“It Just Makes Sense”



“I do not see a need for low skilled migration from outside Europe”

Labour’s Liam Byrne




Odd how the BBC absolutely refused to report Andrew Neather’s ‘incendiary’ revelations about Labour’s immigration policy where they implemented a policy that would deliberately aim to ‘ethnically cleanse’ Britain of its white and British DNA and put British workers on the scrap heap, sacrificed for Labour’s own social and political ends.  Odd how they leap upon a report that hasn’t been published yet and relies upon anonymous ‘officials’ or unseen emails to cobble together a story.


Odd how they never make the connection between Labour’s importation of massive numbers of cheap labourers and the low wages now contributing to the  ‘living standards crisis’….one which began in 2003…..no coincidence that was when immigration really took off…..

“in general terms, the employment of migrants is a deliberate policy choice to employ a workforce at a lower cost”


The Migration Advisory Committee has always been a reliable source of information for the BBC when discussing immigration figures.

That seems to have changed….is there an election coming?

Apparently the MAC’s 2012 report on immigration has got it wrong. and its figures are not to be relied upon now.


Curious really as this is what the BBC said in 2012 of that very report:

‘The Mac report is arguably the most persuasive because it draws on in-depth analysis and research – and it just makes sense.
Danny Shaw Home affairs correspondent, BBC News


So…..It just makes sense….drawing on in-depth analysis and research.

Hmmm…they’re now reporting that ….’According to emails seen by Newsnight, the old research cited by Mrs May was not considered sufficiently “robust” by either the Treasury or the Department for Business.’

So ‘in-depth analysis and research’ isn’t robust enough for the treacherous backstabber Vince Cable?

So just who did leak those emails?  No coincidence that Cable recently said he was quite happy with untold numbers of immigrants swamping the UK.


This is the Newsnight report….highly political and lacking in-depth research.



It tells us that immigration is one of the government’s ‘flagship policies’….which is why the BBC is currently flooding the airwaves with programmes about the ‘benefits’ of immigrants….apparently we’d have no entrepreneurs in this country if it weren’t for immigration….curious as always how the BBC doesn’t dwell on the downsides…say if you want a job, or a house, or a school place.


The language used in the film was no doubt meant to be ‘street’ and accessible….but was instead childish and came across as biased.

We are told that the MAC research was ‘pretty handy’ for a Home Secretary looking to cut immigration…..or it might just have been perfectly reliable and accurate.


We are told ‘It’s hard to make the case for cutting immigration on purely economic grounds.’

Really?  Most research says there is very little if any benefit from immigration economically….but that doesn’t stop the BBC from making the economic case for immigration.

Newsnight went on to say ‘a lot of people oppose immigration restrictions’……but failed to mention that far more support restrictions.


Newsnight told us that the government really ‘treasured’ the research that indicated mass immigration put Brits out of work….

..the problem is, Newsnight went on….‘it’s wrong’.


‘Wrong’ is it?  Where’s the proof of that?   Ah…this new report….why is that so much more accurate then?  And who produced that….was it by the very same MAC that the BBC is denouncing?….as this from the MAC in September 2013 might indicate:

Call for Evidence

Review of migrant employment in low-skilled work

In May 2013, the Minister for Immigration asked the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) to advise on the issue of low-skilled work migration, the factors driving it and the resulting economic and social impacts. Specifically the Minister asked the MAC:“…to consider the labour market, economic and social impacts on the UK and specifically on British workers, drawing on and updating earlier work in this area. In particular, the MAC is asked to research the growth of migrant labour, distinguishing where possible between EEA and non-EEA migrants, in low skilled sectors of the UK economy and the factors driving this

Newsnight tells us that Downing Street has refused to let anyone see the new research as it is ‘simply much too embarrassingCameron’s team wants it to be hidden’.


Really?  Where did the BBC hear that then?  Any proof?  No..thought not.  It’s a lie then.

A highly political lie.


The BBC tells us this:

The BBC’s Newsnight programme, which first reported the story, said it had been told by officials that No 10 had prevented publication of the report to avoid igniting controversy.


Again really? Who are these ‘officials’?  What axes do they have to grind?

Just a rumour until confirmed and credited to someone……a rumour to ‘treasure’…a ‘pretty handy’ rumour that serves to damage the government.

Or another political lie by the BBC to be more blunt.


All in all the Newsnight report was a half baked piece of Labour friendly polemic…..who produced the new research?  What are the new figures?  What did other reports say?


Here is what Nick Robinson tells us after Newsnight….

Although the estimated figure for the so-called “displacement” of British workers has not been disclosed, our political editor Nick Robinson said he understood it was “virtually negligible”.


So essentially exactly what the National Institute for Economic and Social Research said in 2012….. immigration had had little or no impact on the number of jobless benefit claimants….as reported by the BBC.


What did the House of Lords report say in 2008?:

In the short term, immigration may put pressure on the employment opportunities of young people. In the long run, the economic impacts of immigration on the resident population are likely to be fairly small.

What else did the House of Lords report say?…..

Immigration keeps labour costs lower than they would be without immigrants. These lower labour costs also benefit consumers, who then pay less than they otherwise would for products and services (including public services) produced or provided by immigrants.

Ms Irwin of the Royal College of Nursing suggested in her evidence on the employment of foreign nurses in the UK that “in general terms, the employment of migrants is a deliberate policy choice to employ a workforce at a lower cost”



The BBC of course don’t like the House of Lords report because it reveals there is no economic benefit from immigration:

Immigration has become highly significant to the UK economy: immigrants comprise 12% of the total workforce—and a much higher proportion in London. However, 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.


Not only that but arguments that claim immigration will solve the pension’s crisis are false……

Arguments in favour of high immigration to defuse the “pensions time bomb” do not stand up to scrutiny as they are based on the unreasonable assumption of a static retirement age as people live longer and ignore the fact that, in time, immigrants too will grow old and draw pensions. Increasing the retirement age, as the Government has done, is the only viable approach to resolving this issue.


The BBC today quotes from Jonathan Portes…without telling us he was working for Labour in the DWP when they were in government …..but in 2008 he said:

 “There clearly is a risk here that too much migration in some of the wrong sectors would indeed reduce the incentives [for training].” Mr Portes said that the Migration Advisory Committee will take this risk into account when “advising on which sectors migrants might help to fill in terms of labour market shortages”


What did Labour’s Liam Byrne say in 2008?…..

‘…he told us that there was a danger of immigration discouraging British employers from investing in training of local workers, particularly at “the low end” of the labour market.……

.……I do not see a need for low skilled migration from outside Europe”



And that’s the point…low skilled immigration especially from outside Europe….Theresa May was using research that was talking about the effects of non European immigration…here’s here speech:

Home Secretary speech on ‘An immigration system that works in the national interest’

‘…..a clear association between non-European immigration and employment in the UK…..Between 1995 and 2010, the committee found an associated displacement of 160,000 British workers. For every additional one hundred immigrants, they estimated that 23 British workers would not be employed.’


But that was only a very small point in a very long speech, a speech which laid out very many more reasons why immigration should be controlled…..the BBC trying to suggest that this new research undermines the whole case for lowering immigration is clearly the BBC manipulating the news…..even Newsnight admits that saying at the end that….

Much of the concern about immigration is about culture not arithmetic.’


The trouble is the BBC refuses to talk about those other costs of immigration…the ones that effect culture and society…because the BBC values multi-culturalism and thinks, along with Labour, that Britain is too hideously white and British.

What the Newsnight doesn’t admit is that the numbers do count…but not merely in their effect upon indigenous workers…housing, schools, roads, welfare, the NHS all suffer from vastly too many people tryihg to use them…..but the BBC likes to hide that if possible…..how many times did you hear immigration being blamed for the pressure on housing and the need to build ion flood plains recently?  Never?  Probably.


You just can’t trust the BBC.


How the BBC’s silence on immigration damaged the country


Can we still trust the BBC?



The ‘Truth about immigration’…even that was a lie from the BBC and Nick Robinson.












Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone
Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to “It Just Makes Sense”

  1. DP111 says:

    And pimping for the Muslim vote.

    One must not forget that Labour most certainly knew that tens of thousands of young white girls being gang raped by Muslims.


    • Rob says:

      Don’t forget the left wing organisation Liberty actually supported paedophiles. At this time there were 3 members of the current Labour Party in positions of responsibility, so of course they knew about it and of course they wouldn’t act . Still the same now, The Children’s Minister is silent over this ongoing abuse as is the NSPCC etc.


    • Cordwangaler says:

      Ann Cryer and Jack straw both Labour MP’S in very Muslim constituency’s didn’t even try to hide what was going on.


  2. Dave s says:

    I am no longer interested in this nit picking indulged in by politicians and liberal commentators. All we need to know is that there was and is a policy of population replacement and that after 15 centuries the very character of my people and their way of life is under threat. Money, jobs,schools none of it matters.
    The liberal has indulged himself in an orgy of guilt ridden ethnic and cultural experimentation.
    If I am charitable I would say it was done out of foolishness and a lack of knowledge of human nature and history.
    If not then it was done out of a vicious and deliberate attempt to destroy the history and character of a indigenous people and for that only the word treason applies.


    • DP111 says:

      If not then it was done out of a vicious and deliberate attempt to destroy the history and character of a indigenous people and for that only the word treason applies.

      Under the UN charter, I think it is illegal to such a thing – genocide something. I suppose libs deem that such UN principles only to apply to selected ethnicities, and not to Racist Whites.


  3. Rob says:

    Just read this article where the NSPCC are in total denial even when faced with a Muslim Imam who claims child rapes by Asian gangs is because the Men are Muslim and the girls are not. Yet the NSPCC say its because the men drive taxis!



  4. Doublethinker says:

    The message that everyone in the UK needs to know is that the BBC cannot be trusted to tell the truth on a wide range of issues. I am regularly amazed on many of my friends and family still think of the BBC as being a bastion of high stands and truth telling. This site is good at telling the truth about the BBC, but of course has only a tiny readership. I do sometimes mange to get someone to visit the site and they are left bemused by what it reveals about the honesty and reliability of the BBC that they trusted.
    A good rule of thumb when dealing with the BBC is not to believe a word they say on just about anything.


    • Bill says:

      I see little point in our talking to ourselves, since we are all in broad agreement. Instead of spending our time posting here we should look for ways to inform the general public about BBC bias. The fact is, the large majority of people in this country assume that the BBC always tells the truth. Even right wingers, whilst having a vague feeling that the BBC seems to be telling it in ways that don’t accord with their own experience, often seem to have respect for the BBC’s word. There is a lot of potential for spreading the word. We need get out a bit more: talking to people, writing to the newspapers, complaining to our MPs, anything we can think of. Let’s have some ideas for letting people know about the BBC, and then let’s have some ACTION!


      • Dysgwr_Cymraeg says:

        Bill has a fair point here. I post items regularly on facebook stuff linked to biasedbbc.org, or simply link to newspaper articles contained within biasedbbc items. It is patently obvious from the total lack of response, that the recipients generally, well, almost without exception, refuse to accept any criticism whatsoever of the beeb.
        Wherever possible I quote Mirror or Grauniad sources, knowing full well how some view the Mail as toxic.
        However, it never elicits a favourable response.
        I know some may say, my facebook ‘ friends’ must be wrong uns lol, and too far left to be saved. But that needs to be the target audience.
        Twitter gives a different perspective, but you end up preaching to the converted anyway.
        I’m afraid it’s the circus in Rome for too many folk, so long as they get their weekly fix of ‘stenders they’re as happy as pigs in shit.
        I will continue to preach to the unconverted, in the hope that just one day, I get the pleasure of saying: ” I did warn you about that, but you didn’t want to know”. But I know that’s as much as I can ever hope for.
        I live amongst folk here whose over-riding priority is a kind of left wing protectionism of the Welsh language, and as far as it goes their concern about incomers is to be anti English influx.
        They are I’m afraid utterly incapable of seeing the bigger influx of Foreign languages, which swamp english in schools for example. They fail to see that the same problem is going to cross the border and the entire culture will be under threat.
        The motivations of the left wing completely baffle me, but there must be a middle ground who can be reached?


        • Dave s says:

          There is no middle ground. This is a culture war and there are two sides. My side and the other.
          My side is old style conservatism founded on a realistic view of the world and human nature. The other is whatever the other says it is. I do not really care.
          This blog and others is where the non liberal can find some sanity.
          When I tire of liberal bleating I tell them to go and read Homer for a sane view of human nature and the world. . Maybe they do maybe theydo not. Again I do not care.
          There are some good writers out there and good people too. The liberal left has no future and nowhere to go. It can cause pain and real trouble but it is a dead end.
          Time and the turn of the world will see to that.


  5. Span Ows says:

    where is that graph from please?