Overt overpopulation...

They really don't realise what a complete fuck-up they've made, do they? Home Secretary Alan Johnson has admitted that "the government has made mistakes in handling immigration" but as usual it's not quite as honest as you'd think he added that he accepted

"that governments of both persuasions, including this one, have been maladroit in their handling of this issue"...

Eh? What a lying hoon, this Labour government is THE one and only problem, no other: NET immigration quadrupled between 1997 and 2007. It has been well over three years since I posted on the Overwhelming open-door onslaught and Overcrowding or overeacting and what seems clear is that it certainly wasn't overreaction: nothing has changed and the numbers are clear: from 1991 to 1997 average net immigration was growth of just under 41 thousand per year (a high of 77 thousand in 1994 and in two of those years there was actually a slight decrease) In 1998 there was a leap of 200% and it hasn't dropped since (average of over 180 thousand for the ten years from 1998)!! What you say AJ is too little, too late. Last year we heard that NET immigration to the UK was 237,000; at the time Frank Field said,

"Today's figures will come as a shock to ministers. Net migration is much higher than expected. This means immigration has directly added a million people to the UK's population in just the past five years."

Of course we know WHY you're saying this now: this issue has well-and-truly raised it's head above the parapet after the SHOCKING [but half expected and generally presumed by those of us "of the right"] revelation last week that immigration was encouraged by Labour for political gain. So says Andrew Neather who was a Home Office adviser and speechwriter for Tony Blair. Looking at the figures there is NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER. All the increasing wooly-arsed Woolas could say was "this government has reintroduced border controls..."

The latest projections for growth confirm that immigration is "driving [the UK] population to new heights. If nothing is done, we will have an extra 10million people within 25 years - and nearly 70 per cent of them as a result of new immigration.". The words of Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK. "We must halt this conspiracy of silence over our immigration crisis": Read more.... And even more in Sir Andrew's letter to The Guardian last week: "The real threat of immigration" where he mentions an important fact: if the UK wants

"to stabilise our population at 65 million we need to reduce net immigration to zero."

...but of course that doesn't mean that there should be NO immigration as twits like Alan Johnson try to make out ("no sensible argument for immigration to cease altogether") it "means that immigration should be reduced to the level of emigration, which is currently about 100,000 a year." Still not enough for many but certainly a step in the right direction.

Apologies for the vertitable "link fest"...

Overt overpopulation...

They really don't realise what a complete fuck-up they've made, do they? Home Secretary Alan Johnson has admitted that "the government has made mistakes in handling immigration" but as usual it's not quite as honest as you'd think he added that he accepted

"that governments of both persuasions, including this one, have been maladroit in their handling of this issue"...

Eh? What a lying hoon, this Labour government is THE one and only problem, no other: NET immigration quadrupled between 1997 and 2007. It has been well over three years since I posted on the Overwhelming open-door onslaught and Overcrowding or overeacting and what seems clear is that it certainly wasn't overreaction: nothing has changed and the numbers are clear: from 1991 to 1997 average net immigration was growth of just under 41 thousand per year (a high of 77 thousand in 1994 and in two of those years there was actually a slight decrease) In 1998 there was a leap of 200% and it hasn't dropped since (average of over 180 thousand for the ten years from 1998)!! What you say AJ is too little, too late. Last year we heard that NET immigration to the UK was 237,000; at the time Frank Field said,

"Today's figures will come as a shock to ministers. Net migration is much higher than expected. This means immigration has directly added a million people to the UK's population in just the past five years."

Of course we know WHY you're saying this now: this issue has well-and-truly raised it's head above the parapet after the SHOCKING [but half expected and generally presumed by those of us "of the right"] revelation last week that immigration was encouraged by Labour for political gain. So says Andrew Neather who was a Home Office adviser and speechwriter for Tony Blair. Looking at the figures there is NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER. All the increasing wooly-arsed Woolas could say was "this government has reintroduced border controls..."

The latest projections for growth confirm that immigration is "driving [the UK] population to new heights. If nothing is done, we will have an extra 10million people within 25 years - and nearly 70 per cent of them as a result of new immigration.". The words of Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK. "We must halt this conspiracy of silence over our immigration crisis": Read more.... And even more in Sir Andrew's letter to The Guardian last week: "The real threat of immigration" where he mentions an important fact: if the UK wants

"to stabilise our population at 65 million we need to reduce net immigration to zero."

...but of course that doesn't mean that there should be NO immigration as twits like Alan Johnson try to make out ("no sensible argument for immigration to cease altogether") it "means that immigration should be reduced to the level of emigration, which is currently about 100,000 a year." Still not enough for many but certainly a step in the right direction.

Apologies for the vertitable "link fest"...

Overcrowding or overreacting II...

---

OK, OK, I've been wittering on about immigration for a while, and nothing changes: I'll repeat some of those words from last year:

• There is no housing crisis: there is an immigration crisis.




• There is no hospital/A&E crisis: there is an immigration crisis. 




• There is no school-place/teacher crisis: there is an immigration crisis.




• There is no doctor/nurse numbers crisis: there is an immigration crisis.




• There is no police/fire service crisis: there is an immigration crisis.




• There is no infrastructure/road crisis: there is an immigration crisis.




• There is no employment crisis: there is an immigration crisis.  
  

As Migration watch says: "What is the problem?" [LINK] "Immigration is a natural part of an open economy and society. The
problem for the UK is that the current level of immigration is much too
high."

Now, to make matters worse, the Office of National Statistics say they have been underestimating migration numbers for ages, something we really knew but nobody can prove: "Our research has clearly shown that no single source of data can fully reflect the complexity of migration."...getting their excuses in early.

Trouble is, ONS is 'official' figures and the excellent Migration Watch also work off 'official' figures; the UK population 'officially' stands at 67 million . HOWEVER, it is surely much, much higher: "...the population of the UK is presently somewhere between 77 and 80 million"...in 2007! [LINK], that report disappeared for a while and has resurfaced. That article has also had its debunkers but amusingly no proof has ever been given to really disprove it; yet with the inaccuracy of the census, hundreds of thousands of additonal National Insurance numbers every year, the plethora of crises (see list above), the unknown number of illegal immigrants etc., we can safely say the article was most likely more right than wrong...and the ONS figures are a massive UNDER estimate.

Overcrowding or overreacting II...

---

OK, OK, I've been wittering on about immigration for a while, and nothing changes: I'll repeat some of those words from last year:

• There is no housing crisis: there is an immigration crisis.
• There is no hospital/A&E crisis: there is an immigration crisis. 
• There is no school-place/teacher crisis: there is an immigration crisis.
• There is no doctor/nurse numbers crisis: there is an immigration crisis.
• There is no police/fire service crisis: there is an immigration crisis.
• There is no infrastructure/road crisis: there is an immigration crisis.
• There is no employment crisis: there is an immigration crisis.  

As Migration watch says: "What is the problem?" [LINK] "Immigration is a natural part of an open economy and society. The problem for the UK is that the current level of immigration is much too high."

Now, to make matters worse, the Office of National Statistics say they have been underestimating migration numbers for ages, something we really knew but nobody can prove: "Our research has clearly shown that no single source of data can fully reflect the complexity of migration."...getting their excuses in early.

Trouble is, ONS is 'official' figures and the excellent Migration Watch also work off 'official' figures; the UK population 'officially' stands at 67 million . HOWEVER, it is surely much, much higher: "...the population of the UK is presently somewhere between 77 and 80 million"...in 2007! [LINK], that report disappeared for a while and has resurfaced. That article has also had its debunkers but amusingly no proof has ever been given to really disprove it; yet with the inaccuracy of the census, hundreds of thousands of additonal National Insurance numbers every year, the plethora of crises (see list above), the unknown number of illegal immigrants etc., we can safely say the article was most likely more right than wrong...and the ONS figures are a massive UNDER estimate.

Ongoing operations; oncoming ochlesis...

---

There is no housing crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *
There is no hospital/A&E crisis: there is an immigration crisis.  *
There is no school-place/teacher crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *
There is no doctor/nurse numbers crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *
There is no police/fire service crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *
There is no infrastructure/road crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *
There is no employment crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *  **

Ochlesis is the sickness resulting from overcrowded living conditions, there is a lot of space in our green and pleasant land BUT the UK cannot cope with the continued net migration of a quarter of a million people EVERY year; every year in fact since vampire Tony Blair and his New Labour traitors came to power: a huge increase in 1997 and a further equally huge increase in 2003 from which the average has never really come down. [Migration Watch: it "didn’t just happen; the deliberate policy of Ministers from late 2000...was to open up the UK to mass immigration"] Labour wanted more voters, simple as...and Labour Lite (previously called the Conservative Party) continued unabashed. Is this going to be a major cause of civil unrest, if we don't have Holy war first? There is another factor: I am willing to bet everything I own (OK, that's not much) that the emigration does NOT match the net immigration in terms of 'type of person'; by that I mean that although many emigrating will be students finishing their courses, workers finishing their contract etc., many will also be a brain drain, a white flight, call it what you will. Money will be leaving, contributors will be leaving and takers will be arriving.

Net migration is at a similar level to early 2014 with 244,000 more people coming to the UK than leaving, so migration is adding to the UK population https://t.co/cLspmrVTrb pic.twitter.com/g80KjFDPbi

— ONS (@ONS) 22 February 2018

Yes, a gross generalisation that I cannot prove...but I'd still bet everything that it's true. Go to ANY part of England and you will see thousands of houses being built, THOUSANDS. We are hardly building at all on 'brownfield'/urban sites; we are carving up and destroying FOR EVER, new 'greenfield' land, mature countryside. Anyone who has traveled by train will see thousands on the approach to every urban station acres of mess, crumbled old factories, deserted rubble-strewn wastelands that are NOT being built on...why? Water, gas, electric will already mostly be there, approach roads are already there; nearby schools and shops are already there.

* All this is straight forward and luckily it also has a very simple solution; with the will it could be implemented in a week.
** A total of 497,000 National Insurance Numbers were issued to adult EU nationals in the year ending December 2017 (no non-EU counted in that total...)

Ongoing operations; oncoming ochlesis...

---

There is no housing crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *

There is no hospital/A&E crisis: there is an immigration crisis.  *

There is no school-place/teacher crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *

There is no doctor/nurse numbers crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *

There is no police/fire service crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *

There is no infrastructure/road crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *

There is no employment crisis: there is an immigration crisis. *  **



Ochlesis is the sickness resulting from overcrowded living conditions, there is a lot of space in our green and pleasant land BUT the UK cannot cope with the continued net migration of a quarter of a million people EVERY year; every year in fact since vampire Tony Blair and his New Labour traitors came to power: a huge increase in 1997 and a further equally huge increase in 2003 from which the average has never really come down. [Migration Watch: it "didn’t just happen; the deliberate policy of Ministers from late 2000...was to open up the UK to mass immigration"] Labour wanted more voters, simple as...and Labour Lite (previously called the Conservative Party) continued unabashed. Is this going to be a major cause of civil unrest, if we don't have Holy war first? There is another factor: I am willing to bet everything I own (OK, that's not much) that the emigration does NOT match the net immigration in terms of 'type of person'; by that I mean that although many emigrating will be students finishing their courses, workers finishing their contract etc., many will also be a brain drain, a white flight, call it what you will. Money will be leaving, contributors will be leaving and takers will be arriving.

Net migration is at a similar level to early 2014 with 244,000 more people coming to the UK than leaving, so migration is adding to the UK population https://t.co/cLspmrVTrb pic.twitter.com/g80KjFDPbi

— ONS (@ONS) 22 February 2018

Yes, a gross generalisation that I cannot prove...but I'd still bet everything that it's true.

Go to ANY part of England and you will see thousands of houses being built, THOUSANDS. We are hardly building at all on 'brownfield'/urban sites; we are carving up and destroying FOR EVER, new 'greenfield' land, mature countryside. Anyone who has traveled by train will see thousands on the approach to every urban station acres of mess, crumbled old factories, deserted rubble-strewn wastelands that are NOT being built on...why? Water, gas, electric will already mostly be there, approach roads are already there; nearby schools and shops are already there.



* All this is straight forward and luckily it also has a very simple solution; with the will it could be implemented in a week.

** A total of 497,000 National Insurance Numbers were issued to adult EU nationals in the year ending December 2017 (no non-EU counted in that total...)

Overcrowding or overreacting...

I will not cease from mental fight,

Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,

Till we have built Jerusalem

In England's green and pleasant land.

Of course that wasn't meant to be taken literally but the UK government seem intent on building several Jerusalems in their haste to "Concrete over England 'The Government's plan to bribe councils into concreting over what remains of the prettier parts of England is of a piece with its partisan rule since 1997." So says the DT editorial for today's news.

No environmental conditions are placed on the scheme, which the Campaign to Protect Rural England described as "a bribe". It feared that it could introduce "a scary new temptation to corruption in local government and planning".

Henry Oliver of the Campaign to Protect Rural England said: "This idea seems to be a return to 'predict and provide', with a bribe attached - in the linked article with reference to Shrewsbury and the West Midlands - it's not just a problem for the South east of England.
More worryingly the article goes on to say "Government figures show that five million new homes are needed in England over 20 years, 1.5 million of them because of record levels of immigration."...record levels of immigration....more on that later.

All this is nothing new, for years the press have reported variations on the theme, this is just one example from the Guardian and there are small victories that give some communities hope:

"Councils are supposed to be the guardians of the countryside but I suspect what has happened in Dolton is a microcosm of what is happening elsewhere in rural communities,"..."If councils fail to follow their policies and procedures properly, they not only spoil our precious countryside but, in this case, they would also not have achieved affordable housing for local people."

...and I guess it's no surprise that Porker Prescott has been wasting more money "And the scandal has provoked Conservatives to demand that ministers should now also call a halt to Mr Prescott's environmentally unsustainable plans to build thousands of new homes in the crowded south-east of England, and demolish Victorian terraces in the north."
All political parties talk a good game but never deliver, I find myself agreeing with the Lib Dem's (shock-horror!) outline from their last manifesto:

"Liberal Democrats believe decent housing should be a right. We want to meet people’s aspirations to own their home whilst providing more affordable and social homes to rent. In our towns and cities, we aim to increase the number of affordable homes, cut the damage to the environment by energy inefficient homes and push down power over community issues to local residents. People also want more than bricks and mortar from their home. They want to live in safe, clean and friendly communities. So Liberal Democrats will give local people more say in running their neighbourhoods and put the environment at the heart of housing policy. "

Back now to the immigration side of things: Government figures show that five million new homes are needed in England over 20 years, 1.5 million of them because of record levels of immigration....I believe two things: 5 million is too many and more than 1.5 million will be due to immigration - Gov statistics show us that the UK has a growing population. It grew by 280,600 people in the year to mid-2004, and the average growth per year has been 0.4 per cent since mid-2001....amusingly the graph is a Janus, two-faced! Also, this from the UK Government Actuary department:

In the principal projection, the population of the UK is projected to grow by 7.2 million between 2004 and 2031. Some 4.1 million of this increase is directly due to the assumed number of net migrants. Natural change accounts for a further 3.1 million (the difference between 19.2 million births and 16.1 million deaths). Some 1.2 million of this natural increase would occur in the absence of migration. The remaining 1.9 million is the net effect of the assumed annual level of net migration on natural change (almost entirely the effect on births, slightly offset by a small increase in deaths).

Or in the words of Migration Watch. "The UK’s population is projected to rise by 7.2 million from 2004 to 2031 – 6.0 million (83%) of this rise is due to immigration" and "Net inward foreign migration has more than tripled since 1997 to 340,000 in 2004. Significant components - work-related migration and family settlement - are likely to continue at present levels or increase. Indeed, under present policies, they will continue at high levels indefinitely. Illegal immigration is additional."...so, 83% of the population growth will be as net immigration and the subsequent organic growth in immigrant populations...NOW, that to me suggests that nearly all of the proposed building, be it in the south-east or elsewhere, is to cater for the new (and set to continue) record-shattering immigration.
It's not this bad yet, I think the CPRE report -"Your Countryside, Your Choice" - that began with a their portrait of what could be England in 2035, "when the countryside has all but disappeared"...not yet, the photo above is one of several thousand beautiful views across England (this one isn't far from where my family live); when I fly home be it to Heathrow, Bristol or Bournemouth airports you can see the countryside as it really is - but how long will it last, how long will England be a green and pleasant land?
S.O.

Overcrowding or overreacting...

I will not cease from mental fight,

Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,

Till we have built Jerusalem

In England's green and pleasant land.

Of course that wasn't meant to be taken literally but the UK government seem intent on building several Jerusalems in their haste to "Concrete over England 'The Government's plan to bribe councils into concreting over what remains of the prettier parts of England is of a piece with its partisan rule since 1997." So says the DT editorial for today's news.



No environmental conditions are placed on the scheme, which the Campaign to Protect Rural England described as "a bribe". It feared that it could introduce "a scary new temptation to corruption in local government and planning".



Henry Oliver of the Campaign to Protect Rural England said: "This idea seems to be a return to 'predict and provide', with a bribe attached - in the linked article with reference to Shrewsbury and the West Midlands - it's not just a problem for the South east of England.

More worryingly the article goes on to say "Government figures show that five million new homes are needed in England over 20 years, 1.5 million of them because of record levels of immigration."...record levels of immigration....more on that later.

All this is nothing new, for years the press have reported variations on the theme, this is just one example from the Guardian and there are small victories that give some communities hope:

"Councils are supposed to be the guardians of the countryside but I suspect what has happened in Dolton is a microcosm of what is happening elsewhere in rural communities,"..."If councils fail to follow their policies and procedures properly, they not only spoil our precious countryside but, in this case, they would also not have achieved affordable housing for local people."

...and I guess it's no surprise that Porker Prescott has been wasting more money "And the scandal has provoked Conservatives to demand that ministers should now also call a halt to Mr Prescott's environmentally unsustainable plans to build thousands of new homes in the crowded south-east of England, and demolish Victorian terraces in the north."

All political parties talk a good game but never deliver, I find myself agreeing with the Lib Dem's (shock-horror!) outline from their last manifesto:

"Liberal Democrats believe decent housing should be a right. We want to meet people’s aspirations to own their home whilst providing more affordable and social homes to rent. In our towns and cities, we aim to increase the number of affordable homes, cut the damage to the environment by energy inefficient homes and push down power over community issues to local residents. People also want more than bricks and mortar from their home. They want to live in safe, clean and friendly communities. So Liberal Democrats will give local people more say in running their neighbourhoods and put the environment at the heart of housing policy. "

Back now to the immigration side of things: Government figures show that five million new homes are needed in England over 20 years, 1.5 million of them because of record levels of immigration....I believe two things: 5 million is too many and more than 1.5 million will be due to immigration - Gov statistics show us that the UK has a growing population. It grew by 280,600 people in the year to mid-2004, and the average growth per year has been 0.4 per cent since mid-2001....amusingly the graph is a Janus, two-faced! Also, this from the UK Government Actuary department:

In the principal projection, the population of the UK is projected to grow by 7.2 million between 2004 and 2031. Some 4.1 million of this increase is directly due to the assumed number of net migrants. Natural change accounts for a further 3.1 million (the difference between 19.2 million births and 16.1 million deaths). Some 1.2 million of this natural increase would occur in the absence of migration. The remaining 1.9 million is the net effect of the assumed annual level of net migration on natural change (almost entirely the effect on births, slightly offset by a small increase in deaths).

Or in the words of Migration Watch. "The UK’s population is projected to rise by 7.2 million from 2004 to 2031 – 6.0 million (83%) of this rise is due to immigration" and "Net inward foreign migration has more than tripled since 1997 to 340,000 in 2004. Significant components - work-related migration and family settlement - are likely to continue at present levels or increase. Indeed, under present policies, they will continue at high levels indefinitely. Illegal immigration is additional."...so, 83% of the population growth will be as net immigration and the subsequent organic growth in immigrant populations...NOW, that to me suggests that nearly all of the proposed building, be it in the south-east or elsewhere, is to cater for the new (and set to continue) record-shattering immigration.

It's not this bad yet, I think the CPRE report -"Your Countryside, Your Choice" - that began with a their portrait of what could be England in 2035, "when the countryside has all but disappeared"...not yet, the photo above is one of several thousand beautiful views across England (this one isn't far from where my family live); when I fly home be it to Heathrow, Bristol or Bournemouth airports you can see the countryside as it really is - but how long will it last, how long will England be a green and pleasant land?

S.O.

Ongoing overcrowding III...

---

"Net long-term international migration = +330,000 (up 94,000 from YE March 2014), in the year
ending (YE) March 2015. 

The net migration figure was a statistically significant increase from 236,000 in YE March 2014
and is the highest net migration on record."

Just two points from the summary from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Migration Statistics (PDF full report); this is getting stupid. From Migration Watch press release: "There could hardly be a worse time for the Treasury to cut the funds available for immigration control." Looking at Fig 4 (in the ONS link) we see that from 2011 to 2013 there was a fair amount of success (down 25%) in lowering the non-EU immigration but half of this was counteracted by increased EU immigration. Since 2013 both sets have increased. Nearly 30% of the total net immigration (year to March 2015) were students, we'll give them benefit of the doubt although many thousands are not students at all and as we have seen in the past, some colleges and courses or tests were entirely false (and "Each year, around 100,000 non-EU students get their visas to stay in the UK extended"). A full 16% (year to March 2015) say the reason they came was "looking for work", WTF? If I turned up anywhere at a frontier and said I was just looking for work I would get turned back; I cannot think of any of the 50-60 countries that I have visited that would accept this. Are no questions asked? At all? A further 13% came as family/to join someone already here. Dare I suggest that of this 29% nearly* all shouldn't be here. * clearly some family of those on long term work contracts should be.



[Update] And when we look at the National Insurance numbers (NINos) and the probable number of illegal immigrants we can safely say the ONS figures are a massive UNDER estimate. 

Ongoing overcrowding...

---

...of a green and pleasant land [Owsblog 2006]. Before I go on just let me make it clear that this post isn't just a dig at the festering shite heap that was New Labour...but I do start off with that:

“ Every country must have firm control over immigration and Britain is no exception.” Labour election manifesto 1997

We know that in their 1st term - from 1997 - immigration tripled; in their 2nd term it quadrupled (from the 1997 figure) [MW - pdf]. This seemed bad enough and then we found out it was entirely intentional and had a 'subsidiary political purpose' and was not just the result of a booming economy and perceived skills shortage. Now, we learn of ANOTHER round of secret immigration intentions: "The secret immigration policy they tried to hide". "Behind closed doors, EU negotiations will trigger a new wave of cheap labour into Britain." Who and when will the public be informed? These are new,  irreversible commitments. Not Labour, 'even though Peter Mandelson initiated all the current agreements', not David Cameron or the Coalition...not UKIP, or the Greens or even the Unions (although apparently the RMT may yet force some sort of 'alert').

 

Overspending, overcrowding, overcompensating...

---

Bad things come in three's, so the saying goes: 3 billion, 3 million, 3 hundred thousand...



The first is the increasing size of the 'black hole' in MoD procurement which "increased by £3.3billion in Labour's final year in office alone to reach around £36billion". [Link]



The second is no real secret and I've certainly banged on about it for years: 'Immigration Under Labour – Chaos or Conspiracy?' from Sir Andrew Green's Migration Watch press release: "It is no exaggeration to say that immigration under New Labour has changed the face of the country.":

"Every country must have firm control over immigration and Britain is no exception." Labour election manifesto 1997

From the Migration Watch briefing paper (PDF). Net immigration to the UK quadrupled under Labour, bringing more than 3 million immigrants to Britain (more than this arrived but of course some others left and also a million British citizens emigrated)...almost literally 'changing the face of the country'. Pressure on housing, pressure on schools, pressure on services. Pressure on spending.



The third, for those of you concerned about my lack of slagging for the Coalition, you know who you are: when David Cameron stripped Vince Cable of certain responsibilities re the BSkyB takeover - handing responsibility for the decision to media secretary and Conservative Jeremy Hunt - it cost the government (the taxpayer) £300,000. Not a lot in the great scheme of things BUT to quote one ex Chancellor when concerning the taxpayer's money (and the economy):

The Chancellor of the Exchequer should boldly uphold economy in detail; and it is the mark of a chicken-hearted Chancellor when he shrinks from upholding economy in detail, when because it is a question of only two or three thousand pounds, he says it is no matter. He is ridiculed, no doubt, for what is called candle-ends and cheese-parings, but he is not worth his salt if he is not ready to save what are meant by candle-ends and cheese-parings in the cause of the country. No Chancellor of the Exchequer is worth his salt who makes his own popularity either his consideration, or any consideration at all, in administering the public purse. In my opinion, the Chancellor of the Exchequer is the trusted and confidential steward of the public. He is under a sacred obligation with regard to all that he consents to spend.

With thanks to Voyager, in the comments over at Cranmer's, oh, and to Gladstone...



"But let the working man be on his guard against another danger. We live at a time when there is a disposition to think that the Government ought to do this and that and that the Government ought to do everything..."

Ongoing overcrowding II...

---

...of a green and pleasant land [Owsblog 2006].  "Every country must have firm control over immigration and Britain is no exception." Labour election manifesto 1997. From Ongoing overcrowding..."We know that in their 1st term - from 1997 - immigration tripled; in their 2nd term it quadrupled (from the 1997 figure) [Migration Watch - pdf]. This seemed bad enough and then we found out it was entirely intentional and had a 'subsidiary political purpose' and was not just the result of a booming economy and perceived skills shortage. Now, we learn of ANOTHER round of secret immigration intentions: "The secret immigration policy they tried to hide". "Behind closed doors, EU negotiations will trigger a new wave of cheap labour into Britain." Who and when will the public be informed? These are new, irreversible commitments."

The Coalition have done almost nothing to change any of this and now we see where our politicians lead us: 13 per cent of residents of England and Wales were born outside the UK and just over half arrived in the last 10 years, [ONS Link]. An important stat: now 4.8% of the UK are Muslim, more than all other religions (excepting Christian and 'no religion') put together; not too high you may say but I remind you of Edward Cline's 'Jihad by the Numbers' [FSM] which seems a pretty accurate index when you read through the countries:"At 2% and 3% they [Muslims] begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs."

"From 5% on they [Muslims] exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. They will push for the introduction of halal ("clean" by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves - along with threats for failure to comply (United States)."

"At this point, they [Muslims] will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, or Islamic law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world."

Then it starts to get a bit nasty and it's worth noting David's comment here: that Muslim behaviour is not just dependent on their proportion of the population but on the character of the local population: "For instance, in a strongly anti-Muslim nation such as China, Muslims will have to be much larger then two percent before they start to misbehave or go on Jihad."

"...In a free and tolerant society, trouble starts at a much lower level."

Update: sorry for multiple Owsblog back-links (not trying to boost hits like Guido et al!) but another point to note is the health aspect: a 'small proportion of the non-UK born bear the greatest burden of infectious disease reported in the UK.' In 2010, 73% of TB cases reported in the UK were immigrants - of those with country of birth information available (84% of that total are from only two regions: 57% South Asia [almost entirely India, Pakistan and Bangladesh] and 27% from sub Saharan Africa [mainly Zimbabwe and Nigeria]). The same goes for almost 60% of newly diagnosed cases of HIV, and 80% of hepatitis B infected UK blood donors (this data from the HPA PowerPoint; link at bottom of page HERE).

Ongoing overcrowding III...

---

"Net long-term international migration = +330,000 (up 94,000 from YE March 2014), in the year ending (YE) March 2015. 

The net migration figure was a statistically significant increase from 236,000 in YE March 2014 and is the highest net migration on record."

Just two points from the summary from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Migration Statistics (PDF full report); this is getting stupid. From Migration Watch press release: "There could hardly be a worse time for the Treasury to cut the funds available for immigration control." Looking at Fig 4 (in the ONS link) we see that from 2011 to 2013 there was a fair amount of success (down 25%) in lowering the non-EU immigration but half of this was counteracted by increased EU immigration. Since 2013 both sets have increased. Nearly 30% of the total net immigration (year to March 2015) were students, we'll give them benefit of the doubt although many thousands are not students at all and as we have seen in the past, some colleges and courses or tests were entirely false (and "Each year, around 100,000 non-EU students get their visas to stay in the UK extended"). A full 16% (year to March 2015) say the reason they came was "looking for work", WTF? If I turned up anywhere at a frontier and said I was just looking for work I would get turned back; I cannot think of any of the 50-60 countries that I have visited that would accept this. Are no questions asked? At all? A further 13% came as family/to join someone already here. Dare I suggest that of this 29% nearly* all shouldn't be here. * clearly some family of those on long term work contracts should be.

[Update] And when we look at the National Insurance numbers (NINos) and the probable number of illegal immigrants we can safely say the ONS figures are a massive UNDER estimate. 

Ongoing overcrowding II...

---

...of a green and pleasant land [Owsblog 2006].  "Every country must have firm control over immigration
and Britain is no exception." Labour election manifesto 1997. From Ongoing overcrowding..."We know that in their 1st term - from 1997 - immigration tripled; in their 2nd term it quadrupled (from the 1997 figure) [Migration Watch - pdf]. This seemed bad enough and then we found out it was entirely intentional and had a 'subsidiary political purpose' and was not just the result of a booming economy and perceived skills shortage.

Now, we learn of ANOTHER round of secret immigration intentions: "The secret immigration policy they tried to hide". "Behind closed doors, EU negotiations will trigger a new wave of cheap labour into Britain." Who and when will the public be informed? These are new, irreversible commitments."

The Coalition have done almost nothing to change any of this and now we see where our politicians lead us: 13 per cent of residents of England and Wales were born outside the UK and just over half arrived in the last 10 years, [ONS Link]. An important stat: now 4.8% of the UK are Muslim, more than all other religions (excepting Christian and 'no religion') put together; not too high you may say but I remind you of Edward Cline's 'Jihad by the Numbers' [FSM] which seems a pretty accurate index when you read through the countries:"At 2% and 3% they [Muslims] begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs."



"From 5% on they [Muslims] exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. They will push for the introduction of halal ("clean" by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves - along with threats for failure to comply (United States)."



"At this point, they [Muslims] will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, or Islamic law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world."



Then it starts to get a bit nasty and it's worth noting David's comment here: that Muslim behaviour is not just dependent on their proportion of the population but on the character of the local population: "For instance, in a strongly anti-Muslim nation such as China, Muslims will have to be much larger then two percent before they start to misbehave or go on Jihad."



"...In a free and tolerant society, trouble starts at a much lower level."




Update: sorry for multiple Owsblog back-links (not trying to boost hits like Guido et al!) but another point to note is the health aspect: a 'small proportion of the non-UK born bear the greatest burden of infectious disease reported in the UK.' In 2010, 73% of TB cases reported in the UK were immigrants - of those with country of birth information available (84% of that total are from only two regions: 57% South Asia [almost entirely India, Pakistan and Bangladesh] and 27% from sub Saharan Africa [mainly Zimbabwe and Nigeria]). The same goes for almost 60% of newly diagnosed cases of HIV, and 80% of hepatitis B infected UK blood donors (this data from the HPA PowerPoint; link at bottom of page HERE).

Ongoing overcrowding...

---

...of a green and pleasant land [Owsblog 2006]. Before I go on just let me make it clear that this post isn't just a dig at the festering shite heap that was New Labour...but I do start off with that:

“ Every country must have firm control over immigration
and Britain is no exception.” Labour election manifesto 1997

We know that in their 1st term - from 1997 - immigration tripled; in their 2nd term it quadrupled (from the 1997 figure) [MW - pdf]. This seemed bad enough and then we found out it was entirely intentional and had a 'subsidiary political purpose' and was not just the result of a booming economy and perceived skills shortage.

Now, we learn of ANOTHER round of secret immigration intentions: "The secret immigration policy they tried to hide". "Behind closed doors, EU negotiations will trigger a new wave of cheap labour into Britain." Who and when will the public be informed? These are new,  irreversible commitments. Not Labour, 'even though Peter Mandelson initiated all the current agreements', not David Cameron or the Coalition...not UKIP, or the Greens or even the Unions (although apparently the RMT may yet force some sort of 'alert').



 

Overspending, overcrowding, overcompensating...

---

Bad things come in three's, so the saying goes: 3 billion, 3 million, 3 hundred thousand...

The first is the increasing size of the 'black hole' in MoD procurement which "increased by £3.3billion in Labour's final year in office alone to reach around £36billion". [Link]

The second is no real secret and I've certainly banged on about it for years: 'Immigration Under Labour – Chaos or Conspiracy?' from Sir Andrew Green's Migration Watch press release: "It is no exaggeration to say that immigration under New Labour has changed the face of the country.":

"Every country must have firm control over immigration and Britain is no exception." Labour election manifesto 1997

From the Migration Watch briefing paper (PDF). Net immigration to the UK quadrupled under Labour, bringing more than 3 million immigrants to Britain (more than this arrived but of course some others left and also a million British citizens emigrated)...almost literally 'changing the face of the country'. Pressure on housing, pressure on schools, pressure on services. Pressure on spending.

The third, for those of you concerned about my lack of slagging for the Coalition, you know who you are: when David Cameron stripped Vince Cable of certain responsibilities re the BSkyB takeover - handing responsibility for the decision to media secretary and Conservative Jeremy Hunt - it cost the government (the taxpayer) £300,000. Not a lot in the great scheme of things BUT to quote one ex Chancellor when concerning the taxpayer's money (and the economy):

The Chancellor of the Exchequer should boldly uphold economy in detail; and it is the mark of a chicken-hearted Chancellor when he shrinks from upholding economy in detail, when because it is a question of only two or three thousand pounds, he says it is no matter. He is ridiculed, no doubt, for what is called candle-ends and cheese-parings, but he is not worth his salt if he is not ready to save what are meant by candle-ends and cheese-parings in the cause of the country. No Chancellor of the Exchequer is worth his salt who makes his own popularity either his consideration, or any consideration at all, in administering the public purse. In my opinion, the Chancellor of the Exchequer is the trusted and confidential steward of the public. He is under a sacred obligation with regard to all that he consents to spend.

With thanks to Voyager, in the comments over at Cranmer's, oh, and to Gladstone...

"But let the working man be on his guard against another danger. We live at a time when there is a disposition to think that the Government ought to do this and that and that the Government ought to do everything..."

Oncoming ochlesis...

---

Not quite but in one respect the 'science' is settled; there need be no more discussion: "The immigration lobby are getting desperately short of arguments to set against the huge costs of mass immigration"... "Immigration caps don’t hamper the economic recovery. Why pretend otherwise?" [Link]

Obama's obsequious ovines outed...

---

Such fun to watch lefty pain: a photograph and reports of migrant children sleeping in cages at a detention centre went viral on Sunday leading to lefty outrage at Trump. The fun is now after they mostly deleted those tweets when it became clear it was a photo taken under Obama's administration.

Hello @antonio4ca Why did you delete this tweet? Is it because this was 2014 and you are no longer outraged because who this all happened under? Are you no longer speechless? Help explain, thanks. pic.twitter.com/Qe8Pr9Zac1

— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) 28 May 2018

Sudden change of heart obviously. Some (Book Forum Ominivore or HERE as a cached image) even call it "Trump's racist immigration policy"...I would be interested to hear of an immigration policy anywhere in the world that wasn't racist.

They were probably still in a rage over trump blaming the Democrats but even Fact Check, despite showing is wasn't the Democrats (although they are preventing it being changed) can't fully put the blame on Trump, unless they want the children to go to gaol, which of course the luvvies would if it meant getting one over on The Donald. The U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said:

"If you cross this border unlawfully, then we will prosecute you. It's that simple"...If you smuggle illegal aliens across our border, then we will prosecute you. If you are smuggling a child, then we will prosecute you and that child will be separated from you as required by law." Because minors cannot be kept in adult gaols.

Or U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) top official Thomas D. Homan said "I want to be clear. DHS does not have a blanket policy on separating families as a deterrent,"... "Every law enforcement agency in this country separates parents from children when they're arrested for a crime. There is no new policy. This has always been the policy. Now, you will see more prosecutions because of the attorney general’s commitment to zero tolerance."

Overt obloquy....

---

How can 'The Left' ever find solutions (to problems they have caused) if they simply have no idea what the actual problem is? YAB in the Independent is so far off target with her attempt to use GB's Olympic success against those do not agree with open border immigration : "Anyone who now thinks Britain is too multicultural?" LINK. "I wonder how the formidable anti-immigration prophets and campaigners react when medals are won by super-fit migrants and children of migrants"...WTF? Is she really so completely clueless as to what the immigration debate is about or "What multiculturalism really means"?

Ongoing overcrowding III...

---

The rise in the UK Population from immigration ALONE is averaging a new Plymouth or 3 Harrogate's EVERY YEAR: that's just known immigration and not including the thousands of illegals and not including population rise from births etc.  Lord Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK said:

"These figures will be extremely disappointing for the public. The additional pressure on housing and public services is clearly unmanageable."

An understatement; as is 'extremely disappointing', which is putting it very mildly.




Late addition: Immigration Under Labour (MW briefing paper).