Skip to main content

Emigration rockets under Labour

Emigration has gone up substantially under Labour. It is clear that people are less happy living in Tony Blair's Britain.

The link is the first response to one of my Written Questions from last Friday. It shows an increase from just under 240,000 people a year in the mid 1990s to over 350,000 a year in 2002 and 2003.

I suppose from Labour's point of view many of these are not Labour voters.

It is an important issue because is relates to quality of life. There are people who have said to me that life in the UK is getting so aggressive that they want to leave (and are doing so).

Comments

Bob Piper said…
...or the weather is bloody awful... or their property prices have rocketed and they're cashing in their equity... or the pension is so good under Labour they are retiring abroad. John, sometimes you talk such utter crap it is frightening. Presumably, on your logic, when the wicked witch of Finchley ran Britain on behalf of your newly embraced friends, everyone was so in love with Britain they stayed here. Grow up you plonker!
PoliticalHack said…
As somebody with some scientific background, how the hell do you make that leap of faith (logic having clearly been abandoned). People leave the country for many reasons - two of my friends recently emigrated to Australia for work reasons (and delight in telling us that the temperature has started to drop now as winter approaches - down into the 30s now...)
PoliticalHack said…
Passing over the fact that you didn't need to waste public money on a parliamentary question when a quick search of the departmental website would have thrown up the data, it is worth pointing out that many people have chosen to work (an awful lot in professional or managerial grades) or study here, so life can't be all that bad.

Adding to Bob's and my earlier comments, you have drawn an inference that cannot be supported by the evidence presented.
john said…
I started from the principle that people mentioned the issue to me during the election campaign. I thought it was worth finding out the situation.

In 1995 Margaret Thatcher was not in power. It was said recently that it is only now that the policies of the Third Term of Thatcher's government are being implemented.

The only proper test, of course, is to ask the people emigrating why they are emigrating.
Bob Piper said…
Typical nanny state approach. They would probably say mind your own bloody business. Just as a matter of interest... where are these mythical thousands that John is speaking to actually emigrating to? Try walking the back streets of Marseille after dusk, or the Parisian suburbs. Or the wonderful City of Barcelona if you wander the wrong side of Las Ramblas. John's logic is more than usually perverted though when he claims Thatcher's influence is still being felt in 2005... but it wasn't in 1995 under his friends the Conservatives. Ooops! Talking of asking people which government people felt best under... didn't we just do that?
john said…
>when the wicked witch of Finchley ran Britain
Not in 1995.
PoliticalHack said…
If you read the stats, people are asked why they are emigrating and most of those who express a preference are leaving for work reasons.

You have anecdotal comments that a number of people are thinking of leaving, but still no evidence to support your ludicrous claim that it relates to quality of life or that they are not Labour voters. You cannot possibly know that.

It is always possible that the people who mentioned their plans to leave the country were encouraged to emigrate by the thought of you as their MP.
Bob Piper said…
Don't you just love this sort of anacdotal codswallop! Why, I mean four people came to my surgery last week saying they wished to emigrate to Smethwick from Newton ward because that is being ruined by the liberal democrats and they also knew a man who's brother had spoken to someone in a bus queue and he was told that old ladies are frightened to leave their homes for fear of being mugged by asylum seekers, all of whom have mobile phones and brand new cars provided for them by the government. And they told me... so it must be true
john said…
Anecdotal please Bob.
Bob Piper said…
Is that your best repost, John you must be struggling!
john said…
Your basic point is valid in the sense that anecdotal evidence needs statistical analysis to determine trends. Hence the parliamentary question. I have, however, made this point.
Manfarang said…
It must be galling for Labour to find out that not everyone wants to stay in their newly created utopia or return to it for that matter. No one asks you at the airport whether you are emigrating so I don't think the figures are readily avaiable.
Of course it is not so easy to emigrate, gone are the days of assisted passages to Australia or New Zealand.Not many immigrant visas are available.
Many of the Britons working abroad return early before completing their contracts.The middle east is not very safe now. So much for the 'war on terror'making the world a less dangerous place.
Labour has a class-based dislike of Britons who live abroad. They regard them as Tories.A lot of people did leave in the early 1980s because of the high unemployment.These people aren't that sympathetic towards the Tories.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…