90% of all Immigrants to the UK live in England

[Trapper John]

A recently completed study by Migration Watch, taken from the latest census results and the Office of National Statistics amongst other sources, has concluded that 90% of all immigrants to the UK live in England.

Of the 7.1million foreigners living in the UK, 6.6 million live in England, 325,000 in Scotland, 150,000 in Wales & 100,000 in N.Ireland. They say that the pro immigration lobby always like to talk about the UK when relating to immigrant fugures, but it is England which takes the brunt.

These findings mean that, excluding small Island and City states, England is the 6th most populated country on Earth and the ONS state that the immigrant population is set to grow by another 4.3 million over the next 15 years.

This is why you have a large number of people in the UK wondering why others are getting so upset about the mass placement of immigrants, they must live in areas which are not over loaded with them. No wonder Scotland wants to become Independent, because the powerful immigration lobby and the Ultra Liberal and left wing power brokers will no doubt want to offset these findings by dumping the next few million on their doorstep.

One must not forget either, that these figures only include those who are actually foreign at present, it doesn't include the millions who have been granted UK citizenship over the past 15 years for a multitude of spurious reasons.

[3rdLeg]

More Grog !!

[Stooo]

A recently completed study by Migration Watch,

Stopped reading there...

[Trapper John]

:whogives:

More Grog !!

I do .........Well it wouldn't bother you or your lot, would it............. you sink their boats and drown them in the sea before they get a chance to land.

[Trapper John]

A recently completed study by Migration Watch,

Stopped reading there...

Thats up to you, Ostrich.............anyone else for head sized holes in the sand?...see stooooooooooo

[Trapper John]

I think the reason people don't like Migration Watch is that they 'PUBLISH' their findings for all to see, for anyone to rubbish if they can.

Unfortunately for the multiculturists and immigrant lobby, very few ever do or can.

Even Damian Green, Immigration minister - after presumably checking it out, is frantically spewing out rhetoric on how the coalition are taking steps to rectify the problem.

[Stooo]

A recently completed study by Migration Watch,

Stopped reading there...

Thats up to you, Ostrich.............anyone else for head sized holes in the sand?...see stooooooooooo

Turtle neck actually

Sorry Traps, can't take the skewed conclusions of MW seriously at all.

[Stooo]

I think the reason people don't like Migration Watch is that they 'PUBLISH' their findings for all to see, for anyone to rubbish if they can.

Unfortunately for the multiculturists and immigrant lobby, very few ever do or can.

Even Damian Green, Immigration minister - after presumably checking it out, is frantically spewing out rhetoric on how the coalition are taking steps to rectify the problem.

Tabloid Watch do as well, funny how only those leaning towards the right wing side of the political spectrum tend to avoid the site.

[Guest]

A recently completed study by Migration Watch, taken from the latest census results and the Office of National Statistics amongst other sources, has concluded that 90% of all immigrants to the UK live in England.

Of the 7.1million foreigners living in the UK, 6.6 million live in England, 325,000 in Scotland, 150,000 in Wales & 100,000 in N.Ireland. They say that the pro immigration lobby always like to talk about the UK when relating to immigrant fugures, but it is England which takes the brunt.

These findings mean that, excluding small Island and City states, England is the 6th most populated country on Earth and the ONS state that the immigrant population is set to grow by another 4.3 million over the next 15 years.

This is why you have a large number of people in the UK wondering why others are getting so upset about the mass placement of immigrants, they must live in areas which are not over loaded with them. No wonder Scotland wants to become Independent, because the powerful immigration lobby and the Ultra Liberal and left wing power brokers will no doubt want to offset these findings by dumping the next few million on their doorstep.

One must not forget either, that these figures only include those who are actually foreign at present, it doesn't include the millions who have been granted UK citizenship over the past 15 years for a multitude of spurious reasons.

Migration Watch are the biggest purveyors of complete and utter bollocks regarding immigration and immigration figures. For example, a new visa issued to a new person is double counted by MW when they renew it. Lying cunts.

Still intelligent people can spot their BS a mile off and comment accordingly

[Guest]

A recently completed study by Migration Watch,

Stopped reading there...

Me too, exactly the same point

[Big Fat Frosty]

would u wanna live in wales or scotland or ireland TJ?
theres fuck all but sheep in wales
the scots drink and fight like fuck
and n ireland is a razor wire straddled
fucking war zone

[Guest]

I think the reason people don't like Migration Watch is that they 'PUBLISH' their findings for all to see, for anyone to rubbish if they can.

Unfortunately for the multiculturists and immigrant lobby, very few ever do or can.

Even Damian Green, Immigration minister - after presumably checking it out, is frantically spewing out rhetoric on how the coalition are taking steps to rectify the problem.

Nonsense their figures are debunked EVERY time they publish some.

In your opinion are The Queen's children immigrants?

Under MW's criteria they are, a child of an immigrant is also an immigrant they say. Now where was Prince Phil born? So he's an immigrant...

QED.

Here's one showing their BS stats and how they cherry pick some stats but don't add them all up

http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.com/2010/ ... lease.html

[Guest]

No rebutting of MW BS eh?

Here's one of my all-time faves

http://www.fivechinesecrackers.com/2011 ... tence.html

These figures are presented in an unclear and potentially misleading fashion here. Full Fact has had a closer look at where these figures come from, and come to the conclusion that the 3 million figure is net foreign migration to the UK. That's what Migrationwatch's press releasesays, but I'd rather wait until the actual figures are published, since the report itself gives a different impression, making it look as though the 3 million figure is the total number for inward migration. In any case, if the argument is purely about overcrowding, why split UK born and non-UK born like this?

Onwards:
How could all this have happened in the teeth of public opposition? Even the Labour government’s own survey last February showed that 77 per cent of the public wanted immigration reduced, including 54 per cent of the ethnic communities, while 50 per cent of the public wanted it reduced ‘by a lot’.
Hey! Isn't there something missing here? Wasn't there a study published this February that showed the majority of people in the UK do indeed think immigration is too high - until they're told exactly how high it is? It seems 'the public' overestimates the level of mmigration to the UK. Now, why might that be, Sir Andrew, when you've just put out a report that says things like, "England (not the UK) is already, with Holland, the most crowded country in Europe (apart from Malta)" when according to official Dutch figures, it really, really isn't?
Mass immigration is an entirely different matter. The question now is how did it happen and what can be done about it. Was it all a Labour conspiracy? Was it sheer incompetence in government? Or was it wholesale retreat in front of the race relations lobby?
Or was it dealing with a complex and difficult global phenomenon with different assumptions to Sir Andrew Green? Maybe it was that. Just a thought.
The strongest evidence for conspiracy comes from one of Labour’s own. Andrew Neather, a previously unheard-of speechwriter for Blair, Straw and Blunkett, popped up with an article in the Evening Standard in October 2009 which gave the game away.

Heh. I love this. This time last year, MigrationWatch was crowing that they had the smoking gun that proved there was a secret conspiracy to import voters. There was one small problem with it. It was cack. I wrote why in this article over at MailWatch. Nice to see Sir Andrew dropping that particular nonsense and kick it under the carpet, whistling. Not to mention funny.

It's also funny that Sir Andrew has rolled back from the 'smoking gun' claim to an earlier one, by selectively quoting some things from Andrew Neather, but not his response to the storm his Standard article kicked up, which was:
There was no plot.
He also said his views had 'been twisted out of all recognition' by the people saying he'd signalled a plot. But he would say that, the dirty plotting bastard. How could you argue in the face of such strong evidence?

Sir Andrew goes on to say:
The result is now plain for all to see. Even Blair’s favourite think tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), commented recently: ‘It is no exaggeration to say that immigration under New Labour has changed the face of the country.’
Pity he misses out the very next paragraph of the IPPR report, which says:

There was no conspiracy to bring about this huge social change. New Labour did not deliberately set out to turn the UK into a huge multi-racial melting pot and so prevent the Conservatives from ever winning power again, as implied by former Number 10 adviser Andrew Neather in an article seized upon by right-wing commentators. Indeed, as Ed Owen describes, far from having a grand plan to transform Britain, New Labour didn’t have a plan at all.
Oh.

There follows a curious thing. The man who says his opposition to immigration has nothing to do with race uses a breakdown of people of darker skinned races who voted Labour, according to a 2005 study that doesn't break down how many were migrants or how recently those that were arrived in the UK. Weird that.

[Guest]

Even the Speakers wife Sally Bercow called them lying Bullshitters and they threatened to sue.

For some reason the lying Bullshitters didn't sue after being told they lie and bullshit by their legal team



And you believe known liars?

Why?

[Guest]

http://www.philippelegrain.com/back-to- ... rew-green/

MigrationWatch have posted a pitifully weak response to my criticisms of their education “report”.

1) They defend their use of cumulative figures. They say it is legitimate because the “sole objective” of the study was to calculate “pupil place requirements stemming from net migration since 1998″.
Really? If the sole aim was to calculate the impact on pupil places, they wouldn’t need to calculate cumulative costs at all.
More likely, the use of cumulative costs out of context is to generate shock headlines in tabloid newspapers, which are then reproduced by the BBC and elsewhere, to create the impression that immigrants are a huge burden on British society.
If they weren’t aiming to scare people with figures taken out of context, why didn’t their report indicate projected education spending over that period as a reference point? Why didn’t it mention the taxes and other contributions migrants make to society?

2) They defend their decision to include children with one British parent and one foreign one in their calculations. They say this approach was “implicitly endorsed by the Economic Affairs Committee of the House of Lords”.
As I’ve written loads of times, for instance here, that report was biased and flawed – not surprisingly since it was chaired (and its conclusions spun) by John Wakeham, a former Tory cabinet minister, who used the report to advance the Conservatives’ anti-immigration position.
In this case, there is no need to go into technical details. MW’s assumption fails the common-sense test. Stop people in the street and ask them whether the deputy prime minister’s kids should be counted as part of the costs of immigration.

3) They quibble with the studies that show that migrants pay more in tax than they receive in benefits and public services.
Again, they refer to the biased and flawed Lords report.
Academic studies that try to estimate the net fiscal contribution that migrants make agree on one thing: if a country with a huge public debt admits migrant workers, native taxpayers benefit. Why? Because the newcomers help pay off the debts accumulated before they arrived. That is precisely the situation Britain is in now.

Even if one assumes that the taxes migrants pay only just cover the benefits and public services they receive, the net cost of educating migrants’ children over 10 or 25 years is not £100bn or £195bn, it is zero, nil, nada, zilch.

Does anyone want to chip in to send Andrew Green back to school?

Trouble is intelligent people are few and far between most morons lap up the MW BS.