The rise of migration to the UK has been one of the extraordinary stories of the last 20 or so years. A majority of Britons want migration to be lower and think (by six to one) that the Government’s policy towards it as been unsatisfactory. High migration was surely one of the main reasons why the referendum happened and why the “leave” camp won. Perhaps curiously, Mrs May, who has been Home Secretary for six years, is the odds-on favourite to be the next Prime Minister, despite having overseen a migration failure. She did not get to grips with the mismanagement of e-borders, promoted the conceptually ridiculous net immigration target, signed up to the “tens of thousands” manifesto pledge, and then missed it by a factor of around ten. Under her watch, there has been net immigration of 1.8m and gross immigration of nearly 3m despite a myriad of mini-adjustments to migration rules. Conservative party members who are concerned about migration will want to see a clear commitment from Mrs May to end free movement in Europe and introduce a new immigration system and work permits. Continue reading Mrs May’s record on immigration
It’s election eve and one wonders about the outcome of #GE2015. I have been drawn to two analyses. Both mildly mad in their own ways. Continue reading Vigorish Times and hedging bets
I asked a question – mainly as I felt that UKSA and IFS were being a bit too self righteous when they were doing little to help at the sharp end of data misinterpretation by press and politicians. Continue reading Election fact checking
I can hardly agree with The Guardian’s editorial today: “The Guardian view on statistics in politics: over-counting“.
Part of it is just what one might expect from a newspaper: wordsmiths rant against things they tend not to get, like evidence (all too often it has ruined a great story!), big data and “computers”. Add in some cheap shots along the lines of lies, damned lies ……… and you’re done. A good read it is.
But it also makes two very valid points. Continue reading Too many statistics? The Guardian’s view