Interesting(Original post by plstudent)
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz48DBoIvwT
In the article there is a video in which it is shown the government gave different nonsensical excuses for not releasing information that could help clarify the issue. It's quite possible that most immigration is from the EU, not outside, which would definitely boost the Brexit side in the debate. It is impossible to stop EU migration while remaining in the EU, and the government consistently fails to keep its election promises to reduce mass migration.
Net migration is at an all time high in the UK.
x Turn on thread page Beta
David Cameron REFUSES to release figures that would 'prove the true level' of EU migr watch
- 10-05-2016 13:02
- 10-05-2016 13:55
Just seen this:
- Thread Starter
- 10-05-2016 20:32
(Original post by plstudent)
- 11-05-2016 01:03
Seems like a good deal to me. Besides, Brexit is only a start. A necessary step to take towards a more controlled migration policy.
Posted from TSR Mobile
- 12-05-2016 00:04
We also do not know how many duplicate accounts are in the system. It is more important for an employer to get a new immigrant an NI number to start work than to be certain that he wasn't also an old immigrant with an existing NI number.
Finally non-working spouses of immigrants dating back to the 1950s may only need an NI number when first claiming a pension in their own right so are only now emerging into the system.
(Original post by paul514)
- 12-05-2016 14:55
I've mentioned this several times that it is double the number off the official figures which are done by a small scale survey which is extrapolated out.
In other words the only official figure we have is national insurance numbers and then that number doesn't include any partners, children or other family they bring with them who are going to work
NI numbers alone are not an accurate indication of long-term migration.
Why have you thought, I assume prior to this becoming news, that the real figures are actually double what they should be?