Government departments and agencies are hiding key data on the economic contribution of immigrants by nationality. Conservative MP Neil O’Brien (yes, I know, we haven’t forgiven him for going after sceptics during lockdown, but stay with me) writes about the problem in the Times.
The Government collects fabulously detailed statistics on many things. We know that the average Brit drinks about 542 cups of tea a year. We know how many people have been struck by lightning since 1852.
We know what proportion of buses in Rutland run on time. We know that while the Beatles sang that there were “four thousand holes in Blackburn, Lancashire”, there were in fact 4,817 potholes there in 2022. But if you want to get hold of statistics about migration, it’s surprisingly difficult to get reliable data.
Start with the basics. How many people live in Britain? The official answer has changed radically in only a few months. Alongside the budget in March, the Office for Budget Responsibility announced that by the end of its five-year forecast the population would be a million higher than its last forecast, only three months ago. It stated: “About two thirds of this increase is due to a higher estimate of the current U.K. population.”
Paul Johnson, from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said: “This is astonishing when you think about it. We now think the U.K.’s population next year will be more than one million higher than we expected less than three years ago. Driven by much higher net immigration.” …
And that’s just the basics of how many people are here. Go a level deeper and there are no data at all. How many people of different nationalities are in the country? Amazingly, we don’t know. The ONS used to publish an annual breakdown of our population by nationality. But that has been discontinued. When I asked the ONS when the breakdown might resume, it said it was unable to give a date. The organisation is working on it and will provide a progress update some time this year.
What about the economic effects of different types of migration from different places? That question is becoming harder to answer because officials have stopped publishing the data we need to have a sensible conversation about it.
HM Revenue & Customs used to publish annual data on how much tax people of different nationalities paid. But it recently confirmed to me that it has stopped publishing it. Similarly, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) used to publish data on welfare claims by nationality. The DWP published figures every year for a decade or more but it, too, has decided to stop publishing this.
Many EU countries, among them Denmark, Germany and Austria, produce sophisticated analysis of the fiscal contribution of migrants who come on different types of visa, from different places. They use this to ensure they are getting the most beneficial types of migration. We should do the same.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: Watch Migration Watch’s Alp Mehmet discuss the scandal of the hidden immigration data with Nigel Farage on GB News.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
PM2.5 fine particulate matter maybe harmful to human health but I suspect not having food on the table is more harmful to human health or am I being stupid?
Another example of a western WEF controlled government!
PM2.5 is, essentially, yet another modelling scam. From the fact that choking animals with diesel fumes unsurprisingly kills them, comes the theory that lower concentrations of such particulates are proportionately harmful to humans, and models for exposure based on proxies like post-code distance from a main road, leading to predictions – or rather speculations since they are never checked in the real world – of excess deaths in city dwellers (or in this case, I suppose, country dwellers).
At no stage is it demonstrated that any real individual has died from a detected intake of PM2.5 – or indeed that any such individuals exist anywhere in the world. But once you’ve persuaded the world that diesel fumes are killing city-dwellers, and that wood fires are decimating underdeveloped nations, you only have to identify such particles in relation to some politically useable substance to enforce whatever policies are profitable.
Large Malawi study found no respiratory benefit from clean cookstoves (but a major reduction in burns) https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161026081142.htm
No, no. You don’t understand. Everyone knows than PM2.5 pollution is incredibly deadly. So deadly that average age at death in the UK has not increased almost continuously since 1922 (the last time we had a border change), apart from a couple of wars. Oh wait. Yes it has increased, a lot.
Anyway, ignore that. What this consultation process does is explain away the fact that there are almost no differences between respiratory mortality in rural and city areas.
See? ULEZ Goooood.
Don’t expect to see this covered in the BBC State Broadcaster’s output. ‘Trusted News Initiative’ you see.
Fires? Interesting because a wood fire will not produce significant PM2.5s because the fuel is not finely divided enough to do so. They may produce some soot (usually not a lot) but it’s particles are much bigger than 2.5 microns, more like 250 microns. The mechanism of diesel PM 2.5s is because that is about the size of the atomised injected fuel droplets. Never let fact stand in the way of a good story. Petrol injection also does not produce any but the reason for that is obvious so I will leave it to the student to answer with a little thought for himself (you can add her, it, them, etc. but that is just poor English!).
I would imagine that current levels are far far far below the level at which it would constitute harm to public health.
There is no decrease in air quality, just an increase in sensitivity of instruments able to measure it. In fact our air has never been fresher.
These are rounding error particulates and don’t affect anything.
The real goal is 15 minutes areas, no cars, complete control by government over the sheeple or in the Muzzie’s case, the Infidel ape and pig.
I hope I have a michelin star restaurant in my 15 minute area so that I can have a 6 course taster menu of lovely well prepared insects, now that’s something to look forward to.
A brief search on the web yields the following from Our World in Data – “How many people die from air pollution”.
“indoor air pollution – caused by people living in energy poverty – is one of the largest contributors to outdoor air pollution”
About half of all deaths result from indoor air pollution, so my irreverent conclusion based on the current article is – don’t keep your cows indoors.
On a more serious note, green propagandists should re-evaluate their thinking about green and renewable energy, since energy poverty due to banning fossil fuels would arguably cause a greater numbers of deaths compared with renewable sources.
I had no idea that rural communities had such high mortality rates from all the PM2.5 they are being exposed to. Presumably DEFRA have these figures, right??
Definitely. They are the experts.
Department for the
Eradication of
Farming and
Rural
Activities
as a farmer friend of our explained…
It’s scienz, init.
Or ‘The $cience.’
How many of you are sick to death of this interfering money grabbing set of self appointed elite?, Not only do they take increasingly eye watering amounts of money from us in Council tax, VAT,general taxation, levy’s they put onto our fuel bills, the list goes on. Since the Covid 3 years the Public sector numbers and its payroll has increased dramatically meanwhile the Private sector employed has reduced from pre Covid levels, and what do we get for all this money? increased interference and ruination of our freedom and lives.
Why are we continuing to pay for this? its insanity like Neil Oliver said in a recent clip, its like we are being held by the Krays protection money, at the threat of prosecution or worse, but unlike the Krays no protection.
If there are enough of us and I am willing to join a group, but it needs thousands of us, lets just stop paying the council tax, the tax when they demand it on returns, what would they do? they can’t jail everyone. I can think of no other way that is a peaceful resistance to stopping this World group of meglomaniacs from trying to direct and control every part of our lives, How do we start this?
Up to a third of the council tax we pay goes towards their pensions.
In every respect green ideology seeks to remove prosperity and as a direct result of that they will remove well being, lower life expectancy and health. They call it “Sustainable Development”. Doesn’t that sound like a very nice thing? Until you realise that availability and cost of energy correlates perfectly with HDI (Human Development Index) This article is specifically about food, but ofcourse you cannot look at anything green in isolation. Wind turbines, smart meters, banning of coal and getting rid of gas central heating and petrol and diesel cars etc etc etc are all part of the one agenda. It is all connected. An article in my local paper the other day was encouraging people not to own anything but to borrow it. They suggested that everyone eg owning a lawnmower was a bad idea and that one lawnmower would suffice for the whole street. ————Wake up people, you need to see exactly where this eco communism is going.
“Wake up people, you need to see exactly where this eco communism is going.”
A mass kill off and complete enslavement for the survivors.
UK population according to Deagel – 25 million by 2025.
Absolutely Huxley.. and if I remember correctly.. 500million was the aim wasn’t it.. living in harmony with nature of course.. give or take a few luxury yachts, private jets, and ocean front mansions that is..
Correct. That was the figure on the Georgia Guidestones.
We should be left alone with all our faults to let natural selection & Nature take their course ! We don’t need any of this WEF climate bullsh1t which is far more of a threat to life , coupled with all the other type of fear porn we keep enduring ! Let’s F- -K them all off & breath easy .
Find out all about PM2.5 at Steve Milloy’s site https://junkscience.com/. He’s been debunking the PM2.5 myth for years
https://junkscience.com/?s=PM2.5
“EPA and PM2.5: No Science, No Bodies, Just Fraud“
The brutal approach by the Dutch government caused a bit of an uprising so Fishy and Co have been given a different set of plans to work to – something more British and slightly hands off with a bit more warmth and cuddle factor.
“It’s all for the benefit of national health. We really want to look after you. Honest.”
Oh how apt is the nickname ‘Fishy’ eh!.. Fishy by name and fishy by nature..
Great food reset means mass starvation
***************************
***************************
Stand in the Park Make friends & keep sane
Sundays 10.30am to 11.30am
Elms Field
near play area
Wokingham RG40 2FE
–
Oh look a Cow ! Danger Danger ! 8 Wheeler Gravel trucks on HS2 ,No Problamo ! The Chunts with power are drunk on it !!
Do we at all, perhaps, see the ‘obesity crisis’ as being the softening-up process to justify us having less to eat – to save the Planet?
Or is that just another ‘conspiracy theory’?
I found the consultation at the DEFRA web site and have completed it. I expect they will hate my comments, but how else is one supposed to stop these morons from making ever more pointless regulations that hamstring everyone in the business of making a living.
Imperial College modelling eh? So a load of hysterical old bollocks then.
This is the first I’ve heard of the consultation (in the Daily Sceptic email of 22 April, so too late to
respond). How appalling. I find it all beyond depressing.
Me too. I haven’t seen or heard anything elsewhere AFAICR – about the so called‘consultation’.
My observation:
PM2.5s are not harmful to human health, at least not in any reasonable quantity. The biological science for this is 100% clear, mammals have a very effective mechanism to remove particulate matter from our lungs, invented millions of years ago. How do they suppose camels in deserts with sandstorms survive? Lungs contain a mucus film over the internal surfaces which traps any dust particles of pretty much any size. Mucus continuously moves upwards out of lungs, into the throat and is swallowed where the digestive system eventually expels it. Of course there have been a few experiments to check this and so far NO ONE has shown the presence of particles moving across the air/blood barrier, and even if a few did, they will be filtered out of the blood by the kidneys. Human Biology has been eliminated from the school curriculum, except sex of course, and even this is not taught as science.
Something else to note, the whole ULEZ, Euro6 scam is based on these PM2.5s, and we know that is fraudulent, to make us buy new cars, and only electric ones at that! But even electric cars still have tyres (which shed particulate matter) and brakes with friction surfaces (which shed particulate matter) so what is the principle to say that these are the slightest bit less polluting? Or any experimental data? Or anything except nonsense?
There is zero case for any of it, certainly on the basis of dangerous air pollution. Real Science says so! If Khan says it, it must be a lie, he cannot even answer simple questions on his policies!