Didn’t this government make a big fuss about accurate and trusted statistics when it set up the UK Statistics Authority to oversee the ONS and other ‘official’ statistical output?

Even the (supposedly left wing) BBC had very little to show but sympathy to the working classes in their special report based on the findings of an interview with 43 people.

But the BBC love these kind of stories! Its full of people making patronising noises about the white working classes, while they make programmes that see them only through the prism of race and immigration (as with most right-wing middle class commentators like Rod Liddle). Left-wing my arse.

Otherwise, a spot on article.

Whether 43 people or only one person is asked , surely the major concern is whether this is an accurate reflection of the situation. After all very few people foresaw ( Cable , Buffet, Soros, Schif) the present economic situation but unfortunately they were correct when the mass of people were wrong.

Well that’s just it Sunny, these sort of broadcasts are readily forgotten when the anti-BBC camp pipe up. It’s the old psychological thing at the end of the day…we always know when we’re having bad days because we know to be wary of things out of the norm. It’s not like we go around saying “I’m having a great day” just because things are going to plan, hence why the right find it so easy to ignore how the BBC swings both ways.

Tony: If there is one thing this country is absolutely piss poor on it is overseeing “advertising standards”, hence why we are still able to see ad’s for mascara that are, in effect, showing a model with lash extensions on and precious little mascara…while they make claims about how it is “the most popular brand” in voice over while printing in small print that they asked 160 people. I honestly didn’t think that the government would try to undercut that kind of action in the credibility stakes.

Be it in these adverts (which largely do no harm), in government statistics (which misleads us all), or in tabloid reports (which is potentially dangerous), it is atrocious that in this day and age we still don’t have assurances that what people claim is statistically true, let alone statistically relevant.

“After all very few people foresaw ( Cable , Buffet, Soros, Schif) the present economic situation but unfortunately they were correct when the mass of people were wrong.”

What we have here is 43 opinions for all the good that is, I’m not saying that it isn’t true that the working class is resentful towards a great number of things, immigration included, but there is no proof right there in that figure. Yet it is being taken as proof, the tabloids and the broadsheets are running with it as factual and relevant, the anti-immigration line is being spun based on a poorly researched report, even if the methodology of it was perfect. For what it’s worth I believe the mass of people just follow conventional knowledge, which is why these sorts of story are so sensitive.

The question here isn’t really whether the claim is true, it’s why the government is putting so much stock in poor research, and also (especially if they’re not putting much stock in that research) why they are happy to make sensationalist stories out of it.

but the BBC does have a left wing bias…

and a right wing bias and a pro apple bias and an pro microsoft bias and most other biases you care to mention in varying amounts.
Their attempts to do the impossible and be impartial doesn’t do anything towards real equality of output, but it does stop them having the bias by recruitment that all the overtly positioned media does. It also seems to lead to this exact sort of story becoming over prominent, if a grouping claims it isn’t being listened to then it raises alarms just in case it turns out to be true and it becomes a licence fee threatening issue.

According to this little gizmo:

http://americanresearchgroup.com/moe.html

The margin of error on a sample of 43 (at 95% confidence) is + or – 14.94%, on an even split of opinion. It would be even less accurate for a skewed split.

Assuming a UK population of 55000000.

That’s pretty shabby.

Uhh, guys much as I am loathe to defend almost any government analysis whatsoever, I feel compelled to mention that your statistical gripes are not justified in this case, because the report does not appear to be a statistical analysis at all. I can’t see any numbers quoted in the articles based directly on Blears press release (just a few bits and pieces plucked out of Frank Field). This looks much more like a qualitative study of attitudes amongst some sort of focus group. Now, gripe away at that sort of methodology, sure, but also remember that a quite a lot of empirical sociology and psychology is based on that methodology too. Coincidentally, that seems to be the same sort of methods that can be used to prove almost anything (usually the scholar’s own beliefs) but you are putting yourself up against a reasonably large section of the academic establishment by saying this sort of interviewing is of no value whatsoever.

43 people are statistically insignificant so the survey is evidence of fuck all.

However absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and I know from my own job that large numbers of working class people DO blame immigration for the lack of available jobs.

Okay, so the plumbing jobs, etc. that they may think are going to Poles don’t exist and the Poles themselves have long gone home but the perception remains among the working class that British people cannot find work because someone else has taken it.

Your article is about the perception of a perception and that’s probably fascinatingly pomo for people in the media but its at least 2 levels of abstraction beyond anything the unemployed give a toss about. Picking a fight with this particular group of statistics is much easier than addressing the genuine misconceptions those of us who work with the unemployed know are widespread from dozens of encounters every day.

Misconceptions, S-face? More likely denial tactics – and quite reasonable as well. We are, remember, the stiff upper lip nation, not the hang it all out nation. We value privacy, and thus become defensive, particularly in the face of bombastic politicos such as the hamster – let’s keep on attacking her.

The white working classes have just picked the wrong target for any hostility we feel. Really we should be blaming the party which claims to represent us in their concerns (but doesn’t) and the government for causing the worry in the first place.

But these are one and the same – so no conflict of interest then.

Why is Hazel Blears trying to give ammunition to the BNP?

It seems bizarre to have used this 43 person sample, but please do not pretend that immigration is not high on the list of concerns – as shown by proper polling. It is.

We don’t have the actual report, methodology or findings, though the paltry figure of 43 is worrying, so Blears is kite-flying. It’s also pretty irresponsible (but not unknown in new labour) to assert things, allude to an evidence base, but then be reluctant to release that evidence, perhaps from fear of exposing its flimsiness.

“However absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and I know from my own job that large numbers of working class people DO blame immigration for the lack of available jobs.”

I never claimed that it was evidence of absence. Read more.

“It seems bizarre to have used this 43 person sample, but please do not pretend that immigration is not high on the list of concerns – as shown by proper polling. It is.”

I never claimed that immigration isn’t high on the list of concerns, only that in the last year the attitudes against immigration have become more favourable.

Again, I’m not actually trying to assert anything about working white classes here, unlike Blears I don’t really wish to use them to make some vacant political point. The issue for the working classes has been identified as immigration by Blears, and I just don’t think harping on about it under the guise of “dispelling myths” is going to solve anything or make anyone feel any better than simply telling them they’re wrong. At the end of the day “dispelling myths” is just a fluffy way of telling people that they’re wrong even if the word racist isn’t used, and conflict resolution 101 is that you don’t go highlighting the source of someone’s apparent ire if you want to calm them down about it, you deal with the other underlying issues.

The claim that the politicians haven’t been listening is a correct assertion from Blears, but she’s simultaneously limited the field of discussion to “immigrants and me” which only gives politicians the get of jail free card of not dealing with other socio-economic issues that keep the white working class on the edge of deprivation.

This is part of a pattern of yips to BNP strays which have a large intersection with the Labour vote and is far from La Blears first essay . Margaret Hodge , being more under pressure , has been more forthright in Barking .
There is no reason why a sample of 43 may not be revealing depending on what sort of methods are used . In Britain 2008 a psycho social survey was published of 128 subjects who were interviewed over two years on issues surrounding identity . They were white working class subject and lower middleclass .Predictably enough headline result was an association with whiteness of membership with of a nation/community but the key problems were community not race but ethnicity and a Communitarian outlook. In the vernacular the resistance of BME`s to integration and perceived scrounging .
It is certainly not true that the white working classes are racists they are less o than the middle-classes and vastly les so than BME`s They are however generally nationalist and Communitarian and socially Conservative .These attitudes are described in Julina Baggini’s exploration of the Philosophy of the English in “Everytown “. Read it , its good .

Labour’s problem is this . Much of its vote shares none of the attitudes of the left except an interest in redistribution for very obvious reasons . This is why dispensations on the death penalty , Europe and immigration are crowbar red into being by a Party that does not represent its voters views at all and against the wishes of the majority . The hierarchical Party structure is used, the commanding cultural heights ,( notably the BBC). This has been the project of the Fabian left from the start. This is also why the supposed progressive majority to be revealed by PR is a silly lie ( Try finding it in any pub)

La Blears and Labour are concerned about the alarming prospect of losing this shabby alliance and that’s is why Labour cannot ignore immigration which , as an issue has only recede because thanks to mess Brown has got us into we have other things to worry about right now .
I dream of reuniting the Nation , relegating the “Progressive agenda “ to the sixth form debating society minority pass-time its true support merits . I dream of discovering once mnore the Conservative in the working class as Michelangelo discover an angel in the marble .

Qualitative studies using in-depth interviews often have sample sizes of about 50. It is time-consuming doing in-depth interviews so you cannot interview large numbers of people. The objective is to have an in-depth understanding of people’s views. Interviews with a small number of white working-class people are potentially interesting if they give us some in-depth information about why they feel marginalised or how they have arrived at their current situations or views. This kind of research cannot tell us how many people feel marginalised; it can only tell us why those who do feel marginalised have arrived at that conclusion.

Unfortunately in this case we don’t seem to have access to the report of this study, so the risk is that Blears is cherry-picking the results. I get the impression that she is trying to extrapolate from a small sample while avoiding telling us more about the views and situations of those who were interviewed.

I see Guano backs my view of the numbers red herring . This is what it is all about .The BNP polled 5.35 % across London, it has 55 Councillors it is posing real threat . Look at Stoke on Trent here ten years ago Labour had all 60 seats . Now it has 4 wards in a loss to independent and others amounting to a working class revolt .Or Barnsley where the BNP polled 21%,.Have another look at he Ealing result , by the way, serious inroads were made by the BNP , unnoticed at the time in the crowing about the Brown bounce .Labour’s support among C2 DE demographics was at a lower level in 2005 than the crushing defeat of 1983.
Labour abandoned the white working classes on the assumption they have nowhere else to go .The arrogance has been stupefying and now they are paying the price .Immigration is a key issue not to a would be managerialist progressive but to that despised group , the voters whose support they farm with other peoples money .

On the Continent the split of the working class vote off to the far right is commonplace and it is far from impossible we could go the same way.

The Guardian had a good letter on Monday on this. Black Radley is a consultancy in Birmingham.

“Citizens identify an apparent unfairness, but find it difficult to complain in words that are not perceived as racist. Politicians identify a pattern in the perceptions of their constituents, and feel forced to set it out in terms (eg “white working class”) that can perpetuate the divisions between groups of people.”

“Being poor is a better predictor of negative attitudes to other groups – including other races – than is being white (or black, or Asian). We know that people who feel unable to influence things in their area are more likely to feel resentful towards people they see as different from themselves. We know that people who live among, and have friends from, different backgrounds are more likely to feel that society is cohesive.”

“There may well be an issue with the disempowered, isolated and impoverished white working class and their attitudes to immigration, race and integration. But the facts are clear: the cause of the issue is not whiteness, or even immigration – the real challenge to a cohesive society is disempowerment, isolation and impoverishment, as experienced by any ethnic group.”

“To describe the issue as “white working class” may be a necessarily emotive media and political device, but it runs the risk of perpetuating one key myth: the myth that breakdowns in cohesion result principally from differences between races.”

“Professor Peter Latchford
CEO, Black Radley, Birmingham”

“Qualitative studies using in-depth interviews often have sample sizes of about 50.”

You’re quite right that it’s about the contents of the report, the fact that someone that made such a big deal about communication and consultation has allowed this to go reported without publishing the results smacks of real hypocrisy. However I was always under the impression that these sort of interviews were (as you say) to understand specific opinions…Blears and now the media are using this as a poll of a demographic’s opinion, a very different situation.

First an accurately sampled poll should show white working class resentment is an issue, then the issues should be ascertained, and then these sort of interviews should seek to understand why those issues are there. That would be the correct way of approaching this to actually gain enough understanding to make the claims that have been made.

“I dream of discovering once mnore the Conservative in the working class”

Newmania,
then start campaigning to get rid of Cameron and his millionaire chums, otherwise the only way you’ll ever discover this is if he is knocking off his childrens nanny and you walk in on them.

Whatever the merits or demerits of the polling methodology or Ms Blears’ use or (more likely) abuse of it, does anyone seriously doubt that the “white working class” is socially conservative or that there’s a lot of racial prejudice out there? (I wouldn’t call it “racism” – that has been well defined as “prejudice plus power” and we are talking of a disempowered group here.)

Where will the polling numbers be 18 months to two years into a Cameron government? It seems to me perfectly possible that Labour’s share will fall off a cliff. The infighting that defeat will bring will show the Party as lacking both ideas and common sense, the latter evidenced by its electing H. Harperson as its Leader in the aftermath of defeat. By the time I have in mind everyone agrees she’s useless but no one wants to wield the knife. (And there’ll probably be two or three high profile defections to both Tory and Lib Dem…)

In this scenario I expect the polls to settle at Con 40, Lab 20, LD 20, Others 20 – of which 12-15 will be BNP. (All these numbers will vary by plus/minus 5 as news stories will come and go.) New Mania makes a good point when he reminds us that Labour polled fewer votes from its “core” last time than it did in 1983. With the effective destruction of TU influence (which NuLab is perversely proud of) there is no Labour movement any more and so the space has been created for identity politics to suffocate egalitarianism.

21. Mike Killingworth. Excellent piece . Your assessment of the polling is sobering reading and may well be correct. The Labour Party is largely university educated middle class and with no industrial or military background. Socially much of the Labour Party is progressive while much of the white working class is traditional . The white working class provides most of the armed forces yet hardly any Labour MP or their children has been in combat. The education system is watered down university entrance course whereas much of the white working class want high quality craft training with competetive sports. The old fashioned system of sending the best craftsmen to a local polytechnic which they attended in the evening and at weekends was a proven way of enabling bright working class people becoming middle class professionals . An electrical or electronics engineer who had previously completed an apprenticeship was often a better engineer than someone who had just gone to university, particularly when it came to planning and man management. If people from their council estate see someone first become a well paid craftsman and then a chartered engineer then it is proof that ability and hard work pays off.

Nowadays , there is little rapport or emotional connection between the white working class and many Labour MPs( except Frank Field). Margaret Hodge said stacking shelves was suitable job for a tool maker made redundant from Longbridge. A classic example of a middle class Labour MP not appreciating the high degree of skill and long years of training to become a tool maker.

If those in education in the state sector who are largely left wing in outlook had produced a technical/craft training system which surpassed that of Germany, perhaps we would have a larger manufacturing industry. The problem is that many pupils leaving our schools and colleges have inadequate skills and the wrong attitude. Consequently many employers prefer foreigners , especially the Poles and those from the Baltic countries. The development of ever more sophisicated technology means employing less but far more highly skilled personnel. Attending a third rate university to read for a humanities degree and aquiring a debt of £15k does not set one up for life as much as becoming a highly skilled electrician with a good understanding of electronics who can earn £250/d by their late 20s.

A large unskilled and uneducated white working class in a time of recession is the perfect source of recruitment for the BNP. Blair was right ” Education, Education Education” is vital to our future but the poor quality craft training has left much of the white working class unemployed and unemployable.

I’m not sure this has ever really been about people blaming people different to themselves: I encounter very few white people blaming Black people for taking jobs but Black people are just as likely to blame Eastern Europeans as British Whites are.

This suggests at least some of the hostility is rooted in some (limited) understanding of global economics and the effect of labour mobility rather than racism, a suspicion rather confirmed by the fact many people who previously blamed Poles now blame the Credit Crunch. It’s this reapportioning blame to the Crunch which has lead to the apparent ‘fall’ in ‘racism’.

Its in the interest of both Labour and the BNP to pretend racism is the issue: the BNP to recruit the disenfranchised and Labour to demonise the opposition.p

I gave Blears a good kicking over this issue. As someone who actually is working-class, I resent being patronised in such a way… & am not feeling too well so I’ll stop now.

http://dry-valleys.blogspot.com/2009/01/hazel-blears-talks-bollocks.html

Margaret Hodge said stacking shelves was suitable job for a tool maker made redundant from Longbridge. A classic example of a middle class Labour MP not appreciating the high degree of skill and long years of training to become a tool maker.

Brilliant ! I am always pleased to see that disgrace to humankind Enver Hodge get another kick and that was in general a fascinating comment as was Mike`s. My family were all Trade Unionists until the 60s since which time we have been Conservative . A great deal of the talented aspiring working class went to Australia at that time by the way , as their differentials were sacrificed .
Labour are indeed horribly out of favour with a large part of the population but hide this by the over representation of inner cities , the Scottish trick and spreading state dependency. Charlie is right to sniff trouble in the wind .
Something that is rarely remembered is that the Conservative Party never expected to recover this quickly . We were not supposed to be doing more than challenging at this election a ten year project to get back on good terms with the country was envisaged . This project has a long way to go ! The opposition Labour faces is not strong it is still far weaker than it will be as modernisation , at first painful and then welcomed gather momentum in the Party. The Conservative Conference was full of young people and not spotty brilliantined odd bods but people in touch with their peers .
I appreciate the polls are close now but I am talking about cultural currents that are hard to redirect .. Such a shift occurred while the Conservative Party was actually winning elections and arguments .It was unnoticed until that terrible terrible day in 1997 . Suddenly it was clear that we were trying to sell Senior Services Fags , yes a few oldsters still puff them but the product is going nowhere . Imagine how that feels .

Good piece Asquith, wholly agree.

.Lee , you appreciate that prolier than thou shtick Asquith does is an act don`t you ? Actually he works for the BBC and looks and sounds a bit like Hugh Grant .( Went to St. Pauls )-

Stop talking toss, Newmania.

You can surely infer that I mean what I’m saying because no one who wasn’t genuine would be so personally offended at routinely being patted on the head & patronised by New Labour & media luvvies.

It is both the Guardian & the right-wing press who are offenders here.

If you want a toff who’s never done a day’s proper work, might I suggest Workhouse Purnell?

I jest .

I know, but you’re still a knobhead

Though you might agree with at least some of what I said about New Labour, like.

This is just the sort of patronising drivel that further alienates the white working-class. Growing up in Cornwall and living in Bristol, what the fcuk do you know about the effects of immigration? Oooh, you went to a “lesser university”. Does that make you feel sort of down with the lower classes?

Is it the number of opinions you object to or rather the opinion itself? Why do the white middle-class always confuse immigration with race? Is it due to your lack of interaction with immigrants? The issues surround culture and identity.

“The working class are hostile due to being deprived, says the Minister; but are they hostile because of immigrants, or are immigrants merely the subject of the ire of a hostile group of people that need, want and shout for help from their government but receive only greater taxation, condemnation and threats in return?”
“The working classes need real help, not platitudes; much like you would break up a fight between two people by separating them, talking with them and turning them away from one another, that is what needs to be done here”

I can’t speak for the WCs, but I certainly don’t want your help, you patronising, pretentious……

“Telling the working classes that they’re wrong about immigration and trying to discuss myths with them is just two sides of the same coin”

It may not be such a big thing in the 98% white South-West, but immigration is a massive issue in other parts of the country. Labour know this from their canvassing and polling.

“The Poles themselves have long gone home”

You lot must live in a bubble. Some may have gone home, but hundreds of thousands are still here. I can show you numerous Polish bars, cafés and even hairdressers (what’s different about Polish hair?) in my part of London. There are many Polish children in local schools – that’s why we knew you were lying when you (the Left) said the Eastern European influx was temporary. You wouldn’t know because your children don’t go to the “chavvy” community schools.

“Why is Hazel Blears trying to give ammunition to the BNP?”

She’s attempting fake concern for old Labour voters who will vote BNP if they stand in their constituency or refuse to vote at all. As Newmania points out, large numbers of former Labour voters will vote BNP. And, don’t forget they only put up a small number of candidates.

“I dream of discovering once mnore the Conservative in the working class”
“then start campaigning to get rid of Cameron and his millionaire chums”.

Unfortunately, the ruling white middle-class liberal elite and the left leaning media would never accept a working-class leader.

This article in the Telegraph expresses the truth far better than my inarticulate ramblings:

The Labour leadership seems finally to be waking up to the fact that the party’s immigration policy has not been popular with what has traditionally been seen as its core vote: Britain’s white working class. The development appears to have taken Hazel Blears, the Communities Secretary, by surprise. She reacted to a report commissioned by her department that found that many working class whites feel “betrayed” by saying that “the report shows there are real complexities around perceptions [of Government] held by the white working class.”
“Real complexities?” The reasons why the working class feels betrayed actually reduce to one fairly simple fact: they have paid the costs of increased immigration without reaping any of the benefits. They compete for low-skilled, poorly-paid jobs with immigrants who are willing to work longer hours for less money. The white working class is not affluent, so can’t take advantage of the opportunities to eat at ethnic restaurants or to employ nannies, plumbers and builders at low wages that delight those who are better off (such as, for instance, Labour ministers and MPs). They are the ones who find that, because many immigrants are even poorer and more in need of services such as council housing and medical care than they are, there is a longer queue for those benefits. The better-off already own their homes, and they don’t live in the poor neighbourhoods into which immigrants settle, so their children do not have to go to schools where many of their class-mates do not speak English.

Labour’s immigration policy turns out to have been a very effective campaign tactic in the class war – only with the twist that, in this case, Labour has been on the side of the haves rather than the have-nots. The wonderful thing about dramatically increasing immigration in the way Labour has done over the past decade is that advocates of that policy can present it to themselves not as a way of forcing down the wages of the poorest Britons to the great advantage of the employing classes, but as an altruistic attempt to help the impoverished of the developing world. They see it as an exercise in compassion and social justice.

Advocates of unrestricted or very high levels of immigration into Britain often seem simply to have deluded themselves into portraying what is actually a piece of economic self-interest as high-minded philanthropy. Still, underlying the question of how many people from developing economies we should welcome into Britain, there is a very fundamental issue about the basis of rights, and who owes how much to whom.

On one side, there is the rationalist, universalist view, which says that the basis of rights and entitlements is “human-ness” – and that morally, every government should treat every human being in exactly the same way. On the other, there is the view that governments can never be more than the guardians of the interests of the particular group of people who elect them and contribute to them. That is why, as a member of a particular nation, you have a right to a voice in deciding what laws govern your society, but outsiders do not. It is also why you also have an entitlement to benefits that is not universally shared.

Labour’s policy on immigration has been based on the rationalist, universalist view. That is why its immigration policy, with its insistence that every immigrant has exactly the same rights as long-standing members of British society, has come into such sharp collision with the views of the white working class. They think that the Government should recognise that it has special obligations to its own citizens which it does not have to humanity in general. They, along with most of the rest of us, are sceptical of any politician who claims to be following “universal reason”, especially when the “rational policy” requires sacrifices from people who are not politicians. Most British citizens think that the British Government has no obligation whatever to extend to arrivals from Third World countries the benefits to which only being a citizen entitles you.

That reaction does not depend on ethnicity. The majority of Britons, from all backgrounds, are not willing to contribute indefinitely large amounts to the welfare of immigrants, or to sacrifice the larger share of benefits which would be otherwise be theirs – and they do not accept the claim that reason and social justice obliges them to do so.

Labour’s policy, however, has been based on the assumption that that is precisely what everyone should be willing to do. But they haven’t dared to argue it openly. That’s why they have used the smear of “racism” to prevent discussion. Ms Blears now says she wants “an open debate”, but I doubt that’s true. Will anyone believe Labour ministers when they insist that their immigration policy is an example of social justice, and not a cynical ploy to advance a narrow sectional interest? There is only one answer to that question, and Ms Blears knows who it hurts most: Labour.

Chavscum…

“Growing up in Cornwall and living in Bristol, what the fcuk do you know about the effects of immigration?”

Well, can’t he use unemployment rates? Statistics on state benefits, housing etc.? Analysis of shoddy reports and commentary?

For example, one only needs to glance at the report that Blears discusses to realise that it’s wholly unrepresentative, and that there are no broad conclusions that can be drawn from it. Lee’s analysis of it wouldn’t be enhanced or degraded if he lived in Bristol, Bradford or Baghdad.

Ben

the left leaning media

hahhahahahahahaha! hahahhaha! this is like how conservatives in the US refer to the media as “the liberal media” – a total myth and a sad indictment of how far right of the centre they have strayed.

ZaNuLieBour indeed.

This is just the sort of patronising drivel that further alienates the white working-class. Growing up in Cornwall and living in Bristol, what the fcuk do you know about the effects of immigration? Oooh, you went to a “lesser university”. Does that make you feel sort of down with the lower classes?

I don’t claim to be down with the “lower classes”, or the “upper classes” either for your reference. In fact what I’m talking about in this article has nothing to do with how I feel, relate or fit in with working class people. It’s interesting though that you pick on the Cornwall aspect of my past, given the levels of damage internal migration has done to the county. Immigrants didn’t need to come to the UK to fuck up my home county as my own nationals were willingly doing so (and continue to do so) well before it became an issue.

As BenSix says, for the effects on immigration you just have to look at the facts, and I’d wager that’s a much better perspective of reality than a biased view from someone who feels down and out and abandoned by their country.

Is it the number of opinions you object to or rather the opinion itself? Why do the white middle-class always confuse immigration with race? Is it due to your lack of interaction with immigrants? The issues surround culture and identity.

If you’d bothered to read you’d know it is a combination of the number of opinions, lack of publishing of the methodology and results, and the presentation of the results as if a significant opinion poll was carried out. If you believe, by the way, that Bristol is somehow and immigrant free bubble then you are hilariously mistaken, especially with two universities attracting wide ranges of cultures from many different countries.

However, it’s interesting that you seem to think I’m confusing immigration with race. Of course Blears is the one that used the term “racist”, I’d use the term xenophobic…in all essence the difference between the two is splitting hairs anyway.

I can’t speak for the WCs, but I certainly don’t want your help, you patronising, pretentious……

Do you deny that the working classes are in a rut right now and need the help of their politicians?

It may not be such a big thing in the 98% white South-West, but immigration is a massive issue in other parts of the country. Labour know this from their canvassing and polling.

It’s an issue because people have prejudices, misinformation and a fear mongering press. There is as yet no evidence that immigration is a negative on this country, no evidence that immigration is above relative global levels, no evidence that our population density is at breaking point nor that it isn’t infrastructure rather than population that is the issue. But hey, I never said that people didn’t believe that immigration was a problem.

But hey, for centuries people were sure there was a witchcraft problem in Europe too you know.

There are many Polish children in local schools – that’s why we knew you were lying when you (the Left) said the Eastern European influx was temporary.

So what exactly is your problem with immigration? If it is money flowing out of Britain in to the East of Europe you should be happy that Poles are setting up homes and having families here? If it’s population then your issue is with those who maintain infrastructure, not immigrants.

That reaction does not depend on ethnicity. The majority of Britons, from all backgrounds, are not willing to contribute indefinitely large amounts to the welfare of immigrants, or to sacrifice the larger share of benefits which would be otherwise be theirs – and they do not accept the claim that reason and social justice obliges them to do so.

Heh, that old chestnut. Despite the indigenous British public getting older and therefore proportionally becoming more of a drain on welfare than previous generations, and immigrants tending to be young workers that pay their taxes, largely join the private rented market and claim little on benefits, supposedly they are draining our welfare state away!

Except of course this argument posited above is about ASYLUM SEEKERS, and the prejudice people have against them (even though it is our Government that is refusing to allow asylum seekers to work and force them to take our money), it just happened that between 2004 and now the term asylum seeker and immigrant have somehow become interchangeable to the extent that half the time I have an argument with someone about immigrants it turns out they’re talking about asylum seekers instead.

Lee,

Excellent comment @ 34,

Is there any hint from the government about releasing their working papers behind all of this?

Just asking.

I’m in favour of asylum seekers, btw.

In this scenario I expect the polls to settle at Con 40, Lab 20, LD 20, Others 20 – of which 12-15 will be BNP

Con 40? You think a newly elected government, made up of people with literally no idea what they’re doing, taking power at the height of a recession, will end up 2.5 points ahead of where it’s currently rated in opposition…? Maybe if they start a war, otherwise no chance.

The problem is that many pupils leaving our schools and colleges have inadequate skills and the wrong attitude. Consequently many employers prefer foreigners , especially the Poles and those from the Baltic countries.

…for entry-level unskilled jobs.

The development of ever more sophisicated technology means employing less but far more highly skilled personnel.

Yes, yes it does.

Attending a third rate university to read for a humanities degree and aquiring a debt of £15k does not set one up for life as much as becoming a highly skilled electrician with a good understanding of electronics who can earn £250/d by their late 20s.

No, what you’re doing there is confusing an electronic engineer or a software engineer with an electrician. I know some actual electricians, the sort who don’t have degrees and who go around fixing things – and apart from the ones who run companies, they’re taking home 1/3 the kind of money you’re talking about.

OTOH, reading a humanities degree teaches you an understanding of writing and coherent argument that’s absolutely vital for most areas of business – including technical ones.

[36]

Con 40? You think a newly elected government, made up of people with literally no idea what they’re doing, taking power at the height of a recession, will end up 2.5 points ahead of where it’s currently rated in opposition…?

The polls have a long track record of underestimating Conservative support, and are forever trying to find ways of “weighting” their raw samples to adjust for this. I expect this process to intensify after the next election, when I expect the Conservatives to do 1-2% better than their best poll in the previous ten days.

It’s also important to remember that polls throw out the “don’t knows”.

Conservative support is also more solid than that of any other party in the sense that Tories are more likely to see their partisan support as part of their identity, rather than – as Labour and Lib Dem voters do – as a means to securing the political ends they favour. This means that they are less likely to withhold their support just because the Party itself is performing poorly.

The polls have a long track record of underestimating Conservative support, and are forever trying to find ways of “weighting” their raw samples to adjust for this.

Had. There wasn’t any indication of that in 2001 or 2005 (or in recent local elections).

Tories are more likely to see their partisan support as part of their identity, rather than – as Labour and Lib Dem voters do – as a means to securing the political ends they favour.

Sceptical that’s still the case: the identity ‘middle-class right-wing’ no longer translates into the political label ‘Tory’ as closely as it used to. See: Labour 1997/01, UKIP, many Lib Dem local governments.

Had. There wasn’t any indication of that in 2001 or 2005 (or in recent local elections).

Presumably Bottler had some indication of this when he bottled . The Conservative problem has been too many votes accruing to few seats . Cameron has shifted his ground , I think , precisely to try and correct that and I have no doubt his experience in marketing has come into play. My feeling is that Brown has lost a great deal of support among Liberal swing voters who while numerically small are a vital constituency. I did see some figures to back this up recently .
The emergence of the BNP is a serious threat to Labour because it means Brown has to protect two flanks . Labour have had the luxury of being able to assume vote that was bought and paid for . That allowed Blair to create New Labour ,.If in the future they cannot offer enough cuddly progressivism to the Liberal vote they lose seats . If the core support starts to fracture they risk losing everything .
I doubt we will see this effect in the polls soon but as a long term development it is rather delicious from my point of view

Lee, when you say ‘there is as yet no evidence that immigration is a negative on this country’ @ point 34, what kind of quantifiable evidence would you require to prove or disprove this? I know dozens of people without work in the building trade as work has been taken by immigrants. This is a relatively large number of people when one considers this scenario is likely replicated in many more areas of London, let alone the country. This is real evidence for me and I do not require an independent body or think tank to carry out a survey and tell me otherwise. My main point is that it doesn’t take a methodologically perfect investigation to ascertain that there is a large number of British working class people unsure about the levels of immigration and how it is controlled, it has been blindingly obvious for years.

“Lee, when you say ‘there is as yet no evidence that immigration is a negative on this country’ @ point 34″

It was, if I remember correctly, highlighted in a Lords debate (or report, or something, it was about a year ago I think) that essentially, on the whole, immigration has neither a positive or negative impact on the country financially. I’m more than happy to accept that in individual cases that there are negatives from immigration, just as I’m more than happy to accept that in individual cases there are positives from immigration.

“I know dozens of people without work in the building trade as work has been taken by immigrants. This is a relatively large number of people when one considers this scenario is likely replicated in many more areas of London, let alone the country. This is real evidence for me”

You’ve asked your mates, you’ve assumed it must be the same everywhere else, and you’re calling that leap of faith a “fact”? I’ll stick to the studies and evidence based fact finding if you don’t mind.

Replace “immigrants” with sudden influx of young, less experienced and eager workers from Devon. Does the scenario of blaming those Devon lads that take the work by those out of work you mention seem the same? If it does then fair play, and certainly it’s shocking that Labour have so managed to remove themselves from standing up for the people that have always stood behind them, but if it doesn’t then it is purely an exercise in finding blame in the unfamiliar, because it’s easier that way.

In doing so they (and you) are just opening the way for politicians to argue pointlessly about an issue that is only the fall guy for a deeper and different set of problems, and never have your real problems dealt with. If you want the political parties of this country to keep arguing about immigration while they have no legal recourse to do anything about it short of leaving the EU (never going to happen), carry on, I’d just suggest that you focus much more specifically on the more immediate issue of not having enough money to pay disproportionately high living costs, or whatever your main concern is, rather than whichever phantom you wish to attribute the blame to for such a situation.

Hmm, on further thought, I think in the future I’m going to simply say population redistribution rather than immigration, as I don’t think I would readily accept anyone has suffered from immigration, merely the act of of population redistribution coupled with potentially unethical employers or employment practice, and unsuitable local infrastructure.

36. john b .
Employers have taken on those from Poland and Baltic countries for for unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled work. Where the immigrants have the language and managerial expertise they have been promoted to supervisory roles .

Someone who is qualified under the National Institute of Electrical Contractors ( i.e has the authority to sign off electrical work as meeting the national standards) can earn £250/d.

There are many successful business people without degrees as did Shakespeare, Dickens, Wellington, Lloyd George,all the industrialists of 18 and 19 Centuries and most engineers pre 1870 , Bronte sisters, Jane Austen, W Churchill, Kipling, Orwell, Marlborough , Wellington, Prime Ministers Major and Callaghan, Foreign Secretary Ernie Bevin ( considered best since WW2 by some) . What is importANT

36 john b . What is important is that by the time people leave school at 16 they have had a good education. Learning does not have to stop when one leaves school. Churchill read voraciously in the army and ended up winning the Nobel Prize for literature. How is that Churchill, Shakespeare , Kipling , Bronte sisters ,Austen and Dickens managed to achieve such a high level of the mastery of the English language and history yet left school by the time they were 16. Perhaps if we ensured that all school leavers were as well educated we would reduce the the magnitude of the social divide? Perhaps we should concentrate more on the education of children from 5-16 yrs old rather than spending money on humanities courses at third rate uiversities. Poor vocational/technical training has created a pool of uneducated unskilled people who amount to 20-40% of the population. In a knowledge based /high tech manufacturing economy their future is very grim and they are potential recruits for the BNP.

You didn’t actually read the CLG report, did you? If you had, the following would have been clear to you:
a) the press and politicians took whatever from it that suited their own agenda;
b) you fell for the media’s trickery by taking them on face value and believing their interpretation of the report (or, more likely, the press release, as few journalists are likely to have read the report either);
c) that a sample of 43 people is actually quite large for a qualitative piece of research, and scientifically totally valid;
d) that the authors agree with you on anti-racism, and that they make some pretty sensible recommendations at the end of it.
The moral of the story is: always read a report, and make sure you understand what constitutes a sociologically accepted method, before you slate it the report and its methodology.