Re articles which were sent me earlier today, I will post them xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx extracts from the received e mail referred to :- /www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3722968/immigration-facts-and-figures.thtmlImmigration facts and figuresFraser Nelson 6:32pmAs promised, here’s the full story of those immigration statistics that I obtained from the ONS. In our new e-world, I can pass on all the results to you – and they’re worth discussing. The figures show the extent to which Brown’s “boom” was a mirage built not just on debt, but foreign labour. Most seriously, we can see a deep dysfunctionality in the UK labour market. Our system keeps millions on benefits (never less than 5 million have been on some kind of benefits since 1997) while meeting the needs of expanding the economy with a limitless supply of industrious immigrant labour. This means that the direct link between a growing economy and combating poverty is broken – and this is a serious development that demands attention.The ONS results are here, in a pdf*. The key finding: there are fewer British-born workers in the first quarter of 2009 than Q1 of 1997. The trend of employers preferring immigrants, which we saw during the boom, has become more marked still during the bust.But if we zoom in on the last eight years, the recession simply exacerbated what had been an existing downwards trend of UK-born workers in employment while number of foreign-born workers in employment has soared.Without a doubt, immigration has been the largest change of the Labour years – the ratio of immigrant workers has almost doubled in the private sector and the economy overall as the below graph shows. This means the UK’s the overall mix of immigrants is up there with that of America – a change not taken deliberately, or with any debate, but something that happened by accident and which ministers are still struggling to understand. But mass immigration has broken this link. It meant Gordon Brown could actually afford to keep so many million on benefits, as tax receipts were being generated by comparative newcomers. It was a lot easier than trying to reform welfare. Scandalously, that’s what Brown did. To my mind, it is the most contemptible failure of his time as Chancellor. He had the money, the economic boom, to sort out the welfare dependency that afflicts so many communities in Britain. But he took the easy, short term route. To use that analogy the Prime Minister is so fond of deploying, he walked on by on the other side. Why get your hands (and poll ratings) dirty with welfare reform when you can rely on immigrants to keep the economy growing and tax receipts flowing? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Something explosive is about to hit the British political arena, a book with ideas so shocking it will change the debate on the most important issue in European politics Financial Times journalist Christopher Caldwell is the little boy. The publication of his book Reflections on the Revolution in Europe is a pivotal moment in the debate on immigration, and it heralds the start of a new era - an acceptance by the political mainstream that our system isn’t working, and that while a multi-racial society can work, the more multi-racial it is the less well it functions. Caldwell is a reasonable, moderate man who has studied Europe and Islam for a decade, which makes his conclusions all the more astonishing. He argues that mass immigration and the formation of large ethnic bodies makes us unhappier as people, it damages rather than helps the economy, and threatens the basic principles of freedom. Most alarming of all, he shows just how deluded are those liberal thinkers who believe large Muslim immigrant communities can be assimilated into Europe, especially a hedonistic atheist Europe which has recently adopted values at odds with the rest of humanity.Immigration of the sort we’ve had since the war is simply unprecedented. Part of the propaganda pumped out by the establishment is that Britain is a nation of immigrants. But, as Calwell writes: “Aside from the invasions of Angles, Saxons, and Jutes that started in the fourth century AD - and which brought, at the very most, 250,000 new settlers over a period of several centuries - British ’stock’ has changed little. A report entitled "Britain's Immigrants, An economic profile", producedby the IPPR in September 2007 for Class Films and Channel 4/Dispatches/, shows that huge numbers of immigrants living in Britainare in social housing, contrary to the EHRC's claims.The IPPR report shows that 80% of Somalis, 49% of Turks, 41% ofBangladeshis, 39% of Ghanaians, 35% of Jamaicans, 33% of Iranians, 29%of Nigerians, 21% of Ugandans, 20% of Zimbabweans, 15% of Filipinos, 15%of Pakistanis, 14% of Sri Lankans, 12% of Kenyans, and 9% of Chineseimmigrants live in public housing.These figures are, of course, already three years old, and the figuresare likely to have increased substantially since then These figures are, of course, already three years old, and the figuresare likely to have increased substantially since then, as Third Worldimmigration has continued unabated since the IPPR compiled those figures.Despite these figures showing clearly that immigrant groups occupy amassively disproportionate amount of public housing compared to theirpercentage of the population, the EHRC has, in its latest outpouring ofhate against the BNP, commissioned the IPPR to quickly manufacture newstatistics which try to prove that immigrants are not given precedencein the housing queue.The IPPR quickly obliged the EHRC, and, ignoring its own earlier report Even according to the 'new' figures, the EHRC has admitted that 87.8percent of social housing claimants are "British-born." This, of course,means nothing, as the IPPR's earlier report specifically classifiedsecond and third UK-born immigrants as claimants of social housing inits figures.Even discounting that deliberate 'British-born' distortion, the EHRC hasbeen forced to admit that ten percent of current social housingclaimants are "foreigners who had been living in Britain for more thanfive years."Another factor which has allowed the EHRC to distort the figures evenmore is the fact that hundreds of thousands of bogus asylum seekers,both those awaiting decisions and those whose applications have alreadybeen rejected, do not live in social housing.Asylum seekers are accommodated in private residential hotels, paid forby the taxpayer, and do not thus feature in the social housing statistics.The EHRC also claimed that it found no evidence of 'queue jumping' byimmigrants. This is also a deliberate distortion. Currently, socialhousing is allocated on the basis of 'need' and specifically the size ofthe family which is seeking accommodation.In the 2007 IPPR report, a study was made of the immigrant groups'percentage claims for child support. The higher the percentage, thegreater the number of children - and once again the figures show clearlythat immigrant groups will automatically 'queue jump' for social housingover indigenous British people who have fewer or no children. The IPPR study found the following percentages for the "proportion ofpopulation claiming child benefit by country of birth" in 2005/2006:Somalia 40%, Bangladesh 33%, Pakistan 29%, Portugal 27%, Turkey 26%,Uganda 25%, Kenya 24%, Ghana 24%, Nigeria 22%, Sri Lanka 21%, Iran 20%,Cyprus 20%, Philippines 17%, India 16%, Jamaica 16%, Zimbabwe 16% andthe UK 14%.Furthermore, the IPPR report produced a percentage list of 'economicallyactive' sections of each immigrant community, which also dramaticallyinfluences the allocation of social housing. Once again, the IPPR figures from 2007 reveal precisely who is workingand who is not. The figures below are the country of birth followed bythe total unemployed for each community: Uganda 23%, Kenya 23%, Nigeria24%, Sri Lanka 27%, India 29%, Portugal 30%, China 31%, Jamaica 31%,Cyprus 32%, Iran 49%, Pakistan 55%, Bangladesh 56%, Turkey 59% andSomalia 81%. Gordon Brown, has seen fit toannounce a 'policy change' in social housing to give preference to localpopulations over immigrants. Effectively Mr Brown was admitting that theprevious policy was to discriminate against British people in favour ofimmigrants - otherwise why the need for the policy change? daily telegraph144,000 asylum seekers allowed to stay in Britain after claims backlog At least 144,000 asylum seekers will be allowed to stay in Britain due to a backlog of claims xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx It is the statistic that dare not speak its name, though eventually itmust. It has huge ramifications for the civil and political life of thiscountry, the health of the equity markets and, most immediately, theresidential property market. So don't forget you read it here first: thepopulation of the UK is presently somewhere between 77 and 80 million.The 2001 census, already hopelessly out of date and easy to avoid forthose who find filling in forms a trifle inelegant, numbered us at alittle under 59 million. But as statistics go, that one's mostdefinitely a damned lie. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx A sensational, devastating analysisof the consequences of Turkeyjoining the EUA Bridge Too Far, by two Flemish authors Philip Claeys and Koen Dillen, is not readily available in the UK.But it has now been re-published in English and is available on this site.At a time when British Conservatives continue to support Turkish membership, yet remain embarrassed to admit it, we desperately need to know the risks and their consequences. A Bridge Too Far delivers in spades.As the distinguished columnist Taki suggests in his foreword to this remarkable book, Turkey’s entry would extend the EU’s borders to the crucible of Islamic extremism and provide the means to create “a fifth-column in our midst - a bonanza for militant Islamists who believe that ‘infidels’ should be put to the sword”.For anyone concerned at 70 million Turks joining the EU, this book is a ‘must read’.
Tony Price ● 6286d