invaders
Colonists
Proxy soldiers
Is this the same Keith Vaz who tried to, sorry,- was successful, in the nineties, of stifling the child abuse investigation into the activities of Greville Janner?
I am also concerned about his past activities in fulfilling his role as a councillor/lawyer in London. He needs to be investigated and then outed.
His past activities demonstrate a willful complicity into child abuse. He is not, under any circumstances to be trusted!
Just how does he sleep at night?
Oh! I must got this all wrong because Keith Vaz is or was Chairman of the Home Affairs Committee!!
Nobody in their right mind would give such a position of responsibility to a person if they had such a monkey on their back would they?
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/08/27/why-are-there-214000-national-insurance-numbers-for-romanians-and-bulgarians-but-only-53000-immigrants/
Consider the options for a BBC journalist:
1) A lifetime of reporting vicars opening WI fairs and happy smiling people;
2) Rushing from the Liverpool riots to the Hyde Park explosion, the Glasgow massacre and the Bromley battle between Sikhs and ‘asians’.
The BBC has a ‘dog’ in the race.
Labour’s open doors policy on immigration is still in place. The difference between Cameron and Blair is that Cameron promised to reduce immigration, otherwise, the policy is the same.
Er. Who won the election?
At what point did this country or big business feel the need for mass immigration, apparently for the benefit of the economy ?.. This, a country shaped on hard work, a country that well within living memory and with a population of 30% less than it is today, had a technological edge in aircraft, aerospace, computers, nuclear energy and electronics. This country built its own Ships, and ships for the world, Aircraft, Cars, Motorcycles, along with a mining industry producing coal and other minerals, iron ore and the manufacture of steel for the world. This country developed a domestic oil/gas industry, Nuclear power, a successful National Health Service (care for the elderly), dare I mention a language that is used the world over…oops…I did. This country now by comparison, makes nothing, yet we are constantly told this country needs immigration?…….
Yohodi
I always tell people to look at old black and white film footage of war time Britain and any news footage going back as late as the fifties and indeed sixties. Proof absolute of who we were until very recently.
This country has been sold down the river by elements of society that are rotten to the core.
It isn’t just the cultural Marxists in the media (led by the BBC) that have done the damage but also the financial sector, which has encouraged the sale and prostitution of once great companies like GEC, ICI and others (Cadbury and the privatised utilities were recent examples). In every case, the only concern has been the short term gain made by institutional shareholders and the obscene bonuses paid to CEOs and the merchant bankers who acted as their pimps.
Add to that the pig-headed stubborn idiocy of (largely communist) trade unions and key components of the educational establishment (also, predominantly communist) and you have a recipe for the disaster that happened.
However, none of it would have been possible without the constant chorus from the media undermining the very foundations of the country. That decay – that moral collapse – made the rest possible. Any protest could be sneered at, any suggestion that we were being betrayed could be brushed off as ‘jingoism’.
The intriguing question is whether this was orchestrated, or a natural process due to age and post-imperial weariness.
Well said, it is indeed an intriguing and difficult question, IMO post war Liberalism seemed to do for us, the end of National Service and Grammar Schools, free love, feminism and trade unionism all took away our social cohesion, sense of pride, worthiness and a sense of what is right.
I believe it has been orchestrated, its no accident that young white British males have for quite sometime been the biggest under-performers in our schools.
Increasingly looking that way, but orchestrated by whom Geoff, and why?
Remember this one ?………………..
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/jan/30/brown-british-jobs-workers
We are constantly told that the vast majority of migrants arriving at the EU door are Syrians, but whenever I see pictures from Calais, etc, they don’t look particularly Syrian to me. The Syrian’s I have considerable sympathy for, but the reporting narrative is very narrow, rarely looking at those who come to the EU for purely economic reasons.
I heard a report on the World Service about migrants from Senegal, which was good and factual, this has now been put on the website.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-34060931
What the article clearly shows is that those who left Senegal left only for economic reasons. The only way to stop the economic migrant flow is to send these people back as soon as they land, something the UK and EU seems incapable of doing.
Two recent immigration ‘busts’ have been of Vietnamese illegals. The BBC has kept deathly quiet about that.
Vietnam is such a dangerous place to live and so perilous that you can go there on a package holiday.
http://www.kuoni.co.uk/vietnam
Three of today’s Mail Stories, all have remained the same for the last hour…
1) Celebrity Big Brother – 895 comments
2) 200 migrants feared dead in Mediterranean – 41 comments
3) 71 migrants found in back of lorry – 3 comments
It would appear that the Mail moderators are either working overtime ,or that the comments made are overwhelmingly, although not unsurprisingly unsympathetic.
I have given up trying to comment on the Mail articles. I assume I have been blacklisted as my comments never seem to appear even on the “unmoderated” articles.
Anyone notice how the Beeboids are really bigging up each and every migrant fatality.
Let’s be clear. The Austrain lorry and Libya boat capsizes are horrendous but the tone and regularity and priority of these stories is absolutely designed to tug at our heartstrings until we say ‘let the poor people in’.
Meanwhile no-one at the Beeb is following up that the Austrian lorry was coming in from Hungary !!! A pretty safe country I’d say. A good place to live as compared wit say, Syria. Why were they hiding in that lorry at all?
As if to enforce the message AlBeeb gets the reporter with ‘a face like she has been sucking a lemon’ and a depressing voice to add to the brainwashing.
Regarding these 8 million (it’s far more, I know). This would amount to relocating the entire population of Austria into England.
Newsnight inadvertently paves the way for a possible metaphor with another of its not dumbed down ‘news’ pieces…
http://order-order.com/2015/08/28/monbiot-skins-cooks-squirrel-on-newsnight/
bashstreetplug
The red squirrel is indigenous but the grey squirrel was imported to cries of ‘isn’t it lovely, it’s making the countryside more diverse’
But slowly but surely the greys overwhelmed the local reds and out bred them until the reds were confined to small areas of the UK. Ironically The Isle of Wight being one of them.
Belatedly people have woken up to the fact that the greys are vermin and cause more problems than benefits. So now they can be legally culled.
I’m sure this must have a meaning, like an Aesop fable, but I just cannot see it.
George gunning for the GBBO market by a mash-up with GTA and Resident Evil? Good luck with that.
A nice Chianti George? No Kent Vino Folkstone to save the road miles? Pass the Fava beans.
Still a few takeaways in Brixton maybe bookmarking on iPlayer.
I think the supermarkets have a better idea of how many people there are in Britain
For me, the greatest danger for all Christian Europe is with those that follow the teaching of Islam, the Muslim. There are a reputed 50 million Muslims residing in Europe, invading us all with their despotic religious ideology- Countries such as Sweden, its openess now tarnished with a rapid deterioration of its Christian culture & values, likewise Norway, & Finland. There is no fortress Europe, Modern European asylum law is a product of a past century, however Asylum is not a licence for immigration into whatever country. It might be said that Europe has no obligation to accept asylum seekers from outside its borders. The responsibility is not automatically Europe’s concern in any event-Arab Gulf states and the obscenely rich Saudis are doing very little to help their co-religionists in Syria/Iraq. But no one claims responsibility for the constitutionally asserted protection of Europe’s external borders, Why? Why is it that the real danger of allowing hordes of mainly Muslims from an Islamic culture, to land in Euopre, not being faced? What is known if anything of these people flooding across Europe? Are their supporters of ISIL amongst them? How can our authorities account to its public for the safety of allowing, what will be millions entering Europe? The UK & other countries of Europe are facing serious social issues, in what seems to be a policy of unrestricted entry.
The UKIP spokesman for immigration spoke on Ch 4 yesterday, and the interviewer Cathy Newman almost went purple when he mentioned the word refugee CHRISTIANS, as he felt that the Muslim refugees would assimilate better in other countries. WHY IS IT that no-one can ever state an opinion about race or religion without being shouted down almost immediately. I wanted to throw a brick at the tele at the attacking way these interviewers think they can behave to those they have on for comment. To his credit the UKIP spokesman remained calm and eloquent whilst Ms Newman worked herself into a frenzy.
The Muslim issue has to be discussed head-on, whether those of the religion like it or not. By stealth and birth this country will soon become islamafied, and because of the overwhelming mass movement of the Muslim peoples to Europe (and there is no sign of it stopping unless borders are created), then the rise and growth of Islam, again through birth, will have the balance of religious power across Europe. It is such a frightening scenario.
If life in the UK became intolerable in 20 years or less for the Christian British population and they faced extermination, how receptive to British asylum seekers would the following countries be:-
Syria
Algeria
Ethiopia
Somalia
Libya
Sudan
Iraq
Morocco
Egypt
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
Iran
Afghanistan
Pakistan
Bangladesh
These are all Islamic states from whom we have accepted Asylum seekers. Surely, they would reciprocate the favour in 20 years time or less??
Just a hopeful thought. Would the BBC/Left have a comment? Have they thought about this?
..
Double post. This site is placing posts almost randomly.
..