|
Post by Jonjel on Oct 31, 2014 14:11:54 GMT
I agree SJJ. And that does not make either of us racist. We are simply pointing out facts.
And as for Tony Blair's remark, well maybe he should ask the question as to whether HE was good for the country!
|
|
|
Post by IceCreamForTea on Oct 31, 2014 16:19:45 GMT
I agree SJJ. And that does not make either of us racist. We are simply pointing out facts. Jonjel. In SJJ's last post she said: "How can you make decisions when you don't know the facts" (my emphasis). This thread has been rather short on facts. There has been a lot of anecdotal stuff about hearing more foreign voices than English and talk of swamping etc. So may I ask which facts you are alluding to in your post above?
|
|
|
Post by sweetjessicajane on Nov 1, 2014 8:55:57 GMT
I am concerned about immigration, because neither side of the debate have instilled in me confidence, so I err on the "mass immigration is bad" side simple because to carry on doing something without being clear on the impact is not a good idea.
Neither side of the debate come out smelling of roses.
Take a story like "90% of children in a school don't have English as a first language" To one side this is a shining example of our cultural diversity and to the other side an example of "swamping" the native population. But it is much more subtle than that, just because English isn't your first language doesn't mean you can't read and write English, so the discussion should be based on whether these these children speak any English at all, and whether their presence is having a negative impact on the 10%. If teachers are having to spend an disproportionate amount of time on one group because their lack of English skills that is to the detriment of the rest, if the school is forced into the position of having to fund interpreters out of their limited budget again that has an impact on the rest.
Because the debate has been ignored for so long - successive government ignoring the voices of concern - facts seem to be thin on the ground.
How many EU migrants have arrived in the UK? An exact figure men, women and children. How many have subsequently left? How many have been given council/social housing? How many are claiming benefits of any sort?
How many non-EU nationals come on a student visa and subsequently don't leave, or while here work more than they are permitted?
How many non-EU nations use the NHS, and don't pay or more to the point the NHS doesn't seek payment?
How many illegal immigrants have been identified and not deported?
The above is not a complete list of questions merely a flavour.
At the moment one side can say "these foreigners are coming here and being given houses", with the response being "you are being racist you don't know what you are talking about" when the response should be "we have all the data and records show none have been given house or X number have been given houses and it was in these areas."
At the moment one side can say "I can't get a place at school because of all the foreigners", with response being "isn't it wonderful all this cultural diversity" when the response should be "we note there has been an unexpected influx of people to your area and this is putting strain on the current provision, we are currently funding additional provision in your area".
At the moment a lot of the evidence is anecdotal, the debate will only progress when the "Government" can provide facts and figures that people have faith in.
Remember Tony Blair(?) when the borders opened for Polish nationals - "don't worry only 10,000 will come" - How many polish nationals are there currently in the UK?
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 1, 2014 9:59:26 GMT
Take a story like "90% of children in a school don't have English as a first language"... That's not the full story unless you also note that not having English as a first language doesn't mean you don't speak it very well indeed as a second. Cleefy has great difficulty understanding this, because like most English people he does not speak any language other than English, and has no idea how easily children learn a new language. To get a balanced view, it's worth trying a source of information other than the Daily Mail for a change. This is from a local paper, not even the Guardian: IT’S the Birmingham school where nine out of ten kids speak English as a second language.
Yet language is no barrier to success at the Holte School in Lozells, which has been named one of Birmingham’s best schools after getting a glowing Ofsted report.
The 1,150-pupil secondary school retained its ‘outstanding’ tag under tough new inspection rules after a visit by the Government watchdog two weeks ago.
Nearly 90 per cent of pupils speak a different language as their mother tongue – compared to the national average of just 12 per cent.The vast majority of children hail from Bengali, Pakistani or Somali backgrounds and there are just eight white pupils at the school.
Head teacher Pat Walters put the school’s success down to the hard work of staff, students, parents and governors.
She said: “We have a fantastic community here and are so proud to be outstanding. Lozells does get a bad press, so an Ofsted report like this goes a long way...
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 1, 2014 10:07:03 GMT
At the moment one side can say "I can't get a place at school because of all the foreigners"... But as you've said yourself, it isn't only foreigners that keep your child out of school - planning for future need is very difficult even if no foreigners are involved at all.
|
|
|
Post by sjj on Nov 1, 2014 11:06:16 GMT
Nov 1, 2014 8:55:57 GMT sweetjessicajane said: At the moment one side can say "I can't get a place at school because of all the foreigners"... But as you've said yourself, it isn't only foreigners that keep your child out of school - planning for future need is very difficult even if no foreigners are involved at all.
That's why I trying to get the the "numbers". The "Government" at the moment doesn't appear to have a clear idea of the number of migrants coming to this country and making use of the infrastructure - housing, schools, hospitals etc. or whether some areas are being impacted more than others.
Without having a clear idea of numbers how can local or central government make plans for the future.
Take schooling for example - (here where I live) local government keep a rolling 5 year record of children in an area. We were living in this house when my son was born, so for five years the local education department knew that my son would need a space at school (along with all the other children in the area) it wasn't some big surprise when they turned 5 and needed a school place - and yet the education department still didn't have enough spaces to satisfy the local need.
I know planning for the future is not easy, but it's even harder when you don't know how many you are planning for.
|
|
|
Post by cleefarqhuar on Nov 1, 2014 14:13:15 GMT
SJJ, just this week, Sir Michael Wilshaw, the Chief Inspector of Schools In England and head of Ofsted since January 2012, has warned the Government that the large influx of non-English speaking pupils into many English Primary Schools is causing an unbearable strain on their resources and that the Government must increase their education allocation if they are to provide an adequate education for all
In 2008, the House of Lords’ ECONOMIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE produced a report of an investigation into the economic benefits of mass immigration
The members of the Select Committee which conducted this inquiry were:
Lord Best* (served as Director of the National Federation of Housing Associations has led the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust.) Lord Griffiths of Fforestfach**(Chairman of the Centre for Policy Studies from 1991 to 2001. He served as Vice-Chairman of Goldman Sachs International. Lord Kingsdown (ex Governor Bank Of England) Lord Lamont of Lerwick (ex Chancellor of the Exchequer) Lord Lawson of Blaby (ex Chancellor of the Exchequer) Lord Layard (Economist) Lord Macdonald of Tradeston Lord MacGregor of Pulham Market* Lord Moonie* Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay (ex Lib-Dem Treasury Spokesman) Lord Paul Lord Sheldon Lord Skidelsky (Economic Historian) Lord Turner of Ecchinswell* (ex Chairman of the Financial Services Authority) Lord Vallance of Tummel (ex CEO BT) Lord Wakeham (Privy Councillor)
Here are some of the damning conclusions of that Committee:
(START OF REPORT SUMMARY) There is no evidence that net immigration generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population.
The Government’s own figure for the annual benefit of immigration is 62 pence per head per week.
The overall benefit to the Government’s revenues is likely to be small.
Immigration is not the answer to the pensions problem
“We have found no evidence for the argument, made by the Government, business and many others, that net immigration – immigration minus emigration – generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population
The Committee’s assessment of the Government’s main arguments was as follows: The Government’s case:
Immigration generates large economic benefits for the UK because it increases economic growth.
The House of Lords Select Committee: “Overall GDP, which the Government has persistently emphasised, is an irrelevant and misleading criterion for assessing the economic impacts of immigration on the UK. The total size of an economy is not an index of prosperity. The focus of analysis should rather be on the effects of immigration on income per head of the resident population. Both theory and the available empirical evidence indicate that these effects are small, especially in the long run when the economy fully adjusts to the increased supply of labour. In the long run, the main economic effect of immigration is to enlarge the economy with relatively small costs and benefits for the incomes of the resident population.”
The Government’s case:
Immigrants are needed to fill labour and skills shortages and do the jobs that British workers will not do.
The House of Lords Select Committee:
“Although the evidence is limited, there is a clear danger that immigration has some adverse impact on training opportunities and apprenticeships offered to British workers.”
“Many businesses and public services at present make use of the skills and hard work of immigrants but this is not an argument for immigration on a scale which exceeds emigration and thus increases the population of the country. We do not support the general claims that net immigration is indispensable to fill labour and skills shortages. Such claims are analytically weak and provide insufficient reason for promoting net immigration
“The argument that sustained net immigration is needed to fill vacancies, and that immigrants do the jobs that locals cannot or will not do, is fundamentally flawed It ignores the potential alternatives to immigration for responding to labour shortages, including the price adjustments of a competitive labour market and the associated increase in local labour supply that can be expected to occur in the absence of immigration.
“Immigration has had a small negative impact on the lowest paid workers in the UK, and a small positive impact on the pay of higher paid workers.”
(END OF REPORT SUMMARY)
Despite this report after 6 years the population has increased by about 2 million due to mass immigration!
In addition to the ’economic benefits’ of mass immigration, the social impact must also be considered. We have seen how the Chief Inspector Of Schools is concerned at the impact it has on schooling
I would, had I more space add here the findings of a left-wing Harvard Sociologist who investigated the effects of ‘diversity’ upon a society and found to his shock that it was almost wholly negative
It is now really for the pro-mass immigrationists to make their reasoned case rather than resorting, as they invariably do to cries of ‘racism’
|
|
|
Post by Dolly Carton on Nov 2, 2014 14:22:57 GMT
Any chance of a linky-poo, Joe? Pretty please.
Waves!
|
|
|
Post by cleefarqhuar on Nov 3, 2014 8:42:58 GMT
I thought that an unemotional unargauble statement of Britain's position on immigration might cause a pause of quietness (even though idiots like Blair are still advocating mass immigration)
|
|
notgettingenoughAngie
Guest
|
Post by notgettingenoughAngie on Nov 3, 2014 10:26:17 GMT
I thought that an unemotional unargauble statement of Britain's position on immigration might cause a pause of quietness No. The pause was everyone waiting in vain for you to provide a link to your "statement" so we could see how much of it was made up or massively cherry-picked by you. If you are making a play for moron of the year I'd say you were in with a good chance.
|
|
|
Post by sweetjessicajane on Nov 3, 2014 13:06:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sweetjessicajane on Nov 3, 2014 13:13:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sweetjessicajane on Nov 3, 2014 13:18:49 GMT
At the moment one side can say "I can't get a place at school because of all the foreigners"... But as you've said yourself, it isn't only foreigners that keep your child out of school - planning for future need is very difficult even if no foreigners are involved at all. I looked this school up and I should point out that it is a secondary school - whereas I was referring to primary school places. I would put forward the suggestion that the effect of immigration has been more keenly felt in primary education, people moving to the UK and either bringing their families with them or starting their families.
|
|
|
Post by sweetjessicajane on Nov 3, 2014 13:19:36 GMT
Take a story like "90% of children in a school don't have English as a first language"... That's not the full story unless you also note that not having English as a first language doesn't mean you don't speak it very well indeed as a second. Cleefy has great difficulty understanding this, because like most English people he does not speak any language other than English, and has no idea how easily children learn a new language. To get a balanced view, it's worth trying a source of information other than the Daily Mail for a change. This is from a local paper, not even the Guardian: IT’S the Birmingham school where nine out of ten kids speak English as a second language.
Yet language is no barrier to success at the Holte School in Lozells, which has been named one of Birmingham’s best schools after getting a glowing Ofsted report.
The 1,150-pupil secondary school retained its ‘outstanding’ tag under tough new inspection rules after a visit by the Government watchdog two weeks ago.
Nearly 90 per cent of pupils speak a different language as their mother tongue – compared to the national average of just 12 per cent.The vast majority of children hail from Bengali, Pakistani or Somali backgrounds and there are just eight white pupils at the school.
Head teacher Pat Walters put the school’s success down to the hard work of staff, students, parents and governors.
She said: “We have a fantastic community here and are so proud to be outstanding. Lozells does get a bad press, so an Ofsted report like this goes a long way...This is the conversation I meant to quote
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 3, 2014 15:35:53 GMT
Two different points are being confused - one is the lack of sufficient places in schools, whether primary or secondary.
The other is the presumed effect of pupils whose first language is not English.
It suits some people (and the Daily Mail to confuse them.
|
|