Monday, 25 March 2013

Country-of-origin profiling based on statistics would tell us which immigrants to exclude

Unemployment, social housing and crime statistics by country of origin should become the new test for refusing immigrants entry to the UK. Just look at how immigrants from the same country have fared compared to the native=born population and you've got an idea of whether would-be newbies are statistically likely to contribute anything worthwile to British society: if they fail trial by statistics, just say no. Yes, we're going to exclude some worthy people, no doubt - but it'll also mean winnowing out a whole lot of worhthless chaff at the same time.

The left-wing think-tank, Institute for Public Policy Research, tracked down a slew of immigrant-related statistics for a report for Channel 4 in 2007 (you can download it here). They tell an interesting story about which countries tend to produce immigrants who end up with their snouts in our trough. Here's the employment status of immigrants groups in the UK with more than 60,000 members (a dotted line marks the point below which immigrants perform worse than the natives):

Employment status of working-age population by country of birth, excluding 
full-time students, 2005/06 (ranked by unemployment rate) 

1 Canada               2%
2= Cyprus             3%
2= France             3%
2= Republic of Ireland   3%
2= USA                 3%
2= Kenya               3%
2= Australia           3%
8= UK                   4%
8= Philippines     4%
8= South Africa       4%
8= Zimbabwe         4%
8= China               4%
8= India                4%
8= Poland   4%
15= Sri Lanka         5%
15= Pakistan          5%
17= Italy              6%
17= Uganda           6%
19= Nigeria            7%
19= Jamaica          7%
19= Turkey   7%
22= Bangladesh   8%
22= Portugal         8%
22= Ghana            8%
25 Somalia          10%
26 Iran               12%

(The above figures exclude the economically inactive - they don't work and don't receive unemployment benefit.)

Living in subsdised housing is another fairly clear indicator of who's benefitting from the public purse:

Living in local authority or housing association housing 

1= Australia                     5%
1= France                        5%
1= USA                            5%
4= Poland                        8%
4= India                           8%
4= South Africa                8%
4= Canada                       8%
8 China                           9%
9 Italy                            10%
10 Kenya                        12%
11 Sri Lanka                    14%
12= Pakistan                   15%
12= Philippines               15%
14 Cyprus                       16%
15 UK                             17%
16 Zimbabwe                  20%
17= Republic of Ireland    21%
17= Uganda                     21%
19 Nigeria                       29%
20 Iran                            33%
21 Jamaica                      35%
22 Ghana                        39%
23 Portugal                     40%
24 Bangladesh                 41%
25 Turkey                       49%
26 Somalia                      80%

I can't find reliable statistics for criminal convictions by country of birth. That's a shame, because crime costs us all an absolute fortune. I'm sure the Home Office does its very best to bury the embarrassing figures. Tory MP Priti Patel recently asked 16 government departments how much immigration had added to their costs since 1997. All reported that they hadn't worked out those costs, and that doing so would be too expensive - hence all debate about the impact of immigrants on this country's finances takes place in an informationless vacuum. (I wonder why.)

I can report that up to 92% of all cash machine crime in the UK is committed by East Europeans, and that the number of Romanian nationals convicted of crime in the UK last year rose by 40%. Roll on 2014, when, thanks to EU rules, we open the floodgates to Romanians and Bulgarians - what could possibly go wrong? 

Only a country with an economic and cultural death-wish would allow in immigrants whom statistics suggest will be far more likely than the native-born population to end up unemployed and living in taxpayer-funded accommodation, and far more likely to commit crime (and be stupid enough to get caught). Welcome to Deathwish!


  1. A friend sent me this extract recently:

    " Something's wrong when the Russian President makes infinitely more sense than a U.S. President!

    On February 4th, 2013, Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, addressed the Duma, (Russian Parliament), and gave a speech about the tensions with minorities in Russia:

    'In Russia live Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Shari'ya Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that's the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell 'discrimination'. We better learn from the suicides of America, England, Holland and France, if we are to survive as a nation. The Russian customs and traditions are not compatible with the lack of culture or the primitive ways of most minorities. When this honorable legislative body thinks of creating new laws, it should have in mind the national interest first, observing that the minorities are not Russians.'

    The politicians in the Duma gave Putin a standing ovation for five minutes! "

    The opening of the borders of the UK in January 2014 to our fellow EU comrades in Bulgaria and Rumania will be the final chapter in the great white liberal death wish. When it comes to the turn of the Albanians [their advance guard is already here - many of them already in prison] and Turks down the line perhaps the prospect will not be so attractive anymore.

  2. Great Putin quote. I've just never seen any problem with Western countries pursuing immigration policies which are economically and socially beneficial to themselves and which protect the national culture at the same time. Britain - as a great trading nation - has always taken a relaxed attitude to immigration, which works fine when you have a strong cultural identity and control your own laws, but which is extremely destructive when you no longer know who you are or what you stand for as a country and when many of your laws are impiosed by foreign bureaucrats.

    I was interested to read in The Commentator yesterday that the Israeli film-maker Yariv Horowitz had been beaten up "Arab youths" just before his film, Rock the Casbah, which is abpout the Second Intifada, won an award at a French festival. He's now in hospital. French Jews are leaving France in droves, with about 2000 a year relocating to London and the same number to New York. You don't need to be a right-winger or a racist to realise that something has gone deeply wrong with France's immigration policies: liberal guilt, wetness, and their enthusiastic support for intrenationalism, as so often, are to blame.