A greaT bLOG
ALMOST half a million immigrants flooded into the UK last year at a rate of more than 1,300 a day, shock new figures reveal. The astonishing statistic prompted fears that the country has lost the battle to bring mass immigration under control. It came as separate figures showed more than a quarter of babies in Britain last year were born to foreign mothers. In some parts of London, immigrant women account for three- quarters of all births. Campaigners warned the Government was on course to miss its target of slashing net immigration to “tens of thousands” by 2015. Paul Nuttall, Ukip deputy leader, said: “These figures show how the simple character of the country is being changed beyond recognition.The Government must become more serious about controlling immigration because these changes are happening without the say so of the people. “Our public services, schools, hospitals and housing cannot support this kind of growth. It is the weakness and ignorance of successive Governments that have let it happen.” The figures, from the Office for National Statistics,show 487,000 of the 566,00 long-term immigrants entering Britain last year did not hold UK passports.
- 1,300 migrants a day pour in (express.co.uk)
- Immigration commentary – Gerard Batten MEP UKIP (express.co.uk)
- Immigration to UK still way above target, says think-tank (yorkshirepost.co.uk)
- Immigration checks for Cambridge landlords (simplelandlordsinsurance.com)
- Border cap rap: Immigration limit ‘damaging economy’ (thesun.co.uk)
Just today on the bus I overheard a converstion. A 22 year old young women who had 5 children expected the Council to house her and her brood in a 3 storey home. Her boyfriend lived in another flat probably so she could get maximum child and housing benefits. Why should we home people in bigger homes than they could ever get if they got a mortgage? These chavs don’t even have basic skills to do a manual job that would bring in the minimum wage.
All over the UK Housing benefit is suplimenting the rent on large families who have been moved into large homes bigger than they could get if they got a mortgage. A lot of these families are asylum seekers from Africa and other 3rd world countries who in reality where just economic migrants.
The reality is those people who work and pay a mortgage are supplimenting the rents of those who have been given these large homes often in too expensive areas.
Why taxpayers are not up in arms and writing to their M.P’s I don’t know.
No political party seems brave enough to cap Child benefits to 2 children, to stop the abuse of couples living apart to maximise benefits or cap the amount of housing benefit paid to £15K a year.
- Curbs to stop spongers having more children (express.co.uk)
- Cameron is playing on the myth all housing benefit goes to the unemployed (leftfootforward.org)
It’s already a lively one. A rising number of vocal economists are calling the Chancellor to use the UK’s record low borrowing costs to raise funds in the market to boost infrastructure spending and stimulate growth.
The Chancellor, meanwhile, remains 100pc committed to his plan – that the Government will not jeopardise its market credibility by getting out the chequebook for a debt-fuelled spending binge.
As the argument rages, though, the official data is making a mockery of both groups.
Borrowing this year could be as much as £30bn more than in 2011/12, according to economists at Royal Bank of Scotland and Scotiabank. That would take it to £155bn – just £3bn less than Labour at the height of its Keynesian stimulus efforts in 2009/10.
The figure was unsustainable then and it is now.
So borrowing is already soaring, just as the Chancellor’s critics would like and despite George Osborne’s best efforts.
If the deficit does mushroom as feared, the markets could start asking fresh questions about the sustainability of Britain’s public finances. Osborne might even have to make more pledges on cuts in future years.
On the other hand, the growing chorus of voices will argue that – with the deficit already so high – borrowing another £20bn-£30bn for one-off projects would be neither here nor there.
Stimulating growth could reduce unemployment and trigger a recovery that would see tax receipts pickup, pushing the deficit down rapidly after the one-off spending round, they will say.
Both options carry huge risks. If the Chancellor is too inflexible, the markets may decide the lack of growth is Britain’s Achilles’ heel. If he caves in and spends for little reward, the markets could decide he is another fickle politician and demand growth-sapping, higher borrowing costs.
Another plan might be to provide some kind of debt relief to the private sector in the hope that households can stimulate demand. If that coincided with a sharp fall in inflation, that might help. But no such plans are under consideration, despite suggestions by the International Monetary Fund among others.
Short of a resurgence in Europe – which is simply not going to happen – or a radical new idea, the public finance figures serve as a reminder that the financial crisis and decade of debt have condemned the UK to just this uncomfortable state of anxiety.
- Borrowing figures make a laughing stock of the Chancellor – and his opponents (blogs.telegraph.co.uk)
- Borrowing figures add up to a political headache for the government (guardian.co.uk)
- Deficit reduction blow as figures reveal Government borrowed £3 billion more than expected last month (independent.co.uk)
Around £4.5billion a year could be raised if councils sold costly homes when tenants moved out.
This could then be invested in extra housing stock in cheaper areas, the think-tank said.
It could also be used to build new homes, stimulating the economy and generating jobs.
Critics say the idea would create ghettos – but Downing Street gave the idea its firm backing yesterday.
The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: ‘Councils should be looking at ways to use their social housing stock as efficiently as they can.
‘The waiting lists for social housing have increased a lot in the past.
‘They doubled under the last government. [Councils] need to think about how they can use that social housing more efficiently. If they can sell very high-worth housing and invest in more social housing and find homes for more people, that’s something that should be looked at.’
Housing minister Grant Shapps has also praised the proposal, saying: ‘Where you have houses which are worth millions, you could sell them and build a lot more homes to help sometimes vulnerable people come off the waiting list.
Many Councils in the UK give free social housing to the unemployed these people often remain unemployed for several years getting their full rents paid by Housing Benefit. Money is simply being moved from one Council account to another with the Government paying so much towards Housing benefit.
Rich landlords can fill up their extra homes with the unemployed and get their mortgages paid off by the rent money they receive via Housing Benefit from the councils. Yet those people who work and have a mortgage only get their mortgage interest paid in times of need when made redundant.
The system seems to help the very rich and the freeloaders but not those who have worked and paid taxes. The reality is those who work and pay for a mortgage are also paying taxes for freeloaders to live off the state for free.
- The unfair welfare system in the UK. (xymalf.wordpress.com)
- Cameron is playing on the myth all housing benefit goes to the unemployed (leftfootforward.org)
- 1,400 get over £30k in housing benefit (thesun.co.uk)
A third of the fish caught in British waters are being landed abroad by foreign fishermen, it was claimed yesterday.
Trawlers owned abroad – but flying British flags – are accused of taking the fish away from the country in a flagrant abuse of our strict quota system.
Across Europe fish stocks are in long-term decline, with current British levels estimated to be 90 per cent lower than a century ago.
Many blame the Spanish for accelerating the process.
The foreign fishing companies are allowed to register their vessels in the UK and then buy or lease fishing quotas that were meant to be for British boats.
It is reported that, under this system, just five Spanish ships registered in one county are allowed to catch more hake in British waters than the entire Scottish trawler fleet.
The Spanish vessels reportedly have quotas for 1,650 tons of hake, compared with the Scottish fleet’s allowance of 1,570 tons.
According to government records, the five ships are part of 15 Spanish-controlled trawlers ‘based’ in Fleetwood, Lancashire – but which are said to never land their catch there. One of the vessels registered in the once-thriving port is the O Genita, which fishes from a UK quota.
It is owned by the Vidal family, who were recently ordered to pay fines and costs of £1.62million for illegal fishing.
Passing the sentence at Truro Crown Court in Cornwall last month, Judge Graham Cottle accused the skippers and their employers of ‘systematic, repeated and cynical abuse’ of the limits imposed to protect British fish stocks.
According to the latest figures compiled by the Marine Management Organisation, British-registered fishing boats landed 606,000 tons of sea fish in the UK and abroad last year, worth £719million.
About a third of this – 196,000 tons – was landed overseas.
Critics say that even when foreign boats land their catch in British ports, the fish are loaded straight into lorries and taken abroad.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: ‘It is vital that Britain continues to receive a benefit from all UK registered boats. We are reviewing the policy to ensure this remains the case.