Woolas on the rack

Any Colour but Brown

Interestingly, between 1995 and 1997, the public sector was shrinking, whilst the private sector expanded.

As soon as Labour came in the public sector expanded every year.

Richard

It's no surprise you try and have second bite at this topic. Stung by the plagerism of the Daily Mail and the cutting down to size of your mentor and idol Andrew Neil.

Truth is Fraser, Wollass reduced Andrew to a spluttering foaming wreck....at one point his thatch nearly took off on its own.
Poor Andrew did not have a good day.
Both Macintyre and the ferret were laughing so much they had to turn their mics off.
Sorry mate ....some you win and some you lose.....and you've lost this one.

denis cooper

So if we elect rubbish MPs we get rubbish government, but maybe in certain instances EU law will help us to show up the MPs and the government as being rubbish.

In other instances, EU law will be no help at all but a hindrance; but in either case we can't expect to change the EU law just by electing different MPs.

Therefore the best solution must be to cease to elect rubbish MPs, and also cease to be subject to EU law which can't be changed by the better MPs we elect.

But if we already knew how to elect better MPs we wouldn't be subject to EU law anyway - remember that the Tory MPs who voted for us to join the so-called "Common Market" were all breaking the promise they had made through the Tory manifesto for the 1970 general election:

"Our sole commitment is to negotiate; no more, no less."

So this problem of electing rubbish MPs goes back a very long way, and certainly couldn't be solved by voting Tory on May 6th.

smell the glove

Top journalism Frazer.This story should be out there being debated, not smothered, by the Freddie (without the dreamers)lookalike woolarse.

McSweeney

"the actual proportion of the employment increase accounted for by foreigners/migrants ranges from just over 50% to just over 80%"

So not 99%...?

Cuffleyburgers

But Fraser, what was the figure for foreign-born workers in 1997? That increase is what you need.

Marbury

So, everyone born abroad counts as an "immigrant"? Even Sir Cliff?! This is silly, and blaming Eurostat doesn't make it less so.

Do these figures include public sector jobs?

Johnny

Meanwhile, over at BBC news online they are still leading with "Labour's fierce attack on Tory tax plans". Their brazeness of their bias seemingly knows no bounds

Johnny Kidney

Meanwhile, over at the New Labour Project Protection Unit at BBC News Online they are still leading with "Labour's fierce attack on Tory fantasy savings". Pretty brazen bias in their election coverage thus far.

Ian C

Perhaps someone (you, Fraser or an editor of another significant paper/magazine) should publish an 'open letter' to the immigration minister explaining this.

The MSM could then pick it up and run with it.

Any Colour but Brown

Cuffley, follow the links and you'll see the figures.

Edward Palmer

Shock! "Custard Face" is clueless again! Who can forget his mauling by the sainted Ms Lumley? This poor sap has surely suffered enough and I hope can spend more time with others after May 6th.

Ian Walker

Cuffleyburgers - the data is there in the report. 1.9 million in 1997, 3.5 million now.

Edward Sutherland

Fraser, while greatly admiring your pertinacity and statistical ability-very well done- I fear you draw the wrong conclusion re Neathergate.It is surely the sheer boneheadedness of the likes of Woolas that led them to the low duplicities they have practised over immigration since 1997.The Spectator has missed a major opportunity to expose Labour's deceit over Neather.

Jonathan_T

"The LFS is a quarterly census, conducted every three months."

As opposed to every six months?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt thought - presumably this is a necessary clarification for Woolas...

Osred

"This, CoffeeHousers, is why I don't believe in the David Neather conspiracy theories. These boys are without a clue."

Wrong wrong wrong Fraser. The fact that Woolas, like the rest of the country has an imperfect grasp of LFS or EU definitions does not negate Neather. It clearly does not show that they didnt have some pretty foul ideas on how to use immigration. Neather was in the belly of the beast and described it. You - who are not - affect to believe that there was no beast but a slightly dysfunctional and incompetent bunny. The problem is, mate, is that the issue really is too big and too ugly for you and dave to handle.

Michael Sweeney

i thoguht Woolas was quite composed. The figure of 98.5% seems way too high. I've no doubt many lower paid new jobs have been taken by foreign workers, but lots of supermarkets (for instance) have recruited long term British unemployed over the past decade. The figure will be high, but not 98.5%.

Naomi Muse

Well, I reckoned without the sharp and cute Mr Andrew Neil when I expected the BBC to run with this story tomorrow.

Phil Woolas is a prize clot. Joanna Lumley showed him up for that when she took control of the obfuscating of the government on the gurkha situation.

Andrew Neil should be allowed to have a Q&A session with Brown too, for he has facts and figures to hand to wipe out any sleights of hand the PM might try on him.

Woolas was certainly on the rack.

btw did you see the full page (page 6) inside the DM elaborating on the front page this morning?

RJ

PW: "immigrant workers are temporary workers"

Yeah and "Ice ages" are temporary "ages".

Does his arbitrary bollocks sound good in the ministerial car do you think?

sinosimon

mr woolas tends to have a little trouble with numbers.......

Phil Woolas also claimed for a £3.49 bottle of red wine from Tesco in breach of the rules and even put through a receipt that suggests he received a 10 per cent staff discount at the supermarket.

One bill, for £110.20 spent in the Horsham branch of Tesco, shows he spent £1.48 on panty liners, £1.19 on tampons, £2.99 on nappies and £15 on a lady's blouse.

He was reimbursed for the claims, even though the rules for MPs state that personal items such as toiletries are not allowed, nor are items bought for anyone else, including family members. The receipt also shows that whoever paid the bill received a 10 per cent staff discount.

The gaffe-prone minister also claimed the maximum £400 a month for food on his second home expenses in most years.

In 2004-5, Mr Woolas, the MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth, submitted a series of till receipts when claiming Additional Costs Allowance, even though MPs are able to get £400 a month for food without providing any proof that they bought it.

On one receipt he deleted claims for hair dye and baby wipes but did not remove £5.51 spent on Huggies nappies, and £3.49 and £3.99 on bottles of red wine even though alcohol is not allowed under the rules.

Another shopping trip, claimed for in full, included claims for £5.96 on disposable bibs, £23 on women's shoes, a £1.99 child's comic, £1.60 and £1.55 comics, £2.88 on baby wipes and a £5 ladies' jumper.

He then stopped submitting receipts for groceries but instead claimed the maximum available allowance, £4,800, on food from 2005 to 2008.

Mr Woolas said last night: "Receipts for food were not and are not required. However, as a matter of transparency I have always submitted receipts even when not required.

"There are family items for which I did not claim. The amount of expenses claimed and received was less than the receipt submitted."

Mr Woolas says he put in grocery receipts totalling more than the amount he claimed for in food and so it cannot be proven that he was reimbursed for the family items.

However, in May 2004, for example, he submitted £238.30 of Tesco receipts but claimed £332.48 for food on his expenses. In August that year, he submitted £210.31 in supermarket receipts, including the women's shoes and bibs, and put in a food claim for exactly the same amount, which was reimbursed in full.

Mark M

There’s another stat in there I find interesting, and it’s one that makes up a key part of the 2.5 million Brownie. If you subtract the ‘working age’ numbers from the total in work you can see that in 1997, 812 thousand people of retirement age were in work. In 2008, that figure was 1.35 million, a nearly 66% increase. Why is it that all these people who COULD retire are choosing not to? Nothing to do with Brown’s £100bn pension raid, I’m sure.
Also funny how Brown never mentions that 53% of those ‘new’ jobs are in the public sector – a situation that is clearly unsustainable in a UK economy where three-quarters of all jobs are in the private sector. In essence, Brown is congratulating himself on spending our money to employ loads of people (an additional 1.2 million between 1997 and 2009 Q3).

steve

I've just checked the stats against the stats office figures and they give the same figure for total employed (28 million) which is 72% of the adult population. So unemployment is at 28%. Sweet.

Yam Yam

Your gratitude to the EU for forcing Brown to 'fess up about immigration is touching, Fraser.

However, I suspect a desire to control, rather than a yearning for transparency, is the real motive behind the EU's interest in keeping tabs on who's coming and who's going.

Woody

I don't need to see these figures, I just need to get on the bus and see that I am the only one who speaks reasonable english and has the everyday courteousness that my 'working class' parents taught me, i.e. please and thank you.
I just see that when I go to the doctor I can't understand his 'poor' english.
I just see that my local shops are not owned by local people.
I just see that when I go to the local market there is hardly any 'local' stallholders.
I just see............

Ian Walker

I love the unionistas' attack line. I expect that on this issue, whether someone has taken UK citizenship after arriving here and taking a job is rather beside the point.

RickH

So the Immigration Minister hasn't a clue about the job he's been given.
Next you'll be telling us Bob Ainsworth doesn't know one end of a rifle from the other. Perhaps you could hand him one and find out? Do make sure it's loaded, then we'll have a 50% chance of getting rid of him.

Paul Hawkins

Woody -quite right. I can walk down my street and never hear a word of English spoken.I can queue at the doctor's behind someone who cannot communicate with the receptionist in english and I can wait at the Job Centre whilst the taxpayer funded translator helps a non-english speaker acquire benefits.

It's not all about jobs. Local services are under severe pressure and many people don't have the option of going private and feel they are at the back of the line.

The very people Brown claims to support are those he disadvantages most.

Hector

Right on Woody. Recently, I was in Berlin and in the street one heard, er, German. Shortly after I was in Rome and in the street heard, er, Italian. In London one hears, er.

TrevorsDen

I see 'Richard' bgets his garbage in early and totally ignores the reality of the facts.

A huge proportion of the 'new' jobs Brown claims to have created are for overseas workers whilst the number of indigenous people of working age on benefits rises by a million.

ajs

Thank you pu hui. May all the "flat women" to whom you wish to sell shoes gather to tread you down.

Yosemite Sam

I have read P Woolas's explanation about ten times and I am no wiser. He agrees that 1.7m new jobs have been created but disputes that 1.63m have gone to foreign workers. Well what number have gone to foreign workers then? If Woolas cannot enlighten me, perhaps a CHer can tell me what he is getting at.

Anand

One problem I have with the way the stats are collated, is that ANYONE not born in the UK gets counted as an immigrant worker. My Dad was born in Uganda and came to Britain after ini Amin did his psycho act. He has been working in britain first as an accountant then as a SME owner for over 40 years. yet as he is actively working today he will be counted on the LFS. It's got nothing to do with labour that my dad is working in this country quite legitimately as a full long term tax paying UK citizen.

what is mroe relevent is the figure for this quarter compared to the last quarter of Conservative government in 1997. I am sure the figure is massivley higher than in 1997, but to argue all 1.68 million workers came here on Labour's watch is a bit disingenuous.

Anand

Sorry folks, just read further down the commends and it is evident the 1.67 million IS THE DELTA between 1997 and now, so all 1.67 million ARE INDEED all from the last 13 years. My apologies.

David Bouvier

If there was ever proof that "Richard" really is just a Labour party drone this is it. I think Speccie, you should make clear to Richard that he declares his affiliation or is banned from the site. I am all for debate and comment with the opposition, but not for giving screen-space to tiresome propaganda like that.

Beer Moth

Woollas knows very well what is happening regarding immigration and so should you Fraser. Statistics can be made to do all sorts but we see on the streets what is happening.

The floodgates have been open since they sat round the table and decided to debase the workforce of this nation and to give it over to aliens who, at best want to plunder our resources, and at worst, seek to wrest our land from us in the name of an inimical belief system.

denis cooper

Steve @ 3:20 pm - You have to remember that some people of working age are not in paid employment but are not "unemployed". Full time mothers, for example.

Kittler

This "foreign born" category produces some strange statistics.
The last census in Scotland reported the country's second largest immigrant group as German.
Someone then figured out, they were all those Scots born in Germany to servicemen's wives, and we were not being invaded by Germans.

Chris lancashire

Anecdotal evidence: I employ around 100 workers who are mainly British, all long term and our labour turnover is negligible. At peak times we require up to 10 semi-skilled workers; these are now almost exclusively East European who are skilled, work well and turn up every day. Local indiginous youth is none of those things and, despite offering apprenticeships, doesn't appear interested in changing.

Athesius the Facilitator

Richard - You must BE Phil Woolas after that posting. And I thought you where Ed Balls. Can I just ask you this genuine and heartfelt question. Are you sane?

echo34

Chris,

Unfortunately the British youths you speak of have been substantially educated in claiming their rights and benefits (one of labours' few educational successes).

And included is obviously the right not to work.

barnacle bill

Richard - NuLabor's only living brain transplant donor.

mongoose

Thanks for the pdf files on your site. More reliable than Googledocs. And well done on the sleuthing!

Paddy

Fraser: Phil Woolas said on the Politics show that you had got your figures all mixed up (conflated) in his words.

TGF UKIP

Osred, dead right mate, Fraser is being, and has been, particularly weaselly about on the whole Neather matter. What you have to remember, though, is that he is a villager to his very core and as such is profoundly uncomfortable on the whole subject of immigration except to say that he's all for it.

"Send the buggers back" is not the sort of notion his right-on neighbours Marr and Maguire would be likely to be too charitable about if Fraser got too forthright on the subject.

Ghengis

English for disengenuous is untrue.

Richard

Sorry chaps I am still laughing at all these posts from people who didn't watch the programme.
Woolas was slick and sharp.....watch the prog you will see how Andrew was choked off in mid stream and silenced 3-4 times he eventually gave up. Kevin Maguire (sorry I got his name wrong in my first post) was laughing so hard they turned his mic off.
Woolas won that encounter. I may be against most of the tory policies but I am fair, had Woolas lost the arguement I would have tried to make it for him but this time...no need. Oh and to cap it all the old codger then pee'd off Cormack on his last interview as an MP to everyones amusement.
Now watch it don't comment on Fraser's twisted blog unless you have.

Barbara

The more these Labour MP's are challenged the more they appear inept, we see them for what they are, completely mad. We are loaded with foreigners we can see them walking the streets, see them in hospitals having treatment we're paying for though our taxes, doctor's surgeries, driving taxis with cars so old they creak. I could go on, is the minister so blind he cannot see what's going on, then the press should remind him Mr Neal does and rightly so. The time is now ours and we shall decide our destiny with our vote, if they return rest assured even that will disappear if left to the EU stalinist system. We should all not smile at the minister's replies but shudder with fear they have gotten away with such betrayal over the years. Getting our freedom back might take a lot of courage and voting for another party we are not usually associated with, but lets face it the main three are basicly the same, want the same things, which we don't want, so it looks like we have no alternative, vote for the new. I shall.

Lizzy

I could laugh at Woolas's unintentional hilarity if he and his cohorts were not so terrifyingly dangerous.
I used to live near Peterborough which has been in the news this week due to immigrants living rough in the riverside park, depleting fish stocks and skinning and eating swans. It isn't exaggerated it's quite true and the tip of the iceberg.
Peterborough has been at the forefront of immigration for at least a decade. It started in earnest when London boroughs (unable to cope with the numbers) stuffed them on the train at King's Cross and the first place they came to was...Peterborough. There are all nationalities there - Kurds, Somalis, Iraquis and numerous Eastern Europeans. The entire city council (cross parties & MPs) complained to the Home Office as the strain on resources has become unbearable. This was back in the days of the hapless Beverley Hughes who simply accused them of lying.
They council has been unable to determine exact numbers as there are people crammed into houses, living rough - even in people's garden sheds. One police officer I know told me they spend most of their time trying to keep the various ethnic groups apart. Note the tensions are between the ethnic groups and the poorer white working class as the middle classes have done a "white flight" to the surrounding villages creating a mini property boom.
It's a story being repeated across the UK. In Slough they have Kurdish ghettoes where no-one speaks a word of English. My son recently moved out of the East End which was a bit rough and ready but friendly some seven years ago but is now unrecognisable and unwelcoming.
If you can tell me just how this benefits anyone I am prepared to listen to the arguments but it is clear it is a time bomb primed and ready to explode.
This is all going to end in tears and this Government has committed a treasonous act upon the people of this country and should be held to account - preferably in a court of law.
There are times when I weep for my country for I cannot see any solution to this appalling problem.

Lizzy

P.S. Richard I did watch Woolas with Andrew Neil. You really are an utter tripe hound if you thought Neil was struggling against Woolas' towering intellect. Ridiculous.

Lizzy

And this is the interview.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/the_daily_politics/

Derek

After all this, Mr. Nelson STILL does not think it necessary to keep his promise to address Neathergate in the pages of the Spectator, indeed even to make any mention whatsoever of it.

As Peter Madden says in the History Man, paraphrasing Eldridge Cleaver, "‘If you're not the solution,’ says Peter Madden, ‘you're part of the problem.’ ‘It would be terribly arrogant of me to believe I was the solution to anything.’"

2trueblue

Beautifully named for the job. totally wooley. His grasp of figures is nearly as good as Gordos.

Mike Towl

A bit of a Terrier is old Brillo, when it comes to interviewing political Weasles. But a bit of a Bull Dog approach is needed with this particular specimen. Joanna Lumley perhaps?

Vulture

@Richard: Woolarse slick & sharp eh?

Yeah right: this cross between Bugs Bunny and a Britrail ticket clerk is about as slick as John Prescott, and as sharp as Bob Ainsworth. His brain could fit into Tiger Woods' golf tee and leave enough room for your own.

Richard

The blatant mis-representation of the figures is almost chargable under the race relations act.
It is pretty close to incitement to racial hatred.
Woolas explained very clearly just why the stats were unreliable and gave a false impression that did not pass the smell test.
Fraser will have to wait a bit longer for his journo blogger of the year prize.

Chris lancashire

Thanks to Lizzie for the link, I have just watched the interview. Apparently it's all down to "statistics". Shifty, evasive, oily Woolas didn't do any better with Andrew Neil than he did with Joanna Lumley.

Osred

I note in Fraser's column in the Telegraph today that Neathergate is relegated to being the conspiracy that has no name. He repeats the canard that he believes there was no conspiracy because it would take a great deal of organisation (to allow an unregulated flood of labour into the country, or to ignore or refuse to apply existing laws, to allow the wholesale abuse of the student visa system, to allow the assylum system to descend into chaos, to fail to carry out decisions of immigration tribunals etc etc etc). This takes no organisation, conspiracy, or effort on anyone's part merely a laissez faire approach by Reid, Blunkett, Straw, Woolas et al on a number of fronts, letting nature take its course, enabling would be legals and illegals to pick and choose the entry method of their choice and once in, allowing the appeal system to spin out the processs until the HRA kicks in and prevents expulsion.

The article states 'To deal with a problem, one must first recognise it'

I couldnt agree more.

Naomi Muse

Woollas is a prat and looks one whenever he appears.

michael

When PW was asked if a health service cleaner supplied by a contractor was a state or private sector employee he said ....ner...er... nothing.
Here's why : There's a good chance that this employee is an immigrant and as a state employee why are they not British.
British jobs for...
:as a private sector employee
the cost of employing them is set to rise through NI those cost increases are most likely to be passed on either as a direct increase in price to the NHS or a reduction in what the NHS gets for its money. Either way it represents a cut in the health service.
The two faces of labour...hypocrisy and well ...er hypocrisy.

Simon

Your talking rubbish:

http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.com/2010/04/scaremongering-about-immigrants-and.html

McSweeney

I'll ask again because I'd really like to know. Where is the support for the 99% figure when the Statistical note you posted says:
"Of a total increase in employment between 1997 and 2007 of about 2.1 million (counting all over 16s), more than half was accounted for by foreign/migrant workers. But the actual proportion of the employment increase accounted for by foreigners/migrants ranges from just over 50% to just over 80%, depending on the definition of migrant and the population coverage used."

???

Paddy

Vulture: He does look like a Britrail ticket clerk.

Richard of York

Andrew Neil will be having words with Fraser for making him look like a plonker made worse by being torn apart by Woolas.
Fraser might even face a racial hatred charge for his outrageous article.
See John Rentoul blog for a reality check.