I agree that it was the alleged manipulation that was the important issue
behind the original unedited clipping from the Sunday Times and that this
thread has got rather distracted by other things.
The fact that ONS has denied being manipulated - and that should be
accepted - adds fuel to my contention that politicians are probably a
lesser evil than journalists and newspapers with a circulation or
political axe to grind.
Apart from that, the 2001 Census has come in for a lot of valid criticism
not least from local authorities who have successfully challenged their
findings. I suspect the real population of the UK is quite a few higher
than either the 2001 or international figures suggest. Underenumeration
is a classic problem of censuses and a total postal census done this time
cannot have helped.
The lack of enthusiasm is possibly a long fallout from the Poll Tax of
1991 but the impression particularly among the young is that the
government has no business knowing who is where. While refreshingly
libertarian, this attitude needs to be dispelled if any government, local
government or health service is to plan for their care.
Maybe entering a census return should be obligatory if any claim on public
services is made. How about that, Mr Blunkett? Linked to a National
Identity Card? Are we running down the road to an Orwellian nightmare?
Tut tut - but then radical is not constrained to the left, is it?
John
John Logsdon "Try to make things as simple
Quantex Research Ltd, Manchester UK as possible but not simpler"
[log in to unmask] [log in to unmask]
+44(0)161 445 4951/G:+44(0)7717758675 www.quantex-research.com
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Simon Briscoe wrote:
> Is it just me or does anyone else suspect that there have been as many
> dodgy uses of data in some of the recent radstats postings as there might
> be on the migrationwatch website? At least given the uncertainty about the
> magnitude of the immigration flow perhaps all the numbers used in debate
> ought to be rounded a bit!
>
> For anyone interested in the government's figures of legal recorded entries
> to the country please see the links below to reports issued - conveniently
> - today. The reports might help separate in minds the difference between
> asylum and immigration which require different policies yet are sadly too
> often confused.
>
> Table 3.1 in the first link show grants of settlement of nearly 1/2 million
> in the last four years - double the rate seen in the 1990s. One in six were
> given grant to leave for employment. I guess that is the sort of trend that
> gives migrationwatch its oxygen.
>
>
> Control of Immigration: Statistics United Kingdom - 2003
> http://www.info4local.gov.uk/searchreport.asp?id=21219&heading=e-mail+alert
>
> Asylum Statistics: United Kingdom - 2003
> http://www.info4local.gov.uk/searchreport.asp?id=21218&heading=e-mail+alert
>
> Quarterly Asylum Statistics: Second quarter 2004
> http://www.info4local.gov.uk/searchreport.asp?id=21217&heading=e-mail+alert
>
>
> I thought the interesting point about the original posting - the recent
> Sunday Times article - was the alleged manipulation of the ONS by the Home
> Office. The link below takes you to the ONS website where their letter of
> denial can be found. It seems that there was no such interference on this
> occasion. Regardless of diverging views on the merits of the Home Office
> and migrationwatch - and their public spat - we can all agree that is good
> news.
>
>
> http://www.statistics.gov.uk/about/other_letters/richard_alldritt_23aug04.asp
>
> Simon
>
> **********************************************************************************
> This email may contain confidential material. If you were not an
> intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies.
> We may monitor email to and from our network.
>
> ******************************************************
> Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
> message will go only to the sender of this message.
> If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
> 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
> to [log in to unmask]
> *******************************************************
>
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
*******************************************************
|