MigrationWatch Figures Wrong!

[Rich Kid]

The government has secretly calculated there are about 500,000 illegal immigrants in Britain. This figure has been compiled by Home Office officials and is far higher tha figures published by the independent, non-political MigrationWatch.

The research was ordered by Phoney Blair more than a year ago "as a matter of urgency" following a no.10 summit on immigration, a confidential Whitehall memo revealed.

The existence of this estimate was confirmed this week-end by Prof. John Salt, director of the Migration Research Unit at University College, London, who was commissioned by the Home Office to study the number of illegal migrants.
Prof. Salt, a world expert on immigration, said his estimate - provided to the Home Office - was between 450,000 and 500,000 illegal immigrants.
"If I were in a court of law and was asked what was my best estimate, thats what I would say," he said.

So despite denials from Des Browne, the immigration minister, and Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, there is an official figure known to the government - of course its too embarrassing for them to admit it!

It just underlines why people are so concerned over this subject, their own government go into a state of denial and cover-up knowing full well the figures they have on illegal immigrants is extremely high!

Its a pity this government can't be a bit more open and honest and trust the electorate, the only trouble is the electorate don't trust the government!

(full story on front page & page 2 Sunday Times)

[ShyBoy]

That's about 1 in 120 people isn't it? I don't see why people kick up such a fuss. But you know, as is life....

[Rich Kid]

Its the government secrecy and underhandness that gets me. They asked for the figures to be produced but once they are they keep them hidden with ministers still denying they exist.

[Yerascrote]

Its the government secrecy and underhandness that gets me. .

thats politics for ya...regardless of party there'll always be lies

hypothetically speaking...if the tories were in power now they'd probably say there are 750,000 illegal immigrants just to boost their fear factor policies,even though the real figure is 500,000 (even if that is the real number which i doubt myself...)

[ShyBoy]

Its the government secrecy and underhandness that gets me. They asked for the figures to be produced but once they are they keep them hidden with ministers still denying they exist.

Not a very good cover up though, the guy they asked to do it just told the newspapers..

[budda]

And of course you will provide us with a source for these figures wont you, oh, no, you wont, like you've never provided one source ever for any of your anti-labour claims.

Untill you can actually put together a decent arguement with at least ONE source piss off.

[Toadborg]

And of course you will provide us with a source for these figures wont you, oh, no, you wont, like you've never provided one source ever for any of your anti-labour claims.

Untill you can actually put together a decent arguement with at least ONE source piss off.

Er this story was widely reported in the media, thus i do not think it requires a source.

I knew about this story before i saw the post at least.........

[budda]

I havent seen it.

And it is kind of the general way of things here, you provide a source.

If it was anyone else then I'd probably be more easy going but Rich Kid never provides sources for anything.

[Rich Kid]

And of course you will provide us with a source for these figures wont you, oh, no, you wont, like you've never provided one source ever for any of your anti-labour claims.

Untill you can actually put together a decent arguement with at least ONE source piss off.
Now, now bongbudda don't jump out of your box. If you read yesterdays Sunday Times or if you care to check with Prof. John Salt, you'll find it as posted. Bit upsetting for you is it to see Labour ministers deny what they know to be true?

[budda]

Now, now bongbudda don't jump out of your box. If you read yesterdays Sunday Times or if you care to check with Prof. John Salt, you'll find it as posted. Bit upsetting for you is it to see Labour ministers deny what they know to be true?

No. I frankly dont really care what figure is magically thought up for illegal immigrants, I fail to see what difference it makes.

What annoyes me, and you have been warned about from Jim is you not providing a source. You say this is a big news story, then provide a source you muppet.

[Fiend_85]

trudat.

[Rich Kid]

Why bongabudda do you instantly go into denial as soon as theres something you don't like or agree with? Its perplexing.

[budda]

Why bongabudda do you instantly go into denial as soon as theres something you don't like or agree with? Its perplexing.

Where have I denied anything?

[Fiend_85]

Why Rich Kid do you never provide a source when asked for?

[Rich Kid]

Where have I denied anything?
My original posting.

[Fiend_85]

Where?

[Rich Kid]

Why Rich Kid do you never provide a source when asked for?
Don't you read any decent newspapers or listen or watch the news - I'm not your personal news gatherer. If you can't be bothered keeping up thats your problem. Nothing I post hasn't already been published or stated in the media, so don't keep harping on theres a good liitle fiend.

[Fiend_85]

Everyone else that posts here is expected to provide a linked source to. It is not MY job to back up YOUR arguement. Put up or shut up little man.

[budda]

My original posting.

I fail to see where you mean at all. But going backwards and forwards with you is pointless.

On with the topic.

So there are X amount here, granted thats not ideal, I'd quite like to see us do what the Spanish did, just get them to come forward and we could grab loads more tax payers.

[Rich Kid]

Everyone else that posts here is expected to provide a linked source to. It is not MY job to back up YOUR arguement. Put up or shut up little man.
Listen this isn't a college essay you're writing here sonny Jim, as I've already said if I refer to any controversial figures or stories I always say where they've come from, and its normally the press or other media.

[Fiend_85]

You want to explain to me why I want to go out an buy a copy of a paper I think is shite because you can't find an online source?

Don't try and act like you're better than me just because daddy paid for you to get into eton.

[freethepeeps]

You want to explain to me why I want to go out an buy a copy of a paper I think is shite because you can't find an online source?

Don't try and act like you're better than me just because daddy paid for you to get into eton.

The article (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1572533,00.html)

If he wasn't so inept he could have spammed us with at least another 5 posts in the time saved by C+Ping from the source......


:thumb:

[Fiend_85]

It's bizarre I can't see it on BBC news online, or on the Independent online, or on the Torygraph online, or on the Guardian online.

It could just be me, I'll admit that. But SOD doing someone else's research for them.

[budda]

Lets not worry about the source, in this case it isnt the most important issue, though you should provide one Rich Kid.

What do you think to the Spanish example of allowing those illegally here to stay and pay tax Rich Kid?

[freethepeeps]

It's bizarre I can't see it on BBC news online, or on the Independent online, or on the Torygraph online, or on the Guardian online.

It could just be me, I'll admit that. But SOD doing someone else's research for them.

Immigration cover up denied (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/PA_NEWA81641561113777398A0?source=)

"As Michael Howard said when he was Home Secretary: 'There are no official estimates of illegal immigrants into the UK. By its very nature, illegal immigration is difficult to measure and any estimates would be highly speculative'."

Is it easier to measure illegal immigrants under Nu-Labour than under the Tories?

And if yes, why?

We should be told.

[Fiend_85]

Tbh, why would I look at thisislondon exactly? Why would I hunt for this article? I shouldn't even have to hunt across 4 major news sources. It's out and out bad manners.

[freethepeeps]

Tbh, why would I look at thisislondon exactly? Why would I hunt for this article? I shouldn't even have to hunt across 4 major news sources. It's out and out bad manners.

Now, now - we all know that Rich Kid is a well brought up parasite with impeccable manners. He just doesn't quite get how the google thang works.....

[Rich Kid]

Why did John Reid claim on ITV News that Michael Howard had promised to have border guards "at every port" when the Tories have pledged to have 24hr staffing at Britain's 35 main ports and airports?

LIES, LIES, LIES.

[Fiend_85]

What are you talking about?

[Rich Kid]

What are you talking about?
Labour lies my friend.

[budda]

Why did John Reid claim on ITV News that Michael Howard had promised to have border guards "at every port" when the Tories have pledged to have 24hr staffing at Britain's 35 main ports and airports?

LIES, LIES, LIES.

Well he is promising border control, which we all know is impossible.

[Fiend_85]

Labour lies my friend.
Looks like you're talking more total bollocks to me.

[Rich Kid]

Well he is promising border control, which we all know is impossible.
No, he's promising what I quoted, 24hr staffing at 35 ports & airports, sounds quite reasonable to me.

[budda]

No, he's promising what I quoted, 24hr staffing at 35 ports & airports, sounds quite reasonable to me.

I think you might want to read their website a bit more;

"Promising an action programme to limit and control immigration and secure Britain's borders, he declared: "We are announcing a new British Border Control Police. We will have one face at the border. One police force. With one chief constable. With just one job: securing Britain's borders."

Says one part;

"A new police force specially designated to control and secure Britain's borders"

Says another part.

http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=121023

So they are promising to 'secure' the borders, which any sane person will tell you is impossible.

[Rich Kid]

.So they are promising to 'secure' the borders, which any sane person will tell you is impossible.
No-one in their right mind believes ther'll be a ring of "border police" all holding hands around the coast of Britain - come on now bonga, you're implying the impossible.

What is being suggested, and quite reasonably so, is to have 24hr staffing at the 35 main ports and airports.

I think most people would be amazed to learn that Dover one of our main ports doesn't have 24hr staffing, which leaves a gaping big hole in our border controls.

Sensible suggestions to deal with a key issue. What else do you expect from a moderate temperate man like Michael Howard.

[budda]

Sorry, maybe I'm missing something here, you read the qoutes I gave you? The ones right there which mention 'secure' borders?

I think you will find you're the one telling lies here, they are promising 'secure' borders. They do it several times on their website.

[Rich Kid]

Bongsa theres nothing contrary in what I'm saying and what the Tory web-site is saying, please keep up.
24hr staffing of our major ports & airports plus intelligence, is "securing our borders" - theres no contradiction my friend.

[budda]

Lets review this conversation shall we.

I said;

- Well he is promising border control, which we all know is impossible

You said;

- No, he's promising what I quoted, 24hr staffing at 35 ports & airports, sounds quite reasonable to me.

Except he is promising border control, it clearly states that several times on the website.

[budda]

So Rich Kid, do you think a Conservative government could 'secure' our borders?