James Slack is the immigration expert.
And by expert I mean the bellend who lies about it the most.5cc has documented his antics in some length
however I think he's worthy of his own thread here.
It's not often that I can (be arsed to) rip an entire article apart paragraph by paragraph, but Slacky here gives me that chance.One in every four Poles in Britain plan to stay for life, says survey
(co-written by Allan Hall)
first paragraph wrote:
One in every four Poles in Britain is planning to remain for life, a survey has revealed.
One in four eh. That's 25%.
Caption under first picture wrote:
In the survey 23 per cent of immigrants said they would never go back to Poland
Hey, what's 2% between friends.
Second paragraph wrote:
It followed an admission from Britain's consul in Warsaw that the current record levels of migration - which have seen more than 700,000 Poles arrive in only three years - may continue.
Immigration may continue SHOCKER.
Third paragraph wrote:
Paul Fox said: "I think it is too soon to say whether this movement of people will continue at the same rate or what the impact will be. A large number of Poles will decide to settle in the UK. Already they are the 4th or 5th largest ethnic minority."
Paul Fox is Consul General for the British Embassy in Poland.
So he says that he doesn't know if immigration will continue at the same rate or not, and he doesn't know what the impact well be.
Cheers, really useful comment.
Fourth Paragraph wrote:
These comments are in contrast to past statements by Government officials, who have predicted the number of new arrivals will begin to fall.
No they aren't.
Mr Fox says "Er I dunno". That's not a contradiction to the government predicting it'll fall. If he said "it'll rise", that would be a contradiction. Idiots.
What's more amusing about that paragraph though is they've portrayed Mr Fox as a liar. Which is amusing because they use him for a fair bit of the article.
'Here's our source. We'll call him a liar but we're using what he says'. Yes, this bypassed 2 people.
Fifth paragraph wrote:
Received wisdom in Whitehall was also that, after the initial influx, the vast majority of Poles would return home.
Firstly, 77% is the majority.
Secondly, what has that got to do with anything? If 99% of the poles are deported or leave voluntarily is that not returning home?
Sixth paragraph wrote:
Mr Fox pointed out it was a situation over which Britain does not have direct control. His comments reflect the fact that - since the former Communist country joined the EU in 2004 - its citizens have completely free access to the UK.
What does "access" mean? They can visit here? Move here? That's such a vague quote that it doesn't say anything.
Seventh paragraph wrote:
Other countries imposed controls - but Britain was one of only three existing EU members who opted to do nothing.
"Controls" over what? Immigration? Deportation? Visas. Again, too vague to be of any use.
Eighth paragraph wrote:
Mr Fox was speaking after the results of a survey, headed by Warsaw University migration specialist Krystyna Iglicka. The survey, carried out by the Polish Centre for International Relations, questioned almost 700 Poles living in the UK.
23% of 700 = 161.
161 people out of 700 said they planned to stay. I'd have thought that was a good result for the Mail.
Ninth paragraph wrote:
Some 23 per cent of respondents said they would never go back to Poland and a further 32 per cent said that if they ever went back it would not be for another five to ten years.
23 + 32 = 55.
Credit where it's due, the headline was almost accurate.
Tenth paragraph wrote:
Based on estimates from the Home Office's worker registration scheme, that would mean more than 160,000 Poles and their families staying for good.
Okay if 160,000 is 55% then the other 45% is about 131,000.
And how does this worker registration scheme fit in? Serious question? Is it some sort of guide to something? What if a pole doesn't register, does that make the figure higher? Mail doesn't include that bit, don't want to confuse the natives.
Eleventh paragraph wrote:
Krystyna Iglicka said: "I am not optimistic about Poles coming back. Looking at earlier emigrations it's usually been not the emigrants themselves, but their children that have returned."
Really? The children go back? Well, that's an interesting statement when you consider [url=[url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=496375&in_page_id=1770]this story[/url] which hit the front page 2 months ago.
That story, btw, was also written by James Slack. So here he's printed a quote which pretty much nullifies that story.
With the mistakes he makes I don't think he's that bright to be honest, but anyway.
Twelth paragraph wrote:
The report also found the majority of Poles were not over-qualified for the jobs they are taking in the UK, amid reports of graduates working in factories or stacking shelves.
So now we've moved from what poles want, to their jobs. Okay then.
Thirteenth paragraph wrote:
Some 65 per cent of respondents said they were working in jobs matching their qualifications.
Fourteenth paragraph wrote:
The survey also suggested the majority of Poles in Britain were not well integrated in local communities, despite planning to stay in the country for the long term.
Define "well integrated". I'm not "well integrated" with my neighbours
, nevermind my "local community", because some of them are cunts and I just don't see the others that often - nobodies fault. It's a meaningless conclusion without details.
And "planning to stay" does not equal "have been here a while". Maybe this "majority" hasn't been here long enough to really integrate.
Fifthteenth paragraph wrote:
The survey's author said: "Not one of the people who took part in the survey voted in local elections in Britain." They said they had not voted because their economic situation was too difficult, they had too much work or did not speak English well enough.
Nor did a great deal of Brits. So what?
Sixteenth paragraph wrote:
Polish immigrants were also reluctant to make friends outside their own Polish communities. Only 59 per cent of women and 48 per cent of men said they had close contacts with British people outside work.
Oh now come on this is scraping it a bit.
How many Brits have "close contacts" with people outside work? How many people who have moved to France, Spain have "close contacts" with the French, Spanish?
Yet another context-less thing to say.
Seventeenth paragraph wrote:
Mr Fox said the post-EU enlargement immigration in the UK was "one of the largest immigrations Britain has ever seen, in such a short time".
Eighteenth paragraph wrote:
He said it was a "miracle" that since May 2004 Britain had absorbed so many new immigrants without more strain and friction.
1. He's the "Consul General for the British Embassy in Poland", which suggests he lives in Poland. How would he know what strain and friction there was here?
2. The fact we've apparently absorbed this number without the country exploding in a fireball is a testiment to the fact that either we haven't taken in that many, or we can cope with the ones we have.
Bet Slacky didn't intend me to read it that way huh.
Ninteenth paragraph wrote:
The length of time a migrant intends to stay is crucial to Government planning. Ministers insist that migrants make a positive contribution to the economy while working.
Of course. Most countries have such a policy.
Twentieth paragraph wrote:
But critics say this picture changes if the migrants retire here – with four out of five becoming a net drain on the country's finances.
Based on what? Says who? We find out..
paragraphs 21-23 wrote:
The amount a worker needs to earn to make a positive contribution over the course of their life is £27,000 a year.
This is the equivalent of paying £7,600 a year in income tax and other taxation and would cover the costs of healthcare and other public services into retirement.
Only 20 per cent of migrants fall into this category, according to Migrationwatch UK which made the calculations.
You know if I was a blogger at this point I'd probably hop over and find out if that's what they really said, if they're basis was sound, and if their figures were all correct.
But it doesn't make any difference, because notice the wording. 20% of migrants, not
20% of immigrants or poles.
In this particular story, comparing different things makes those paragraphs useless, even if Migrationwatch is correct.
paragraph 24 wrote:
A Home Office spokesman said: "We are clear on the benefits to the UK on migration from Eastern Europe to the UK since 2004, and we know migration contributed about £6 billion to our economy in 2006.
"But we have to ensure that migration is in the best interests of the UK, including our communities, which is why we have set up the Migration Impacts Forum to inform the Government on the wider impacts of migration."
Doesn't say anything in particular, but fair enough.
I notice Slacky doesn't dispute that 6bn this time.
So just to get this straight.
According to a survey of 700 poles undertaken by the Warsaw University (though we don't know who they asked - people over here?, people over there? people hoping to come here? deportees?), 55% planned to stay here for either 5 - 10 years, or forever.
The Mail calls Mr Fox a liar then uses him to back up their anti-immigrant bullshit. Slacky allows through a comment that's contrary to a previous story he wrote. There's something irrelevant about jobs. And there's some unrelated figures from Migrationwatch.
But overall, the entire story says "55% of poles plan to stay". And it took 2 people to write it.
I wonder what Mail readers made of it...
Simple to me, there's no such thing as no control, we just close the doors. Sorry our country is full and it is affecting the English people and the English way of life.
- Jacqui Weems, Southampton
Do you have any basis for that? In fact, do you have any basis for fucking anything you say, apart from "oh I read it in the mail"
Anyone with a shred of common sense would have told this useless government that this would happen. This is what happens when you have a government which is composed of ex student union 'radicals' and wide-eyed lefties, who think the world is a fluffy plaything that can be governed by kindness and naivety. There's no way back from this - New Labour have broken this country with their Utopianism.
- A. Howlett, Manchester
Told the government that what
would happen? That some immigrants have a desire to stay here? Because THAT'S WHAT THE STORY IS ABOUT FUCKNUT.
Admits they've lost control? What a ridiculously purile statement to make! It implies they potentially had some control in the first place. The British government has no such control.
- Cllr Chris Cooke, Tamworth, UK
Control over what?
If it's immigration I'm quite sure Ama Sumani
The other comments are the usual ones such as "We never lost control cos we never had it". yawn.
However, friday mods alert!
A bit at odds with the info that 177,000 have already returned to Poland. And it's very clear many Poles voted in local elections, and they are the most likely immigrants to vote Conservative in local elections too.
Many of the parents also help in our local school, and unlike many previous immigrants, almost all of them speak English, have jobs and pay taxes.
- Alan, London
I am pleased I have Polish people in my neighbourhood. They are much better behaved than the drunken English yobs that rampage around some towns.
- Sharon, Birmingham
Why are we picking on Polish immigration? From what I know and have seen the Poles are a noble, hard-working folk. When it comes to imigration the Poles are the least of this country's problems. I have no problem at all with them replacing some of the home-bred feral trash we have already.
- Stevep, Birmingham, England
Hopefully the Polish won't integrate too much. I certainly wouldn't want to see their children become drunken, ill-mannered, feral yobs.
- Maxine, Taipei, Taiwan