Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Bollocks.
Fighting the last war always works - especially when you lost it!
George Osborne is getting an awful lot of airtime and publicity for someone who the more swivel-eyed Leavers insist is politically dead. As usual, they're telling themselves something and hoping it's true.
And of course - TMay - election loser immigration over-stater
And Prime Minister........
The conceit of her campaign focusing entirely on herself was appalling.
Wasn't it based on polling evidence rather than conceit?
You've become our regular TMay apologist - but I suppose someone has to. Agreeing to a campaign which was all about her without reference to her party was conceit and high risk.
So that's a 'Yes' - May was rated more highly than her party - a position not sustained on greater exposure (or lack of it) - but thats where they started - so it was based on data you don't like.......Sturgeon had pulled a similar trick in 2015.
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Bollocks.
Fighting the last war always works - especially when you lost it!
The last war was the war to strengthen Theresa May's hand. How did it go again?
George Osborne is getting an awful lot of airtime and publicity for someone who the more swivel-eyed Leavers insist is politically dead. As usual, they're telling themselves something and hoping it's true.
And of course - TMay - election loser immigration over-stater
And Prime Minister........
Until she's won an election - like Osborne/Cameron - she's nothing politically. The conceit of her campaign focusing entirely on herself was appalling.
What does losing a referendum they didn't have to call and were 1.06 to win make Cameron and Osborne? Apparently the loss has cast the country into oblivion, so it is much more damaging than a party losing a GE
Osbo opposed the referendum.
He was still one of the main men of Remain, who were heavy odds on favourites throughout, had all the levers of power at their disposal... and lost
Mr 'Instant Recession' and 'Punishment Budget' - its striking how his acolytes can't see he's a completely busted flush....
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
George Osborne is getting an awful lot of airtime and publicity for someone who the more swivel-eyed Leavers insist is politically dead. As usual, they're telling themselves something and hoping it's true.
And of course - TMay - election loser immigration over-stater
And Prime Minister........
Until she's won an election - like Osborne/Cameron - she's nothing politically. The conceit of her campaign focusing entirely on herself was appalling.
What does losing a referendum they didn't have to call and were 1.06 to win make Cameron and Osborne? Apparently the loss has cast the country into oblivion, so it is much more damaging than a party losing a GE
Osbo opposed the referendum.
He was still one of the main men of Remain, who were heavy odds on favourites throughout, had all the levers of power at their disposal... and lost
Mr 'Instant Recession' and 'Punishment Budget' - its striking how his acolytes can't see he's a completely busted flush....
This argument is contingent on having a government 'making a success of Brexit'. They are not, and they cannot.
Heard reports that the student numbers were over-inflated by 100k.
However also heard reports that net migration is down by nearly 100k "due to Brexit".
If the student numbers were now reported as 100k less then net migration is essentially unchanged on last year so no has there been no Brexit change afterall? Or are the student numbers still recorded as 100k in which case do we need to change the net migration figure?
I don't think the 100k figure for students not going home is an annual figure.
So what time period is it for and how much of the annual figure is accounted for by student changes rather than Brexit?
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agree with him on everything, the EU being an obvious example, and like everyone in public life he has made mistakes or misjudgements but for competence, vision and the ability to articulate a position there is no one in the current House of Commons who is even close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
This, incidentally, is what is wrong with the lazy assertion that JRM is another Boris; JRM shows serious signs of being a grown-up, and I doubt whether even in his Oxford days he smashed up a restaurant or irrumated a pig's head.
Indeed. Osborne has been massively shown up by the actions of other Cameroons. Some have retired with dignity, others have taken up the mantle and worked with the new leadership.
And many have got on with their jobs of being constituency MPs and their other projects, despite having no small amount of antipathy towards the current leadership and direction (ie Mrs May coz that's who's driving this). This wasn't really an option for Cam or George. Their positions were untenable.
Indeed. The only positive way out for George was retirement from front line politics. Editing a free sheet wasn't exactly the desired route, mind, for dignity. He just sounds petty, frankly.
It is certainly a classic case of putting self before party. Presumably he thinks it better for the country to have a conservative government under Mrs May than a Labour one under JC.
What was May doing when she continued to peddle the 100,000 students overstaying their visas when she knew it wasn't true?
Basically, she is a liar !
She put her own ambitions before what was best for her party and her country. It's a bad look.
You think her plan was to overstate immigration at a time when her party was under attack on immigration, and she was in charge of it, so that when she became leader, which looked unlikely to ever happen at the time, she could then massage the figures downwards?
That is cunning, I thought she was meant to be shit!
Her plan was to use being tough on immigration to improve her standing among Tory party members. It worked for a while. But because she is shit she's been caught out.
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agree with him on everything, the EU being an obvious example, and like everyone in public life he has made mistakes or misjudgements but for competence, vision and the ability to articulate a position there is no one in the current House of Commons who is even close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
Really? The pasty tax budget wasn't a "we all make mistakes" mistake, it was wankerdom of the highest order. In retrospect it is the childishness of the Cameron government which is its most striking fixture; that budget was Osborne phoning in an Oxford essay because he had something more interesting to do. His current behaviour is purely undergraduate: he thinks he is the editor of Cherwell sniping at the president of the Union.
This, incidentally, is what is wrong with the lazy assertion that JRM is another Boris; JRM shows serious signs of being a grown-up, and I doubt whether even in his Oxford days he smashed up a restaurant or irrumated a pig's head.
Indeed. Osborne has been massively shown up by the actions of other Cameroons. Some have retired with dignity, others have taken up the mantle and worked with the new leadership.
And many have got on with their jobs of being constituency MPs and their other projects, despite having no small amount of antipathy towards the current leadership and direction (ie Mrs May coz that's who's driving this). This wasn't really an option for Cam or George. Their positions were untenable.
Indeed. The only positive way out for George was retirement from front line politics. Editing a free sheet wasn't exactly the desired route, mind, for dignity. He just sounds petty, frankly.
It is certainly a classic case of putting self before party. Presumably he thinks it better for the country to have a conservative government under Mrs May than a Labour one under JC.
What was May doing when she continued to peddle the 100,000 students overstaying their visas when she knew it wasn't true?
Basically, she is a liar !
How did she know it wasn't true if the figures were only released days ago?
George Osborne is getting an awful lot of airtime and publicity for someone who the more swivel-eyed Leavers insist is politically dead. As usual, they're telling themselves something and hoping it's true.
And of course - TMay - election loser immigration over-stater
And Prime Minister........
Until she's won an election - like Osborne/Cameron - she's nothing politically. The conceit of her campaign focusing entirely on herself was appalling.
What does losing a referendum they didn't have to call and were 1.06 to win make Cameron and Osborne? Apparently the loss has cast the country into oblivion, so it is much more damaging than a party losing a GE
Osbo opposed the referendum.
He was still one of the main men of Remain, who were heavy odds on favourites throughout, had all the levers of power at their disposal... and lost
Mr 'Instant Recession' and 'Punishment Budget' - its striking how his acolytes can't see he's a completely busted flush....
This argument is contingent on having a government 'making a success of Brexit'. They are not, and they cannot.
He's a busted flush politically what ever the outcome of BREXIT - he may well end up a more successful free-sheet local newspaper editor than politician.
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agree with him on everything, the EU being an obvious example, and like everyone in public life he has made mistakes or misjudgements but for competence, vision and the ability to articulate a position there is no one in the current House of Commons who is even close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
This, incidentally, is what is wrong with the lazy assertion that JRM is another Boris; JRM shows serious signs of being a grown-up, and I doubt whether even in his Oxford days he smashed up a restaurant or irrumated a pig's head.
Indeed. Osborne has been massively shown up by the actions of other Cameroons. Some have retired with dignity, others have taken up the mantle and worked with the new leadership.
And many have got on with their jobs of being constituency MPs and their other projects, despite having no small amount of antipathy towards the current leadership and direction (ie Mrs May coz that's who's driving this). This wasn't really an option for Cam or George. Their positions were untenable.
Indeed. The only positive way out for George was retirement from front line politics. Editing a free sheet wasn't exactly the desired route, mind, for dignity. He just sounds petty, frankly.
What was May doing when she continued to peddle the 100,000 students overstaying their visas when she knew it wasn't true?
Basically, she is a liar !
She put her own ambitions before what was best for her party and her country. It's a bad look.
You think her plan was to overstate immigration at a time when her party was under attack on immigration, and she was in charge of it, so that when she became leader, which looked unlikely to ever happen at the time, she could then massage the figures downwards?
That is cunning, I thought she was meant to be shit!
Her plan was to use being tough on immigration to improve her standing among Tory party members. It worked for a while. But because she is shit she's been caught out.
But that doesn't answer the point of why she would inflate the immigration figures as Hom Sec. That would make her look weak on immigration among the Tory members she thought she would need to become leader.
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agree with him on everything, the EU being an obvious example, and like everyone in public life he has made mistakes or misjudgements but for competence, vision and the ability to articulate a position there is no one in the current House of Commons who is even close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
This, incidentally, is what is wrong with the lazy assertion that JRM is another Boris; JRM shows serious signs of being a grown-up, and I doubt whether even in his Oxford days he smashed up a restaurant or irrumated a pig's head.
Indeed. Osborne has been massively shown up by the actions of other Cameroons. Some have retired with dignity, others have taken up the mantle and worked with the new leadership.
And many have got on with their jobs of being constituency MPs and their other projects, despite having no small amount of antipathy towards the current leadership and direction (ie Mrs May coz that's who's driving this). This wasn't really an option for Cam or George. Their positions were untenable.
Indeed. The only positive way out for George was retirement from front line politics. Editing a free sheet wasn't exactly the desired route, mind, for dignity. He just sounds petty, frankly.
It is certainly a classic case of putting self before party. Presumably he thinks it better for the country to have a conservative government under Mrs May than a Labour one under JC.
What was May doing when she continued to peddle the 100,000 students overstaying their visas when she knew it wasn't true?
Basically, she is a liar !
She put her own ambitions before what was best for her party and her country. It's a bad look.
You think her plan was to overstate immigration at a time when her party was under attack on immigration, and she was in charge of it, so that when she became leader, which looked unlikely to ever happen at the time, she could then massage the figures downwards?
That is cunning, I thought she was meant to be shit!
Her plan was to use being tough on immigration to improve her standing among Tory party members. It worked for a while. But because she is shit she's been caught out.
Yet 42% voted for it and even Corbyn has accepted free movement must end
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
As an aside, the Border Adjustment Tax is officially dead as of today.
Like every other Trump policy or idea.
Is there no start to his achievements in making America great again?
I thought he might pursue a less interventionist policy on the world stage (Which I think would do the USA good to be frank given their crazily inflated veteran budget) but seems he is even more hawkish than the Neo-Cons he derided in the debates now. I'd say I wouldn't vote for him now, but a) I don't have a vote b) I'd have ticked the Hillary box anyway
"even more hawkish than the Neo-Cons"
He doesn't have a clue. I doubt he would even know what you are referring to. He doesn't keep one idea in his head longer than a goldfish and seems to decide policy based on the late night cable news channels and twitter.
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
I don't wanna talk About things we've gone through Though it's hurting me Now it's history I've played all my cards And that's what you've done too Nothing more to say No more ace to play
The winner takes it all The loser's standing small Beside the victory That's UK destiny
I was in EU arms Thinking I belonged there I figured it made sense Building me a fence Building me a home Thinking I'd be strong there But I was a fool Playing by the rules
The gods may throw the dice Their minds as cold as ice And someone way down here Loses someone dear The winner takes it all The loser has to fall It's simple and it's plain Why should I complain?
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agree with him on everything, the EU being an obvious example, and like everyone in public life he has made mistakes or misjudgements but for competence, vision and the ability to articulate a position there is no one in the current House of Commons who is even close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
This, incidentally, is what is wrong with the lazy assertion that JRM is another Boris; JRM shows serious signs of being a grown-up, and I doubt whether even in his Oxford days he smashed up a restaurant or irrumated a pig's head.
Indeed. Osborne has been massively shown up by the actions of other Cameroons. Some have retired with dignity, others have taken up the mantle and worked with the new leadership.
wasn't really an option for Cam or George. Their positions were untenable.
Indeed. The only positive way out for George was retirement from front line politics. Editing a free sheet wasn't exactly the desired route, mind, for dignity. He just sounds petty, frankly.
What was May doing when she continued to peddle the 100,000 students overstaying their visas when she knew it wasn't true?
Basically, she is a liar !
She put her own ambitions before what was best for her party and her country. It's a bad look.
You think her plan was to overstate immigration at a time when her party was under attack on immigration, and she was in charge of it, so that when she became leader, which looked unlikely to ever happen at the time, she could then massage the figures downwards?
That is cunning, I thought she was meant to be shit!
Her plan was to use being tough on immigration to improve her standing among Tory party members. It worked for a while. But because she is shit she's been caught out.
But that doesn't answer the point of why she would inflate the immigration figures as Hom Sec. That would make her look weak on immigration among the Tory members she thought she would need to become leader.
Their visceral loathing of May has rendered some otherwise sensible posters strangers to reason.
If students over staying their visas is only 2,000 or so a year, then why does it matter if we include them or exclude them in the immigration figures? If all of those coming leave at the end of their studies then the net figure will be approximately zero in the scheme of things.
Under the proposals to exclude them, would we add back in those students transferring to other visa categories? If not, it seems like a very dodgy exclusion.
If students over staying their visas is only 2,000 or so a year, then why does it matter if we include them or exclude them in the immigration figures? If all of those coming leave at the end of their studies then the net figure will be approximately zero in the scheme of things.
Under the proposals to exclude them, would we add back in those students transferring to other visa categories? If not, it seems like a very dodgy exclusion.
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Bollocks.
Fighting the last war always works - especially when you lost it!
The last war was the war to strengthen Theresa May's hand. How did it go again?
She got an extra two years of Conservative government.
Their visceral loathing of May has rendered some otherwise sensible posters strangers to reason.
I talked about this the other day. It's Chapman syndrome - the replacement of all ability to reason with visceral loathing of anyone connected to Brexit.
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
No that's not true. You need to get over it and move on rather than make cheap, unhelpful, jibes. It's in the past, let it go. Even James "Mark" Chapman aint gonna help you now
Yesterday a poster called her malevolent. Today she is being compared negatively with someone who managed to get booed at the Olympics.
Baffles me. Is it because she got 14m votes against the best Labour campaigner since Blair, sidelined the lib Dems or actually listened to the referendum of last year?
The poor losers cant stand not having one of their own running tings. Spoilt rotten
She was a Remainer, albeit a fairly pathetic effort made.
She was, but she has accepted the result and tried to get on with it, so not "one of their own" in this context
If she had promised the extra £350m a week to the NHS that would be accepting the result. As it is she has ruled out the key promise.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
I don't wanna talk About things we've gone through Though it's hurting me Now it's history I've played all my cards And that's what you've done too Nothing more to say No more ace to play
The winner takes it all The loser's standing small Beside the victory That's UK destiny
I was in EU arms Thinking I belonged there I figured it made sense Building me a fence Building me a home Thinking I'd be strong there But I was a fool Playing by the rules
The gods may throw the dice Their minds as cold as ice And someone way down here Loses someone dear The winner takes it all The loser has to fall It's simple and it's plain Why should I complain?
An ABBA song more appropriate for the EU would be Money,Money, Money
He must be seriously regretting standing down from the Commons. If he was still there this forthcoming Conference would be electric.
If Osborne spoke at conference this year there is a serious risk he would be booed, Cameron by contrast would be cheered if he appeared
There wasn't a fag paper between them but some, perhaps many Cons members have a cognitive dissonance whereby they cannot allow themselves to acknowledge what a good team Osborne & Cam were and hence would welcome one, while condemning the other.
Cameron has acted with dignity and loyalty since leaving office, Osborne has done nothing but snipe from the sidelines and party members I have spoken to have noted the difference
Remember how election loser TMay fired Osborne in the most public and humiliating. She herself is to blame.
In part because Osborne was so belittling and arrogant towards her and other colleagues as Chancellor
One of May's fatal flaws is that she believes she can easily deal with issues with a single cunning move. So she thinks she's killed the Cameroons with a brutal reshuffle, but they are still there and angry. She thinks she can get her mandate by calling an election, but forgets to run a vigorous, disciplined campaign. She believes she can dictate terms to Europe, and seems surprised that it's a long process and that our neighbours have been doing a bit of work on their strategy while she was d1cking about not running an election campaign to speak of.
It was not out of revenge, but out of the sentiment that George Osborne would have been a petty force of instability in the cabinet, consumed with his own ambition. I was unsure whether it was the right call to sack him at the time, but his petty, ambition-consumed, instability-causing behaviour since being Standard Editor shows it was the right call. Since becoming editor he has clearly put his own score-settling and vengeance above of the need to keep Corbyn's radical socialism out of government.
Their visceral loathing of May has rendered some otherwise sensible posters strangers to reason.
I talked about this the other day. It's Chapman syndrome - the replacement of all ability to reason with visceral loathing of anyone connected to Brexit.
Oh well, history will be changed by the 9/9 demo! I expect they'll all be going!
Their visceral loathing of May has rendered some otherwise sensible posters strangers to reason.
I talked about this the other day. It's Chapman syndrome - the replacement of all ability to reason with visceral loathing of anyone connected to Brexit.
I don't wanna talk About things we've gone through Though it's hurting me Now it's history I've played all my cards And that's what you've done too Nothing more to say No more ace to play
The winner takes it all The loser's standing small Beside the victory That's UK destiny
I was in EU arms Thinking I belonged there I figured it made sense Building me a fence Building me a home Thinking I'd be strong there But I was a fool Playing by the rules
The gods may throw the dice Their minds as cold as ice And someone way down here Loses someone dear The winner takes it all The loser has to fall It's simple and it's plain Why should I complain?
An ABBA song more appropriate for the EU would be Money,Money, Money
Heard reports that the student numbers were over-inflated by 100k.
However also heard reports that net migration is down by nearly 100k "due to Brexit".
If the student numbers were now reported as 100k less then net migration is essentially unchanged on last year so no has there been no Brexit change afterall? Or are the student numbers still recorded as 100k in which case do we need to change the net migration figure?
The drop in Non EU students coming last year was about 20 000. Most of the drop in net migtation was because A8 EU citizens now come and go in equal numbers.
The net migration figures for the last year were roughly:
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agreeen close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
This, incidentally, is what is wrong with the lazy assertion that JRM is another Boris; JRM shows serious signs of being a grown-up, and I doubt whether even in his Oxford days he smashed up a restaurant or irrumated a pig's head.
Indeed. Osborne has been massively shown up by the actions of other Cameroons. Some have retired with dignity, others have taken up the mantle and worked with the new leadership.
And many have got onreally an option for Cam or George. Their positions were untenable.
Indeed. The only positive way out for George was retirement from front line politics. Editing a free sheet wasn't exactly the desired route, mind, for dignity. He just sounds petty, frankly.
What was May doing when she continued to peddle the 100,000 students overstaying their visas when she knew it wasn't true?
Basically, she is a liar !
She put her own ambitions before what was best for her party and her country. It's a bad look.
You think her plan was to overstate downwards?
That is cunning, I thought she was meant to be shit!
Her plan was to use being tough on immigration to improve her standing among Tory party members. It worked for a while. But because she is shit she's been caught out.
But that doesn't answer the point of why she would inflate the immigration figures as Hom Sec. That would make her look weak on immigration among the Tory members she thought she would need to become leader.
She did not inflate them. She saw an opportunity to talk tough and because of that did not act on the fact that the original numbers were completely wrong. Why else would she conceal numbers that would have been very helpful to the government?
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agreeen close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
This, incidentally, is what is wrong with the lazy assertion that JRM is another Boris; JRM shows serious signs of being a grown-up, and I doubt whether even in his Oxford days he smashed up a restaurant or irrumated a pig's head.
Indeed. Osborne has been massively shown up by the actions of other Cameroons. Some have retired with dignity, others have taken up the mantle and worked with the new leadership.
And many have got onreally an option for Cam or George. Their positions were untenable.
Indeed. The only positive way out for George was retirement from front line politics. Editing a free sheet wasn't exactly the desired route, mind, for dignity. He just sounds petty, frankly.
What was May doing when she continued to peddle the 100,000 students overstaying their visas when she knew it wasn't true?
Basically, she is a liar !
She put her own ambitions before what was best for her party and her country. It's a bad look.
You think her plan was to overstate downwards?
That is cunning, I thought she was meant to be shit!
Her plan was to use being tough on immigration to improve her standing among Tory party members. It worked for a while. But because she is shit she's been caught out.
But that doesn't answer the point of why she would inflate the immigration figures as Hom Sec. That would make her look weak on immigration among the Tory members she thought she would need to become leader.
She did not inflate them. She saw an opportunity to talk tough and because of that did not act on the fact that the original numbers were completely wrong. Why else would she conceal numbers that would have been very helpful to the government?
So why did she sit on good news in 2015 again? I honestly don't follow
You are saying she wanted immigration to look higher than it was, even though it was her job to control it, so that if she ever became PM, she could reveal the true numbers and look good?
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
Arguably, the fact foreign students DON'T stay on is the concern. These are young, well educated, well connected, motivated and highly marketable people.
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agreeen close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
This, incidentally, is what is wrong with the lazy assertion that JRM is another Boris; JRM shows serious signs of being a grown-up, and I doubt whether even in his Oxford days he smashed up a restaurant or irrumated a pig's head.
Indeed. Osborne has been massively shown up by the actions of other Cameroons. Some have retired with dignity, others have taken up the mantle and worked with the new leadership.
And many have got onreally an option for Cam or George. Their positions were untenable.
Indeed. The only positive way out for George was retirement from front line politics. Editing a free sheet wasn't exactly the desired route, mind, for dignity. He just sounds petty, frankly.
What was May doing when she continued to peddle the 100,000 students overstaying their visas when she knew it wasn't true?
Basically, she is a liar !
She put her own ambitions before what was best for her party and her country. It's a bad look.
You think her plan was to overstate downwards?
That is cunning, I thought she was meant to be shit!
Her plan was to use being tough on immigration to improve her standing among Tory party members. It worked for a while. But because she is shit she's been caught out.
But that doesn't leader.
She did not inflateal numbers that would have been very helpful to the government?
So why did she sit on good news in 2015 again? I honestly don't follow
You are saying she wanted immigration to look higher than it was, even though it was her job to control it, so that if she ever became PM, she could reveal the true numbers and look good?
Because it would have meant a lost opportunity to look and talk tough. Without a problem there could be no posturing. She was never a team player.
As she is ultimately not very good, she did not think through the consequences of the true figures becoming known.
Their visceral loathing of May has rendered some otherwise sensible posters strangers to reason.
I talked about this the other day. It's Chapman syndrome - the replacement of all ability to reason with visceral loathing of anyone connected to Brexit.
Brexititus?
Other symptoms include putting words in the mouths of those one disagrees with, assuming Leavers are horrid, and continually thinking that the EU has us over a barrel.
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agreeen close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
This, incidentally, is what is wrong with the lazy assertion that JRM is another Boris; JRM shows serious signs of being a grown-up, and I doubt whether even in his Oxford days he smashed up a restaurant or irrumated a pig's head.
Indeed. Osborne has been massively shown up by the actions of other Cameroons. Some have retired with dignity, others have taken up the mantle and worked with the new leadership.
And many have got onreally an option for Cam or George. Their positions were untenable.
Indeed. The only positive way out for George was retirement from front line politics. Editing a free sheet wasn't exactly the desired route, mind, for dignity. He just sounds petty, frankly.
What was May doing when she continued to peddle the 100,000 students overstaying their visas when she knew it wasn't true?
Basically, she is a liar !
She put her own ambitions before what was best for her party and her country. It's a bad look.
You think her plan was to overstate downwards?
That is cunning, I thought she was meant to be shit!
But that doesn't leader.
She did not inflate them. She saw an opportunity to talk tough and because of that did not act on the fact that the original numbers were completely wrong. Why else would she conceal numbers that would have been very helpful to the government?
So why did she sit on good news in 2015 again? I honestly don't follow
You are saying she wanted immigration to look higher than it was, even though it was her job to control it, so that if she ever became PM, she could reveal the true numbers and look good?
Because it would have meant a lost opportunity to look and talk tough. Without a problem there could be no posturing. She was never a team player.
But how could she have known she would get the opportunity to look and talk tough?
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
Don't think so - at least definitely not on ferries or Eurotunnel.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agreeen close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
This, incidentally, is what is wrong with the lazy assertion that JRM is another Boris; JRM shows serious signs of being a grown-up, and I doubt whether even in his Oxford days he smashed up a restaurant or irrumated a pig's head.
Indeed. Osborne has been massively shown up by the actions of other Cameroons. Some have retired with dignity, others have taken up the mantle and worked with the new leadership.
And many have got onreally an option for Cam or George. Their positions were untenable.
Indeed. The only positive way out for George was retirement from front line politics. Editing a free sheet wasn't exactly the desired route, mind, for dignity. He just sounds petty, frankly.
What was May doing when she continued to peddle the 100,000 students overstaying their visas when she knew it wasn't true?
Basically, she is a liar !
She put her own ambitions before what was best for her party and her country. It's a bad look.
You think her plan was to overstate downwards?
That is cunning, I thought she was meant to be shit!
Her plan was to use being tough on immigration to improve her standing among Tory party members. It worked for a while. But because she is shit she's been caught out.
But that doesn't leader.
She did not inflateal numbers that would have been very helpful to the government?
So why did she sit on good news in 2015 again? I honestly don't follow
You are saying she wanted immigration to look higher than it was, even though it was her job to control it, so that if she ever became PM, she could reveal the true numbers and look good?
Because it would have meant a lost opportunity to look and talk tough. Without a problem there could be no posturing. She was never a team player.
As she is ultimately not very good, she did not think through the consequences of the true figures becoming known.
You make it sound like she suppressed the true figures.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
That's easy to answer. The 2011 mid year estimate was 63,285,100. The 2011 Census estimate was 63,181,775. So in the 10 years between 2001 and 2011, the mid year estimates were pretty good.
Whilst this is becoming boring in the extreme whY did governments in previous times not limit immigration from outside the EU when it was clearly their responsibility?
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
He is, with Cameron, the outstanding politician of his generation. I don't agreeen close. It is very unfortunate that he is not available to help in a difficult situation.
She put her own ambitions before what was best for her party and her country. It's a bad look.
You think her plan was to overstate downwards?
That is cunning, I thought she was meant to be shit!
Her plan was to use being tough on immigration to improve her standing among Tory party members. It worked for a while. But because she is shit she's been caught out.
Heard reports that the student numbers were over-inflated by 100k.
However also heard reports that net migration is down by nearly 100k "due to Brexit".
If the student numbers were now reported as 100k less then net migration is essentially unchanged on last year so no has there been no Brexit change afterall? Or are the student numbers still recorded as 100k in which case do we need to change the net migration figure?
The drop in Non EU students coming last year was about 20 000. Most of the drop in net migtation was because A8 EU citizens now come and go in equal numbers.
The net migration figures for the last year were roughly:
EU: +115 000 Non EU: +145 000 UK: - 50 000
Once we are outside the EU, cutting immigration is easy. We have gross emigration of about 150k and gross immigration of about 500k. Half of that immigration is high skill and the other half is low skill if you look at jobs data. Stop the inflow of 250k low skill immigrants and you have your 100k a year target. This means tightening the visa system on non-EU work migration to truly limit it to high skill, applying that to EU workers, and increasing the income to sponsor family migrants to the £35k a year needed to be a net tax payer. We'd still have all the skills that we actually need and we'd hit the promise. Clearly communicate this is what you're doing and you'd get the support of almost all Conservative voters and a big chunk of the Labour base.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
No wonder we don't know who has left the country. As I say, I'm not up to speed. Haven't been abroad in years for various reasons.
Whilst this is becoming boring in the extreme whY did governments in previous times not limit immigration from outside the EU when it was clearly their responsibility?
Because they wanted to rub the right's nose in diversity. It's the same reason Blair got rid of exit checks in 1998. He didn't want the true facts known.
Arguably, the fact foreign students DON'T stay on is the concern. These are young, well educated, well connected, motivated and highly marketable people.
The numbers are just about those overstaying their visas, not people transferring to new visa categories.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
No wonder we don't know who has left the country. As I say, I'm not up to speed. Haven't been abroad in years for various reasons.
I think the scheme is up and running (see my link below). I am not sure why it wasn't done before though.. all you need is a database with one table for arrivals, and another for departure, each storing the passport number, date, and port of entry. Why is that so complicated?
Whilst this is becoming boring in the extreme whY did governments in previous times not limit immigration from outside the EU when it was clearly their responsibility?
A profoundly important question. The only answer is they choose not to because it was a) bad economics b) bloody difficult and expensive to enforce c) went against broader policy of being an open country d) business would kick up a right fuss.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
No wonder we don't know who has left the country. As I say, I'm not up to speed. Haven't been abroad in years for various reasons.
I think the scheme is up and running (see my link below). I am not sure why it wasn't done before though.. all you need is a database with one table for arrivals, and another for departure, each storing the passport number, date, and port of entry. Why is that so complicated?
Home Office. Not fit for purpose as Charles Clarke once said.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
Whilst this is becoming boring in the extreme whY did governments in previous times not limit immigration from outside the EU when it was clearly their responsibility?
May suspended civil servants back in 2011 over a border row regarding passport checks of non EU nationals.She blamed them for relaxing checks to ease queues.Governments take less responsibility and say the agency is at fault .
The Foreign Office really would like a bit of stability just at the moment. I suspect they'll get it, no matter what the spin balloon might look like.
May clearly will face a leadership challenge at some point, but anyone that challenges her now simply self-defines themselves as deeply stupid (Assuming that the challenger isn't offering a pretty monumental change of policy).
Whilst this is becoming boring in the extreme whY did governments in previous times not limit immigration from outside the EU when it was clearly their responsibility?
A profoundly important question. The only answer is they choose not to because it was a) bad economics b) bloody difficult and expensive to enforce c) went against broader policy of being an open country d) business would kick up a right fuss.
I suppose the answer to my own question is that the Weatminster elite were unaware of the actual impact it was having on communities and the Labour MP's representing those areas had become dependant on their votes.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
No wonder we don't know who has left the country. As I say, I'm not up to speed. Haven't been abroad in years for various reasons.
I think the scheme is up and running (see my link below). I am not sure why it wasn't done before though.. all you need is a database with one table for arrivals, and another for departure, each storing the passport number, date, and port of entry. Why is that so complicated?
Home Office. Not fit for purpose as Charles Clarke once said.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
Passports are not checked by UK Borders on leaving, however they are checked by airlines and other carriers. That is the source of the exit data now.
It is likely that those on student visas changing to other visa types are missing from the supposedly net neutral figures.
For Brexit to work as intended we do need a substantial increase in HM Customs and Border Agency staff, and for more Civil Servants to plough through up to 3 million extra cases applying for permanent status. There is no sign of this, or indeed on many other issues such as medicines licencing etc. If Brexit is not to be cliff edge, then this needs doing now, or we have to swallow the EU deal to keep the wheels turning.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
No wonder we don't know who has left the country. As I say, I'm not up to speed. Haven't been abroad in years for various reasons.
I think the scheme is up and running (see my link below). I am not sure why it wasn't done before though.. all you need is a database with one table for arrivals, and another for departure, each storing the passport number, date, and port of entry. Why is that so complicated?
Home Office. Not fit for purpose as Charles Clarke once said.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
Passports are not checked by UK Borders on leaving, however they are checked by airlines and other carriers. That is the source of the exit data now.
It is likely that those on student visas changing to other visa types are missing from the supposedly net neutral figures.
For Brexit to work as intended we do need a substantial increase in HM Customs and Border Agency staff, and for more Civil Servants to plough through up to 3 million extra cases applying for permanent status. There is no sign of this, or indeed on many other issues such as medicines licencing etc. If Brexit is not to be cliff edge, then this needs doing now, or we have to swallow the EU deal to keep the wheels turning.
Something as simple as a national Oyster card works. Breeze in, breeze out. I find it very hard to believe that anyone's that worried about their movements being tracked in London now. So the national-identity-card idea needs to return.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
Passports are not checked by UK Borders on leaving, however they are checked by airlines and other carriers. That is the source of the exit data now.
It is likely that those on student visas changing to other visa types are missing from the supposedly net neutral figures.
For Brexit to work as intended we do need a substantial increase in HM Customs and Border Agency staff, and for more Civil Servants to plough through up to 3 million extra cases applying for permanent status. There is no sign of this, or indeed on many other issues such as medicines licencing etc. If Brexit is not to be cliff edge, then this needs doing now, or we have to swallow the EU deal to keep the wheels turning.
Agree with all of that. Yes there’s currently no exit checks leaving the UK, airlines send passenger lists to the Home Office and unless you’re flagged on a wanted database or are stopped by customs you leave without anyone except the airline looking at your passport at the gate.
Mrs Rudd is vulnerable If her department doesn’t get on top of things as basic as sending the right letters to people. Depending on exactly what the EU deal looks like there are likely to be a couple of million EU nationals applying for leave to remain in the UK in the next couple of years. Every one they screw up will probably make the papers.
Their visceral loathing of May has rendered some otherwise sensible posters strangers to reason.
I talked about this the other day. It's Chapman syndrome - the replacement of all ability to reason with visceral loathing of anyone connected to Brexit.
Brexititus?
Other symptoms include putting words in the mouths of those one disagrees with, assuming Leavers are horrid, and continually thinking that the EU has us over a barrel.
We know that it is infectious, but is it treatable?
All removing students from the migration figures does is reduce the gross immigration and gross emigration numbers.
It doesn't reduce net migration figures. It provides better figures since students here are no more migrants than tourists are.
If next year the UK universities attract more students that is a good thing and is an economic export for the UK - yet it will be reported as a negative if students are counted because immigration has gone up.
If next year UK universities fail to attract good students then that is a bad thing yet means the government is perversely rewarded with better migration figures.
All removing students from the migration figures does is reduce the gross immigration and gross emigration numbers.
The report I linked to earlier in the thread implies that the IPS is good at counting students in but not good at counting them out. Actually, not even that. It complained that the ONS are unable to "triangulate" the exit numbers.
How this is any different to any other group of migrants I don't know. We're only five years away from finding out how the 2021 mid year estimates compare to the 2021 Census. That's the ultimate arbiter of the migration statistics.
All removing students from the migration figures does is reduce the gross immigration and gross emigration numbers.
It doesn't reduce net migration figures. It provides better figures since students here are no more migrants than tourists are.
If next year the UK universities attract more students that is a good thing and is an economic export for the UK - yet it will be reported as a negative if students are counted because immigration has gone up.
If next year UK universities fail to attract good students then that is a bad thing yet means the government is perversely rewarded with better migration figures.
I don't think that's true at the moment. The immigration stats are being reported as though people don't want to come here. As I showed last night, the figures for January to March this year were very similar to 2016. I reckon the Brexit blip is over and the rolling annual figures will start to go up again in six months time.
Indeed and my estimation of Boris rises a couple of notches if that's what he's thinking. To be fair, having a semi-failed state on the northern shore of the Mediterranean doesn't help any of us and there still seems a shortage of long-term thinking about stopping the flow of migrants from points further south.
It will be interesting to see if this represents a step-change in diplomatic practice and international co-operation or whether this is just cynical power-politics trying to build influence in a strategic and oil-rich (well, there's a thing) area.
All removing students from the migration figures does is reduce the gross immigration and gross emigration numbers.
It doesn't reduce net migration figures. It provides better figures since students here are no more migrants than tourists are.
If next year the UK universities attract more students that is a good thing and is an economic export for the UK - yet it will be reported as a negative if students are counted because immigration has gone up.
If next year UK universities fail to attract good students then that is a bad thing yet means the government is perversely rewarded with better migration figures.
I don't think that's true at the moment. The immigration stats are being reported as though people don't want to come here. As I showed last night, the figures for January to March this year were very similar to 2016. I reckon the Brexit blip is over and the rolling annual figures will start to go up again in six months time.
Well yes there is that. Migration goes up = bad = out of control. Migration goes down = bad = not an attractive country.
However the issue is that students are temporary residents of the country who are here for potentially three or four years. Potentially going back home in the holidays and probably going home afterwards. Yes at the end of their course they could be counted as an emigrant but why should we do that? That leaves the figures reflecting not simply who is properly coming and going now but who registered three to four years ago.
A student going back home at the end of their studies is no more an emigrant than a tourist going back home at the end of their holiday is.
All removing students from the migration figures does is reduce the gross immigration and gross emigration numbers.
It doesn't reduce net migration figures. It provides better figures since students here are no more migrants than tourists are.
If next year the UK universities attract more students that is a good thing and is an economic export for the UK - yet it will be reported as a negative if students are counted because immigration has gone up.
If next year UK universities fail to attract good students then that is a bad thing yet means the government is perversely rewarded with better migration figures.
But the people who are concerned about immigration aren't concerned about students ** but with the effects that unskilled and non-assimilating immigration brings.
This whole student numbers issue looks like politicians and media types obsessing about an irrelevance which they're interested in rather than sorting a genuine problem which they're not.
As with FPTP by elections, good second places are useless in a referendum. The winner takes it all. Remain need to learn this. !
That is where you go wrong, I`m afraid. In FPTP elections, where the first placed candidate takes everything, their party may end up with power. But, depending on the size and distribution of votes cast against them, they do not necessarily end up with authority.
We see this quite clearly in the case of the present administration in the USA. Trump is totally without authority.
It is the same in the UK, where Mrs May has power, thanks not least to her bribing of the DUP, but she has no authority whatsoever. Neither does the Conservative Party as a whole, whoever is its leader..
Nobody respects Mrs May, not even within her own party.
In a referendum, there are not really winners and losers, are there? We had a proposal, and everybody voted in terms of what they wanted it to mean. A senseless waste of time.
But the fact that a large number of people voted to Remain shows that the country is strongly divided - probably. Nobody in his right mind would take that as an endorsement for going full steam ahead, with half the country strongly against you. Still less for imposing drastic short-sighted hard-line Tory measures, which are claimed to be a consequence of the vote.
The government ought to be trying to bring people together. It i positive proof of Mrs May`s uselessness that she is busy making the country even more divided.
All removing students from the migration figures does is reduce the gross immigration and gross emigration numbers.
It doesn't reduce net migration figures. It provides better figures since students here are no more migrants than tourists are.
If next year the UK universities attract more students that is a good thing and is an economic export for the UK - yet it will be reported as a negative if students are counted because immigration has gone up.
If next year UK universities fail to attract good students then that is a bad thing yet means the government is perversely rewarded with better migration figures.
I don't think that's true at the moment. The immigration stats are being reported as though people don't want to come here. As I showed last night, the figures for January to March this year were very similar to 2016. I reckon the Brexit blip is over and the rolling annual figures will start to go up again in six months time.
Well yes there is that. Migration goes up = bad = out of control. Migration goes down = bad = not an attractive country.
However the issue is that students are temporary residents of the country who are here for potentially three or four years. Potentially going back home in the holidays and probably going home afterwards. Yes at the end of their course they could be counted as an emigrant but why should we do that? That leaves the figures reflecting not simply who is properly coming and going now but who registered three to four years ago.
A student going back home at the end of their studies is no more an emigrant than a tourist going back home at the end of their holiday is.
Here's why students are included:
Office for National Statistics (ONS) migration statistics use the UN recommended definition of a long-term international migrant: “A person who moves to a country other than that of his or her usual residence for a period of at least a year (12 months), so that the country of destination effectively becomes his or her new country of usual residence.”
As with FPTP by elections, good second places are useless in a referendum. The winner takes it all. Remain need to learn this. !
That is where you go wrong, I`m afraid. In FPTP elections, where the first placed candidate takes everything, their party may end up with power. But, depending on the size and distribution of votes cast against them, they do not necessarily end up with authority.
We see this quite clearly in the case of the present administration in the USA. Trump is totally without authority.
It is the same in the UK, where Mrs May has power, thanks not least to her bribing of the DUP, but she has no authority whatsoever. Neither does the Conservative Party as a whole, whoever is its leader..
Nobody respects Mrs May, not even within her own party.
In a referendum, there are not really winners and losers, are there? We had a proposal, and everybody voted in terms of what they wanted it to mean. A senseless waste of time.
But the fact that a large number of people voted to Remain shows that the country is strongly divided - probably. Nobody in his right mind would take that as an endorsement for going full steam ahead, with half the country strongly against you. Still less for imposing drastic short-sighted hard-line Tory measures, which are claimed to be a consequence of the vote.
The government ought to be trying to bring people together. It i positive proof of Mrs May`s uselessness that she is busy making the country even more divided.
Arguably, the fact foreign students DON'T stay on is the concern. These are young, well educated, well connected, motivated and highly marketable people.
Encouraging a brain drain is not a good thing. The school I am involved with actively encourages students to return home - their skills are needed more there than here
As with FPTP by elections, good second places are useless in a referendum. The winner takes it all. Remain need to learn this. !
That is where you go wrong, I`m afraid. In FPTP elections, where the first placed candidate takes everything, their party may end up with power. But, depending on the size and distribution of votes cast against them, they do not necessarily end up with authority.
We see this quite clearly in the case of the present administration in the USA. Trump is totally without authority.
It is the same in the UK, where Mrs May has power, thanks not least to her bribing of the DUP, but she has no authority whatsoever. Neither does the Conservative Party as a whole, whoever is its leader..
Nobody respects Mrs May, not even within her own party.
In a referendum, there are not really winners and losers, are there? We had a proposal, and everybody voted in terms of what they wanted it to mean. A senseless waste of time.
But the fact that a large number of people voted to Remain shows that the country is strongly divided - probably. Nobody in his right mind would take that as an endorsement for going full steam ahead, with half the country strongly against you. Still less for imposing drastic short-sighted hard-line Tory measures, which are claimed to be a consequence of the vote.
The government ought to be trying to bring people together. It i positive proof of Mrs May`s uselessness that she is busy making the country even more divided.
By the same reasoning, no government elected under fptp should enact any of the policies in its manifesto.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
All removing students from the migration figures does is reduce the gross immigration and gross emigration numbers.
It doesn't reduce net migration figures. It provides better figures since students here are no more migrants than tourists are.
If next year the UK universities attract more students that is a good thing and is an economic export for the UK - yet it will be reported as a negative if students are counted because immigration has gone up.
If next year UK universities fail to attract good students then that is a bad thing yet means the government is perversely rewarded with better migration figures.
I don't think that's true at the moment. The immigration stats are being reported as though people don't want to come here. As I showed last night, the figures for January to March this year were very similar to 2016. I reckon the Brexit blip is over and the rolling annual figures will start to go up again in six months time.
Well yes there is that. Migration goes up = bad = out of control. Migration goes down = bad = not an attractive country.
However the issue is that students are temporary residents of the country who are here for potentially three or four years. Potentially going back home in the holidays and probably going home afterwards. Yes at the end of their course they could be counted as an emigrant but why should we do that? That leaves the figures reflecting not simply who is properly coming and going now but who registered three to four years ago.
A student going back home at the end of their studies is no more an emigrant than a tourist going back home at the end of their holiday is.
Here's why students are included:
Office for National Statistics (ONS) migration statistics use the UN recommended definition of a long-term international migrant: “A person who moves to a country other than that of his or her usual residence for a period of at least a year (12 months), so that the country of destination effectively becomes his or her new country of usual residence.”
I would suggest that a student here temporarily during term-times is NOT making this "his or her new country of usual residence".
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
Arguably, the fact foreign students DON'T stay on is the concern. These are young, well educated, well connected, motivated and highly marketable people.
Encouraging a brain drain is not a good thing. The school I am involved with actively encourages students to return home - their skills are needed more there than here
The same arguably applies to the claim that the NHS couldn't function without immigrants. What we are doing in recruiting them is abusing our financial advantage to steal human capital from the third world.
All removing students from the migration figures does is reduce the gross immigration and gross emigration numbers.
It doesn't reduce net migration figures. It provides better figures since students here are no more migrants than tourists are.
If next year the UK universities attract more students that is a good thing and is an economic export for the UK - yet it will be reported as a negative if students are counted because immigration has gone up.
If next year UK universities fail to attract good students then that is a bad thing yet means the government is perversely rewarded with better migration figures.
But the people who are concerned about immigration aren't concerned about students ** but with the effects that unskilled and non-assimilating immigration brings.
This whole student numbers issue looks like politicians and media types obsessing about an irrelevance which they're interested in rather than sorting a genuine problem which they're not.
** Assuming that the students aren't 'students'.
If the people who are concerned about immigration aren't concerned about students then all the more reason to take students out of the equation. That way the Home Office is left with the figures of what is actually getting people concerned about.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
All removing students from the migration figures does is reduce the gross immigration and gross emigration numbers.
It doesn't reduce net migration figures. It provides better figures since students here are no more migrants than tourists are.
If next year the UK universities attract more students that is a good thing and is an economic export for the UK - yet it will be reported as a negative if students are counted because immigration has gone up.
If next year UK universities fail to attract good students then that is a bad thing yet means the government is perversely rewarded with better migration figures.
But the people who are concerned about immigration aren't concerned about students ** but with the effects that unskilled and non-assimilating immigration brings.
This whole student numbers issue looks like politicians and media types obsessing about an irrelevance which they're interested in rather than sorting a genuine problem which they're not.
** Assuming that the students aren't 'students'.
If the people who are concerned about immigration aren't concerned about students then all the more reason to take students out of the equation. That way the Home Office is left with the figures of what is actually getting people concerned about.
Or they publish two sets of figures, with and without. The with figures are published because it is an international norm.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics, such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The really interesting question is: If the International passenger survey is wrong on students, how reliable are its figures for other groups?
I am not up-to-speed with the details of exiting the UK. But surely every passport is scanned? So we should know exactly who has left the country?
No that's not the case though it will change soon.
Weird that article was on the BBC News homepage earlier this week. Didn't read that it was 2 years old already!
I fly from Heathrow a couple of times a week and I've only ever once been checked (a couple of years ago)
By an interviewer? I think this system just takes the data from the airlines.
Squeezyjet send a vaguely threatening email about a week before each outbound flight asking you to specify in advance the travel document on which you are travelling (i.e. passport with number and expiry date). This is less onerous than it sounds because once you have given those details once you can say "same as usual".
Arguably, the fact foreign students DON'T stay on is the concern. These are young, well educated, well connected, motivated and highly marketable people.
Encouraging a brain drain is not a good thing. The school I am involved with actively encourages students to return home - their skills are needed more there than here
A good point.
Anecdote is not data but I was in Ukraine on holiday a few weeks back, and one of my tasks was to help do up the house of the in-laws. We had huge difficulty finding a local plumber, because apparently all the plumbers in Ukraine have gone to Poland - because all the Polish plumbers are in the UK!
As with FPTP by elections, good second places are useless in a referendum. The winner takes it all. Remain need to learn this. !
That is where you go wrong, I`m afraid. In FPTP elections, where the first placed candidate takes everything, their party may end up with power. But, depending on the size and distribution of votes cast against them, they do not necessarily end up with authority.
We see this quite clearly in the case of the present administration in the USA. Trump is totally without authority.
It is the same in the UK, where Mrs May has power, thanks not least to her bribing of the DUP, but she has no authority whatsoever. Neither does the Conservative Party as a whole, whoever is its leader..
Nobody respects Mrs May, not even within her own party.
In a referendum, there are not really winners and losers, are there? We had a proposal, and everybody voted in terms of what they wanted it to mean. A senseless waste of time.
But the fact that a large number of people voted to Remain shows that the country is strongly divided - probably. Nobody in his right mind would take that as an endorsement for going full steam ahead, with half the country strongly against you. Still less for imposing drastic short-sighted hard-line Tory measures, which are claimed to be a consequence of the vote.
The government ought to be trying to bring people together. It i positive proof of Mrs May`s uselessness that she is busy making the country even more divided.
There was definitely a winner and a loser in the AV referendum though
Comments
Mr 'Instant Recession' and 'Punishment Budget' - its striking how his acolytes can't see he's a completely busted flush....
At least you got rid of UKIP!
Next.
He doesn't have a clue. I doubt he would even know what you are referring to. He doesn't keep one idea in his head longer than a goldfish and seems to decide policy based on the late night cable news channels and twitter.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41053684
I don't wanna talk
About things we've gone through
Though it's hurting me
Now it's history
I've played all my cards
And that's what you've done too
Nothing more to say
No more ace to play
The winner takes it all
The loser's standing small
Beside the victory
That's UK destiny
I was in EU arms
Thinking I belonged there
I figured it made sense
Building me a fence
Building me a home
Thinking I'd be strong there
But I was a fool
Playing by the rules
The gods may throw the dice
Their minds as cold as ice
And someone way down here
Loses someone dear
The winner takes it all
The loser has to fall
It's simple and it's plain
Why should I complain?
Under the proposals to exclude them, would we add back in those students transferring to other visa categories? If not, it seems like a very dodgy exclusion.
https://tinyurl.com/ybpywy63
This paragraph stands out:
The ONS estimate of non-EU student immigration shows good coherence with other statistics,
such as the Home Office visa data. In spite of definitional differences between the two data
sources, in general, the trends align. This helps give users confidence that the IPS is reliably
capturing the scale of non-EU student immigration and that the estimate is a high-quality
measure, in line with Principle 4, Practice 3 of the Code. In contrast, the estimate of former student emigration is the only source of information about when a student leaves the UK; the other sources of information do not confirm the point at which the student has the left the country. This lack of ability to verify and triangulate the estimate means that assurances cannot be given to provide the same level of confidence in the former-student emigration figures.
Basically, the OSR is questioning the former student emigration figures because they don't trust the International Passenger Survey (IPS). What I'd like to know is, why do the OSR think that the IPS would be any less reliable for students leaving after finishing their studies that anyone else? Perhaps there would be an issue with students not identifying as students as they leave but I doubt it.
I have to say, that report looks like it's been done to cause a bit of a storm.
The net migration figures for the last year were roughly:
EU: +115 000
Non EU: +145 000
UK: - 50 000
You are saying she wanted immigration to look higher than it was, even though it was her job to control it, so that if she ever became PM, she could reveal the true numbers and look good?
As she is ultimately not very good, she did not think through the consequences of the true figures becoming known.
So we should know exactly who has left the country?
Of course, things might have changed since 2011.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-32205970
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-41049074
May clearly will face a leadership challenge at some point, but anyone that challenges her now simply self-defines themselves as deeply stupid (Assuming that the challenger isn't offering a pretty monumental change of policy).
It is likely that those on student visas changing to other visa types are missing from the supposedly net neutral figures.
For Brexit to work as intended we do need a substantial increase in HM Customs and Border Agency staff, and for more Civil Servants to plough through up to 3 million extra cases applying for permanent status. There is no sign of this, or indeed on many other issues such as medicines licencing etc. If Brexit is not to be cliff edge, then this needs doing now, or we have to swallow the EU deal to keep the wheels turning.
https://twitter.com/conspirator0/status/900158639884955648
Student enters Britain = immigrant
Student leaves Britain = emigrant
All removing students from the migration figures does is reduce the gross immigration and gross emigration numbers.
Mrs Rudd is vulnerable If her department doesn’t get on top of things as basic as sending the right letters to people. Depending on exactly what the EU deal looks like there are likely to be a couple of million EU nationals applying for leave to remain in the UK in the next couple of years. Every one they screw up will probably make the papers.
If next year the UK universities attract more students that is a good thing and is an economic export for the UK - yet it will be reported as a negative if students are counted because immigration has gone up.
If next year UK universities fail to attract good students then that is a bad thing yet means the government is perversely rewarded with better migration figures.
How this is any different to any other group of migrants I don't know. We're only five years away from finding out how the 2021 mid year estimates compare to the 2021 Census. That's the ultimate arbiter of the migration statistics.
It will be interesting to see if this represents a step-change in diplomatic practice and international co-operation or whether this is just cynical power-politics trying to build influence in a strategic and oil-rich (well, there's a thing) area.
However the issue is that students are temporary residents of the country who are here for potentially three or four years. Potentially going back home in the holidays and probably going home afterwards. Yes at the end of their course they could be counted as an emigrant but why should we do that? That leaves the figures reflecting not simply who is properly coming and going now but who registered three to four years ago.
A student going back home at the end of their studies is no more an emigrant than a tourist going back home at the end of their holiday is.
This whole student numbers issue looks like politicians and media types obsessing about an irrelevance which they're interested in rather than sorting a genuine problem which they're not.
** Assuming that the students aren't 'students'.
We see this quite clearly in the case of the present administration in the USA. Trump is totally without authority.
It is the same in the UK, where Mrs May has power, thanks not least to her bribing of the DUP, but she has no authority whatsoever. Neither does the Conservative Party as a whole, whoever is its leader..
Nobody respects Mrs May, not even within her own party.
In a referendum, there are not really winners and losers, are there? We had a proposal, and everybody voted in terms of what they wanted it to mean. A senseless waste of time.
But the fact that a large number of people voted to Remain shows that the country is strongly divided - probably. Nobody in his right mind would take that as an endorsement for going full steam ahead, with half the country strongly against you. Still less for imposing drastic short-sighted hard-line Tory measures, which are claimed to be a consequence of the vote.
The government ought to be trying to bring people together. It i positive proof of Mrs May`s uselessness that she is busy making the country even more divided.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) migration statistics use the UN recommended definition of a long-term international migrant: “A person who moves to a country other than that of his or her usual residence for a period of at least a year (12 months), so that the country of destination effectively becomes his or her new country of usual residence.”
Travelling by ferry was different.
Anecdote is not data but I was in Ukraine on holiday a few weeks back, and one of my tasks was to help do up the house of the in-laws. We had huge difficulty finding a local plumber, because apparently all the plumbers in Ukraine have gone to Poland - because all the Polish plumbers are in the UK!