To think the Guardian is a joke re: JK Rowling?

[Firesidefox]

So, the Guardian was running a 'person of the year' poll, and I voted for JK Rowling for her bravery in standing up to the extremist wing of the trans lobby.

I went to have a look to see when the results were out, and they've deactivated the poll! According to Twitter, it's because JK Rowling was the out and out winner.

If this is the case, this is PATHETIC.

@Thievesoil

chardonnay I agree. I always feel Brexit wouldn’t have happened had Blair et al hasn’t agreed to the unlimited immigration from Poland etc.

Yes there were huge benefits and much of it has been positive but the impact on certain communities and employees/lower end wage growth was dismissed.

Previous posters have mentioned Boston. I am from the area and have been going there regularly for many years (I am over 70) Yes it has been swamped. Extremely cheap foreign labour, pressure on schools etc. Pressure on housing. Hopefully all will blend eventually, but I can quite see why locals resented it. It has changed such a lot. Also, as anyone who has been there knows, it is extremely poorly connected, so very few options for work. I don't think the people of Boston are more bigoted than average. Lots of Poles settled in Lincolnshire after the war, and have integrated really well. But I can see why Leave was a protest vote for many in the area. I hope eventually we can all move on. BTW I voted Remain, and used to vote Labour.

"Pressure on schools "

94 percent of pupils in Boston get their first choice primary school. Some schools have a percentage of EU children, some have none at all.

I read up on Boston during the referendum, including reading up the local councils own investigation and findings into the impact of immigration.

Boston though is one of a few examples of leave voting places where there has been significant immigration ( about 10 percent growth) most didn't have any

BTW the local council report said that immigration was highlighted as a major concern by many voters back in the 90s when it made up about 1 or 2 percent of the population.

@JohnHuffam1812

BTW the local council report said that immigration was highlighted as a major concern by many voters back in the 90s when it made up about 1 or 2 percent of the population.

Indeed, and it increased, as you say. Basic competition for jobs where being a native speaker was not essential...eg flower picking, cauli cutting. Obvious, really.

Yes but it was a "major concern" when it was low.

Even prior to 2004 average wages in Boston were lower than nationally, but this is due to the range of jobs available. This actually improved between 2004 and 2008 as average wages rose faster than on average.

Unemployment in Boston has always been very low and was throughout the 2000s and 2010s.

The fact that it was a major concern when it was low gives an indication of the general attitude towards immigration

So you are saying that they are just bigots, then?

No I'm saying it was the attitude to immigration when it was low. It gives an indication of how more immigration was going to be refoeved.

BTW when people talk about Boston they never mention the fact that it kept its maternity ward following 2004 cause of the increase in demand, this was actually the only health service really effected !

@1dayatatime

Right before she said that, she was going on about having to pay taxes, complaining that people who are "not vulnerable" can claim but she cant claim and then she ignited his reply and brought up the immigrants. It was a whole train a thought; paying tax, unable to claim benefits, immigrants coming in. That is what she was talking about.

You need to take what she said as a whole and not pick out one bit.

She was a bigot.

I feel I have to point out the attitude to migration in the earlier period would have been influenced by the type of migrants who were coming already. Mostly cheap labour brought in by the gangmasters, not nice young families. Knife crime, home brewed spirits, brawls, unlicenced drivers. I have hopes (as I said before) that the communities will merge as more families settle, but I hope you can see that the average Bostonian would have had real reservations about getting more of the same.

Your experience doesn't match what the Town Council reports though.

They report that there has been no increase in anti social behaviour and crime over the period 2001 to 2011 (which is when the big influx came).

I distinctly remember the end of it "we have reports from shop keepers that there are 3 or 4 people who a regularly out of their heads by midday every day in the town centre. They are all British"

Yes the council has a rosy view of things. I have been local, observing court reports, but please ignore me .

You seem very wedded to your narrative.

As do you, I'm more likely to believe in the objectivity of the town council than a random on the Internet.

Boston wasn't really negatively effected.

It's going to be worse off when the impacts on on agricultural industry start to be felt.

This report?

democracy.boston.gov.uk/Data/Overview%20&%20Scrutiny%20-%20Corporate%20&%20Community%20Committee/201210181830/Agenda/Report%20of%20the%20Social%20Impact%20of%20Population%20Change%20in%20Boston%20Task%20and%20Finish%20Group.pdf

That would be it, there was data I got from elsewhere too.

I'm pretty sure I remember jt accurately

JohnHuffam1812
94 percent of pupils in Boston get their first choice primary school. Some schools have a percentage of EU children, some have none at all.

Just checked some stats for you.
Boston primary schools - percentage of pupils whose first language is not English 2018/2019:

54.9%
61.1%
33.3%
57.9%
32.2%
65.3%
72.7%
55.8%
34.9%
20.8%
24.4%
13.2%
18.2%

www.gov.uk/school-performance-tables

The Times - November 2007

Councils say £250m emergency fund is needed to cope with influx of migrants.

Town halls have called today for a £250 million emergency fund to help local authorities to cope with the increasing pressure on public services from immigration.

A report from the Local Government Association claims that official population statistics seriously underestimate the number of immigrants in large areas of the country.

In some rural areas, such as Boston, Lincolnshire, the number of migrant workers is nine times the number cited in official statistics, according to the first study of all local authorities.

The document argues that although immigrants bring significant benefits to the national economy, the workers and their families are also imposing huge burdens on services.

Health, police, education and housing provision are all under pressure...

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/councils-say-pound250m-emergency-fund-is-needed-to-cope-with-influx-of-migrants-t0qpnbggt8f

@Clavinova

That data doesn't go against the stat I used.

It actually agrees with a point I used early, some schools have a high percentage of EAL students others have very low.

Your copy and paste from 2007 is desperate, but you know councils.did get extra money right ?

It also is expected as immigrants tend to be young that they have children.

After all its the reason Boston kept its maternity hospital. Most of those EAL students in primary schools were born here.

JohnHuffam1812
That data doesn't go against the stat I used.

I filled in the missing stats for you.

Some schools have a percentage of EU children, some have none at all.

Which primary schools in Boston have no EU children at all?

Boston though is one of a few examples of leave voting places where there has been significant immigration (about 10 percent growth).

10% growth is clearly an underestimate.

Your copy and paste from 2007 is desperate, but you know councils did get extra money right?

Not desperate at all - clearly relevant to your posts above (you posted "between 2004 and 2008"). When did the councils receive the extra funding?

• feels like ghosts of Christmas past are rising again on this thread?

The volume of immigration and the way it wasn't controlled means whilst a huge number of people came here, hard working, keen to assimilate, speak English etc, unfortunately also a large number of people came who were also hard working but who moved in shadows under the radar, sending money home, living in unregulated hmos, small numbers again not a problem but it seemed many didn't register at doctors, so went to a and e, obviously no taxes paid and sadly some unsociable behaviour. But... Then came the gangs and criminals and sadly their human slaves.

With no way of tracking anyone's back ground or anything, we did get an influx of undesirables who should never have been allowed to set foot on UK soil.

Car washes used to wash money , fruit pickers... Exploited and women trafficked.

Councils up and down the country bore the brunt of official numbers going down but.. Real numbers not going up, but exploding up and no money to help.

Many councils found themselves in dire straights and the BBC did a panorama report into schools in Slough v care in older adults facilities. Slough Council in particular did a now infamous memorandum to Parliament.
It carefully laid out how each support team had been inundated with huge numbers of new cases eg say children's center dealt with ten families a month, suddenly they had 70+ on their books.

As above schools couldn't cope with so many children in one class who couldn't speak English.
A few children in each class is always manageable but the numbers were too high.
Then minors unaccompanied also went up, vulnerable children dumped into councils, which we know have always been poorly supported and funded before this huge influx brought to bear.

The Blair government just hid it's head in the sand. Hospitals creaked as the birth rate shot up with no extra beds or midwifes to help.

Very few people benefitted unfortunately except those who enjoyed the cheap labour and criminal over Lords.

10 percent growth in the total population of Boston was not an underestimate. It was actually a bit more but not far off.

Desperate yes.
.the point about sone afhiols having no EAL kids at all came from the councils document of 2012 which talks about how it isn't a problem, no that the schools got extra funding.

"Whcih schools in Boston have no EU Children at all" did you miss the bit where I said this would have increased since 2012 because of the no of children born here ?

Most EAL children don't need too much additional support if any btw.

@Itsalmostanaccessory

So her discussion with Gordon Brown focused on benefits , the deficit and immigration. Here is the full transcript of her comments:

"We had it drummed in when I was a child … it was education, health service and looking after the people who are vulnerable. But there's too many people now who are vulnerable but they can claim and people who are vulnerable can't get claim, can't get it."

Brown replied: "But they shouldn't be doing that, there is no life on the dole for people any more. If you are unemployed you've got to go back to work. It's six months…"

Duffy continued : "You can't say anything about the immigrants because you're saying that you're … but all these eastern European what are coming in, where are they flocking from?"

So there are a number of separate points she is making namely a feeling that there are too many vulnerable people, that how benefits are allocated amongst the vulnerable is unfair and that immigration is a concern.

If Gillian Duffy had included a concern on climate change in her discussion would you have also linked that to her concern on immigration, perhaps she's blaming Polish builders for climate change as well?

The key issue here is that Gillian Duffy raised separate points that you have chosen to link simply because she included the topic of immigration and due to your obstinate attachment to an opinion (please see my definition of a bigot on previous post).

Also has to be added that Boston saw the largest increase in immigration of anywhere in the UK.

Most places that voted leave had little to no EU immigration so talking about pressure on services and impacts on population is a bit false.

There are even examples of places that saw populations falling, like Sunderland, but voted out where people repeated the mantra about immigration.

John.

As was hashed over endlessly during the run up to brexit, we simply do not know who was where because no one was counted in. Blair expected a few thousand and millions of people came.
As mentioned and has been documented so many times, many people worked in the shadows to sand money home so they didn't have register anywhere. The only time we got a glimpse was when public services cried out for help eg under funded councils /schools /small charities/ hospitals etc.