VIANA DO CASTELO SUPLANTOU O ENTRONCAMENTO NO RANKING DOS "FENÓMENOS".TEVE UM CANDIDATO A PRESIDENTE BARIL, TINHA UM DEPUTADO DO PSD, O JORGINHO , QUE SE "CASOU" COM UM OUTRO HOMEM E AGORA VAI TER UM JACOBINO QUE COMEÇOU NO CDS, ESTÁ NO PSD MAS QUE SE DÁ BEM EM PENSAMENTO E OBRA COM OS BLOQUISTAS...É DO FCP E QUE É CONSIDERADO PEÇONHENTO PELOS BENFIQUISTAS...
E TEM UM ESTALEIRO QUE FAZ BARCOS QUE NÃO NAVEGAM...
VÊM COMO AINDA NÃO BATEMOS NO FUNDO?A ESCADARIA PELOS VISTOS AINDA NÃO ACABOU...
PERTENCE CERTAMENTE AO submundo da blogosfera DE ACORDO COM CIENTÍFICAS CLASSIFICAÇÕES DUNS GAJOS QUE VIVEM DOS MEUS IMPOSTOS E ANDAM A AFUNDAR PORTUGAL
Friday, April 15, 2011
NITIDAMENTE DA EXTREMA DIREITA...
David Cameron on immigration: full text of the speech
Prime minister's address to Conservative party members on the government's immigration policy
The Guardian, Thursday 14 April 2011
David Cameron blames Labour for allowing immigration to become 'too high' Link to this video
A year ago, we were in the middle of a general election campaign. And there was one message I heard loud and clear on the doorstep: we want things to be different. People said they wanted a government that didn't just do what was good for the headline or good for their party but good for the long term and good for our country. That's what we're engaged in.
Clearly, cutting public spending isn't popular, but it's right to bring sense to our public finances. People said they wanted a government that actually trusted them to use their own common sense. That's the kind of government we want to be – giving neighbourhoods and individuals a whole range of new powers … scrapping so much of the bureaucracy that drove us mad.
People said they were sick of seeing those who did the right thing get punished and the wrong thing rewarded. Again, that's what we're acting on. In welfare we're ending the system that took money from hard-working taxpayers and gave it to people who refused to work. These are the differences we are trying to make – listening to people, doing the hard and necessary work of changing our country for the better.
Immigration debate
But there was something else we heard on the doorstep – and it was this: "We are concerned about the levels of immigration in our country … but we are fed up of hearing politicians talk tough but do nothing." Here, again, we are determined to be different.
Now, immigration is a hugely emotive subject … and it's a debate too often in the past shaped by assertions rather than substantive arguments. We've all heard them. The assertion that mass immigration is an unalloyed good and that controlling it is economic madness … the view that Britain is a soft touch and immigrants are out to take whatever they can get. I believe the role of politicians is to cut through the extremes of this debate and approach the subject sensibly and reasonably.
The last government, in contrast, actually helped to inflame the debate. On the one hand, there were Labour ministers who closed down discussion, giving the impression that concerns about immigration were somehow racist. On the other, there were ministers hell-bent on burnishing their hard-line credentials by talking tough … but doing nothing to bring the numbers down.
This approach had damaging consequences in terms of controlling immigration … but also in terms of public debate. It created the space for extremist parties to flourish, as they could tell people that mainstream politicians weren't listening to their concerns or doing anything about them. I remember when immigration wasn't a central political issue in our country – and I want that to be the case again. I want us to starve extremist parties of the oxygen of public anxiety they thrive on and extinguish them once and for all.
Above all, I want to get the policy right: good immigration, not mass immigration. That's why I believe it's time for a new approach – one which opens up debate, not closes it down; where politicians don't just talk, but actually act.
Benefits of immigration
Let's start with being open. The British people are fair-minded – and I want them to feel they can be honest about what they think about this subject. Here's what I think. Our country has benefitted immeasurably from immigration. Go into any hospital and you'll find people from Uganda, India and Pakistan who are caring for our sick and vulnerable. Go into schools and universities and you'll find teachers from all over the world, inspiring our young people. Go to almost any high street in the country and you'll find entrepreneurs from overseas who are not just adding to the local economy but playing a part in local life. Charities, financial services, fashion, food, music – all these sectors are what they are because of immigration. So yes, immigrants make a huge contribution to Britain. We recognise that – and we welcome it.
Pressures of immigration
But I'm also clear about something else: for too long, immigration has been too high. Between 1997 and 2009, 2.2 million more people came to live in this country than left to live abroad. That's the largest influx of people Britain has ever had … and it has placed real pressures on communities up and down the country. Not just pressures on schools, housing and healthcare – though those have been serious … but social pressures too. Because real communities aren't just collections of public service users living in the same space.
Real communities are bound by common experiences … forged by friendship and conversation … knitted together by all the rituals of the neighbourhood, from the school run to the chat down the pub. And these bonds can take time. So real integration takes time.
That's why, when there have been significant numbers of new people arriving in neighbourhoods … perhaps not able to speak the same language as those living there … on occasions not really wanting or even willing to integrate … that has created a kind of discomfort and disjointedness in some neighbourhoods.
This has been the experience for many people in our country – and I believe it is untruthful and unfair not to speak about it and address it.
Our aim
So, taking all this into account, I believe controlling immigration and bringing it down is of vital importance to the future of our country. That's why during the election campaign, Conservatives made a clear commitment to the British people … that we would aim to reduce net migration to the levels we saw in the 1980s and 1990s.
Now we are in government, we are on track to meet that aim. We are controlling legal immigration – having introduced a cap on non-EU economic migrants. We are clamping down on illegal immigration. And we are getting to grips with the asylum system too. The UK Border Agency is now close to clearing the back-log of almost half a million asylum cases. Our action is working.
But some myths have crept in – about what we're doing and the impact our policies will have. There are those who say that whatever measures we put in place, we can't control immigration significantly. And there are those who accept we can control immigration, but argue that the way we propose to do it will damage our economy and universities. Today I want to take those myths head-on.
Immigration from Europe
Let me begin by addressing those who say we can't control immigration. They have three planks to their argument. First, they say legal immigration is impossible to control because we're a member of the European Union. Second, they argue that illegal immigration can't be controlled either because it's impossible to properly police. And third, they say that immigration will always be high because immigrant workers do jobs that British people won't do.
Each part of that argument is wrong. Take this question of Europe. Yes, our borders are open to people from other member states in the European Union. But actually, this counts for a small proportion of overall net migration to the UK. In the year up to June 2010, net migration to our country from EU nationals was just 27,000.
That's not to say migration from Europe has been insignificant. Since 2004, when many large eastern European countries joined the EU, more than one million people from those countries have come to live and work in the UK – a huge number. We said back then that transitional controls should have been put in place to restrict the numbers coming over. And now we're in government, if and when new countries join the European Union, transitional controls will be put in place.
But this remains the fact: when it comes to immigration to our country, it's the numbers from outside the EU that really matter. In the year up to June 2010, net migration from nationals of countries outside the EU to the UK totalled 198,000. This is the figure we can more easily control and should control.
Last week, our new immigration cap for people coming here to work from outside the EU came into force. It means for the next twelve months, we will not allow employers to recruit more than 20,700 skilled workers from outside Europe. And we've already shown a cap can work. Last July, we placed interim limits on the number of visas we would give for skilled workers - and this kept the numbers down to under 20,000.
Of course employment is just one of the routes of entry and settlement into this country. Every year tens of thousands of people marry into Britain or join their families here. Now many of these are genuine, loving relationships. But we also know there are abuses of the system.
For a start there are forced marriages taking place in our country, and overseas as a means of gaining entry to the UK. This is the practice where some young British girls are bullied and threatened into marrying someone they don't want to. I've got no time for those who say this is a culturally relative issue – it is wrong, full stop, and we've got to stamp it out.
Then there are just the straightforward sham marriages. Last summer, we ordered the UK Border Agency to clamp down on these and they've had significant success, making 155 arrests. And there was also the shocking case of a vicar who was jailed for staging over 300 sham marriages.
But as well as abuse of the system, there are other problems with the family route. We know, for instance, that some marriages take place when the spouse is very young, and has little or no grasp of English. Again we cannot allow cultural sensitivity to stop us from acting. That's why last November we introduced a requirement for all those applying for a marriage visa to demonstrate a minimum standard of English … and we will defend the age limit of 21 for spouses coming to the UK.
So however sensitive or difficult a subject it may be, we are tightening up the family route. But by far the biggest route for non-EU entrants into this country has been the student visa route. Immigration by students has almost trebled in the past decade. Last year, some 303,000 visas were issued overseas for study in the UK.
But this isn't the end of the story. Because a lot of those students bring people with them to this country … husbands, wives, children. Indeed, last year, 32,000 visas were issued to the dependents of students. Again, many of these applications are for legitimate students doing legitimate courses with legitimate dependents coming over with them. But we know that some of these student applications are bogus, and in turn their dependents are bogus.
Consider this: a sample of 231 visa applications for the dependents of students found that only twenty-five percent of them were genuine dependents. The others? Some were clearly gaming the system and had no genuine or loving relationship with the student. Others we just couldn't be sure about.
The whole system was out of control – and we're now getting to grips with it. We're targeting bogus colleges that offer sham courses. We're making sure that anyone studying a degree-level course has a proper grasp of the English language. We're saying that only postgraduate students can bring dependents.
And we're making sure that if people come over here to study, they should be studying not working … and that when they've finished their studies, they go home unless they are offered a graduate-level skilled job, with a minimum salary.
Taken together, we estimate that these proposals will cut the number of student visas issued by around 80,000 a year. So across all the main routes of entry to Britain – work, family, education – we are taking action, simultaneously. And the key word here is 'simultaneously'.
As the Home Secretary has said, controlling immigration by clamping down on one route alone is "like squeezing a balloon … Push down work visas and the number of student visas will shoot up. Clamp down on student visas and family visas will spring up."
For years, people have been playing the system, exploiting the easiest routes of entry to the UK. Now, because of what we're doing, this country finally has consistent controls right across the immigration system.
Permanent settlement
But as I said in a speech in opposition, what matters most is not who comes into the country but who stays. Of course there are fair and legitimate reasons for people who arrive here temporarily to stay here permanently. But the figures clearly suggest that many gain temporary entry into the UK with no plans to leave. More than a fifth of students who entered Britain in 2004 were still here five years later – and many were supposed to be coming to study short courses.
But the most significant route to permanent settlement is the economic migration route. Last year, 84,000 people who initially came on a work visa got the right to settle here. I want Britain to continue to attract the best workers. But it cannot be right that people coming to fill short-term skills gaps can stay long-term.
As the Cross-Party Balanced Migration Group has argued, it is essential we break that link between temporary visas and permanent settlement.
They are right – that's what this Government is determined to do … and we will consult on how best to proceed on this in the coming months.
Illegal immigration
So this is the progress we are making on cutting legal immigration and clamping down on the abuse of legitimate entry routes. And we are cracking down on illegal immigration too. This is a question of fairness – yes, to the British people … but also to those who have been shipped over here against their will, kept as slaves and forced to work horrendous hours.
So as part of our National Crime Agency, we are establishing a proper border policing command which will crack down on people smuggling. And because of better technology and closer working with the French, we have managed to cut the number of people identified trying to cross the Channel illegally by two thirds last year.
At the same time as stopping illegal immigrants coming to Britain, we are doing something about those who are already here. Two nationwide campaigns targeting illegal migrants have resulted in 1400 arrests, 330 prosecutions and 260 removals. And in the six months to the end of February, we collected some £3.6m in fines from employers of illegal workers.
What's more, we're closing the loophole that has allowed people who have worked here illegally to get unemployment benefits. Estimates suggest that as many as 155,000 illegal workers might be able to do this … with some eligible to claim over £5,000 in employment seekers allowance – each year.
That's wrong - and we're stopping it. We're making sure that only people who have the right to work here can claim benefits. And we also recently announced that anyone who owes money to the NHS will be refused entry to the UK until they have paid back their debts.
So across border control, health policy, benefits policy … we are taking decisive action to close the gaps that for too long have allowed people to come here illegally and to stay here illegally.
Who will do these jobs?
So we can control both legal and illegal immigration. What is required is political will and the drive to make sure this agenda runs right across government.
But the third argument put forward by those who say we can't control immigration is that immigration is not just a problem of supply but of demand. Put simply, immigration will always be high because British people won't do the jobs migrant workers do.
I can see why this argument is made. Since 1997, the number of people in work in our economy has gone up by some 2.5 million. And of this increase, around 75% was accounted for by foreign-born workers … many of whom were employed to clean offices, serve in restaurants or work on building sites. At the same time we have had persistently, eye-wateringly high numbers of British born people stuck on welfare.
But let's be clear about what our conclusions should be from this. This is not a case of 'immigrants coming over here and taking our jobs'. The fact is – except perhaps in the very short-term – there are not a fixed number of jobs in our economy. If one hundred migrant workers come into the country, they don't simply displace job opportunities for a hundred British citizens. Of course they take up vacancies that are available, but they also come and create wealth and new jobs.
The real issue is this: migrants are filling gaps in the labour market left wide open by a welfare system that for years has paid British people not to work. That's where the blame lies – at the door of our woeful welfare system, and the last government who comprehensively failed to reform it.
So immigration and welfare reform are two sides of the same coin. Put simply, we will never control immigration properly unless we tackle welfare dependency. That's another powerful reason why this government is undertaking the biggest shake-up of the welfare system for generations … making sure that work will always pay … and ending the option of living a life on the dole when a life in work is possible.
Economy
Take all these actions together, and I believe we are proving that we can control immigration.
But there's another group of people I want to take on. The ones who accept we can control immigration, but have doubts about what our reforms will mean. The first thing they say is: these policies will deny British business of the talent they need to succeed. That's plain wrong. Nothing – nothing – is more important to this government than growing our economy, creating jobs and prosperity across our country.
That's why far from simply salami-slicing numbers coming here with no thought to the impact that will have on business, we have thought incredibly carefully about how we can select and attract the world's brightest to our shores.
This was something the last government comprehensively failed to do. Yes, they introduced a points-based system for immigration, where people were admitted to our country according to the levels of skills they had … but only after being repeatedly called to do so by the Conservative party.
Yet once they put this in place, they failed to properly control it and effectively manage it. For example, tier one visas were supposed to be reserved for only the highest skilled migrants. But the evidence shows almost a third of people who came over on one of these visas were not employed in highly skilled jobs. Some were found stacking shelves in supermarkets or driving taxis – and that's if they were employed at all.
Tier two visas were supposed to be reserved for skilled jobs such as engineers. But again, these visas were abused and misused. In one case, an applicant applied as an "elite chef" for a fried chicken shop. The main qualifying criterion was the rate of pay. So in this case, his sister, who owned the shop decided to pay him exactly the amount that allowed him to qualify. There was nothing the authorities could do and he was allowed in.
So it has fallen to this government to sort out the system – and we are completely changing the way it works so it is truly geared to the needs of our economy. We are reforming tier one, to make sure that it is genuinely a route only for the best. As part of that package of reform, we are introducing a new route for people of exceptional talent – like scientists, academics and artists. And we are introducing a new entrepreneur visa, to roll out the red carpet for anyone who has a great business idea and serious investment.
We are also reforming tier two visas. Business leaders have told us that as a country, we should prioritise skilled tier two, workers with a job offer rather than highly-skilled tier one workers without a job offer. So that's what we're doing.
For the coming year, even as we have reduced the number of economic migrants overall by seven thousand, we have actually increased the number of tier two visas available. And we have also raised the skills level so it is only open to graduate-level occupations - and excludes other jobs like careworkers and cooks. What's more, we have exempted what are called 'intra-company transfers' from the limit while raising standards at the same time … so firms can still move their employees around the world, but not to fill permanent jobs that could be done by UK workers.
So I completely reject the idea that our new immigration rules will damage our economy.
Universities
The second thing some say is that our policies on student visas will damage our universities. Again, let me make clear: this government will do nothing to harm Britain's status as a magnet for the world's best students. That's why with us, if you're good at your subject, can speak English and have been offered a place on a course at a trusted institution – you will be able to get a visa to study here.
Put another way, Britain's universities are free to market themselves globally saying: "You can come and study here at some of the finest institutions anywhere in the world – and you can stay and work in a graduate job after you leave."
That makes our country a hugely attractive destination for genuine students who genuinely want to study abroad. What we don't want is for this to be a hugely attractive destination for people who only want a passage to Britain. So we are cracking down on the abuses of the system.
In recent years there has also grown up a thriving industry of bogus colleges, providing bogus qualifications as cover for bogus visas. Of the 744 private colleges on the UK Border Agency sponsor register in January, only 131 had attained highly trusted sponsor status.
Yet, as of mid-January this year, the 613 private colleges who are not "highly trusted" have been able to sponsor 280,000 students between them. The potential for abuse is clearly enormous.
Indeed, we have been looking into the practice of some so-called colleges. In one case, students were sent off to so-called work placements in locations up to 280 miles away from the college where they were supposed to be studying on a regular basis.
In another, students were found working in 20 different locations and undertaking no study time whatsoever. In yet another case, there were 2 lecturers for 940 students.
Want to know how ridiculous things have got? An Indian organisation which helps people get student visas has put up a massive billboard in that country. It's got a picture of London bus and the words "get a free ride to the UK" emblazoned across it.
Clearly, we cannot – and should not – put up with any of this. That's why we're getting to grips with the abuse and that's why I reject the idea that our policy will damage our universities.
It really is simple: if you're a genuine academic institution – you have nothing to worry about. But if you're not, you do – and I make no apology for that.
Conclusion
What I have set out today is a sober, comprehensive and effective plan to cut immigration, and cut it substantially. Sober because we come to this debate clear-headed about not only the benefits of immigration … but also its impact on our public services, communities and society. Comprehensive because we are leaving no stone unturned, taking action across all routes of entry to our country. And effective – because we are doing all this in a way that strengthens our economy and enhances the status of our universities.
This time last year, we said we would listen to people's concerns and get immigration under control. Today I can confidently say that we are getting there.
If we take the steps set out today, and deal with all the different avenues of migration, legal and illegal, then levels of immigration can return to where they were in the 1980s and 90s, a time when immigration was not a front rank political issue. And I believe that will mean net migration to this country will be in the order of tens of thousands each year, not the hundreds of thousands every year that we have seen over the last decade.
Yes, Britain will always be open to the best and brightest from around the world and those fleeing persecution. But with us, our borders will be under control and immigration will be at levels our country can manage. No ifs. No buts. That's a promise we made to the British people. And it's a promise we are keeping.
-----------------------
David Cameron veut limiter l'arrivée d'étrangers
-----------------
Immigration speech was a dog-whistle for the right
David Cameron's tough pronouncements on immigration mask policies that harm the poorest and most vulnerable
MAS ESTÃO FEITOS.É QUE EM PORTUGAL AS ESCOLAS NÃO SÃO SEF E COMO A COISA AQUI JÁ NÃO DÁ A RAPAZIADA FAZ UMA CURTA PARAGEM DE DESCANSO PARA A EUROPA DOS BONS SUBSÍDIOS...
PS
ESPERO QUE ESSES "ALUNOS" DESAPARECIDOS ASSIM DE REPENTE NÃO CONTEM PARA O "ABANDONO ESCOLAR"...
Prime minister's address to Conservative party members on the government's immigration policy
The Guardian, Thursday 14 April 2011
David Cameron blames Labour for allowing immigration to become 'too high' Link to this video
A year ago, we were in the middle of a general election campaign. And there was one message I heard loud and clear on the doorstep: we want things to be different. People said they wanted a government that didn't just do what was good for the headline or good for their party but good for the long term and good for our country. That's what we're engaged in.
Clearly, cutting public spending isn't popular, but it's right to bring sense to our public finances. People said they wanted a government that actually trusted them to use their own common sense. That's the kind of government we want to be – giving neighbourhoods and individuals a whole range of new powers … scrapping so much of the bureaucracy that drove us mad.
People said they were sick of seeing those who did the right thing get punished and the wrong thing rewarded. Again, that's what we're acting on. In welfare we're ending the system that took money from hard-working taxpayers and gave it to people who refused to work. These are the differences we are trying to make – listening to people, doing the hard and necessary work of changing our country for the better.
Immigration debate
But there was something else we heard on the doorstep – and it was this: "We are concerned about the levels of immigration in our country … but we are fed up of hearing politicians talk tough but do nothing." Here, again, we are determined to be different.
Now, immigration is a hugely emotive subject … and it's a debate too often in the past shaped by assertions rather than substantive arguments. We've all heard them. The assertion that mass immigration is an unalloyed good and that controlling it is economic madness … the view that Britain is a soft touch and immigrants are out to take whatever they can get. I believe the role of politicians is to cut through the extremes of this debate and approach the subject sensibly and reasonably.
The last government, in contrast, actually helped to inflame the debate. On the one hand, there were Labour ministers who closed down discussion, giving the impression that concerns about immigration were somehow racist. On the other, there were ministers hell-bent on burnishing their hard-line credentials by talking tough … but doing nothing to bring the numbers down.
This approach had damaging consequences in terms of controlling immigration … but also in terms of public debate. It created the space for extremist parties to flourish, as they could tell people that mainstream politicians weren't listening to their concerns or doing anything about them. I remember when immigration wasn't a central political issue in our country – and I want that to be the case again. I want us to starve extremist parties of the oxygen of public anxiety they thrive on and extinguish them once and for all.
Above all, I want to get the policy right: good immigration, not mass immigration. That's why I believe it's time for a new approach – one which opens up debate, not closes it down; where politicians don't just talk, but actually act.
Benefits of immigration
Let's start with being open. The British people are fair-minded – and I want them to feel they can be honest about what they think about this subject. Here's what I think. Our country has benefitted immeasurably from immigration. Go into any hospital and you'll find people from Uganda, India and Pakistan who are caring for our sick and vulnerable. Go into schools and universities and you'll find teachers from all over the world, inspiring our young people. Go to almost any high street in the country and you'll find entrepreneurs from overseas who are not just adding to the local economy but playing a part in local life. Charities, financial services, fashion, food, music – all these sectors are what they are because of immigration. So yes, immigrants make a huge contribution to Britain. We recognise that – and we welcome it.
Pressures of immigration
But I'm also clear about something else: for too long, immigration has been too high. Between 1997 and 2009, 2.2 million more people came to live in this country than left to live abroad. That's the largest influx of people Britain has ever had … and it has placed real pressures on communities up and down the country. Not just pressures on schools, housing and healthcare – though those have been serious … but social pressures too. Because real communities aren't just collections of public service users living in the same space.
Real communities are bound by common experiences … forged by friendship and conversation … knitted together by all the rituals of the neighbourhood, from the school run to the chat down the pub. And these bonds can take time. So real integration takes time.
That's why, when there have been significant numbers of new people arriving in neighbourhoods … perhaps not able to speak the same language as those living there … on occasions not really wanting or even willing to integrate … that has created a kind of discomfort and disjointedness in some neighbourhoods.
This has been the experience for many people in our country – and I believe it is untruthful and unfair not to speak about it and address it.
Our aim
So, taking all this into account, I believe controlling immigration and bringing it down is of vital importance to the future of our country. That's why during the election campaign, Conservatives made a clear commitment to the British people … that we would aim to reduce net migration to the levels we saw in the 1980s and 1990s.
Now we are in government, we are on track to meet that aim. We are controlling legal immigration – having introduced a cap on non-EU economic migrants. We are clamping down on illegal immigration. And we are getting to grips with the asylum system too. The UK Border Agency is now close to clearing the back-log of almost half a million asylum cases. Our action is working.
But some myths have crept in – about what we're doing and the impact our policies will have. There are those who say that whatever measures we put in place, we can't control immigration significantly. And there are those who accept we can control immigration, but argue that the way we propose to do it will damage our economy and universities. Today I want to take those myths head-on.
Immigration from Europe
Let me begin by addressing those who say we can't control immigration. They have three planks to their argument. First, they say legal immigration is impossible to control because we're a member of the European Union. Second, they argue that illegal immigration can't be controlled either because it's impossible to properly police. And third, they say that immigration will always be high because immigrant workers do jobs that British people won't do.
Each part of that argument is wrong. Take this question of Europe. Yes, our borders are open to people from other member states in the European Union. But actually, this counts for a small proportion of overall net migration to the UK. In the year up to June 2010, net migration to our country from EU nationals was just 27,000.
That's not to say migration from Europe has been insignificant. Since 2004, when many large eastern European countries joined the EU, more than one million people from those countries have come to live and work in the UK – a huge number. We said back then that transitional controls should have been put in place to restrict the numbers coming over. And now we're in government, if and when new countries join the European Union, transitional controls will be put in place.
But this remains the fact: when it comes to immigration to our country, it's the numbers from outside the EU that really matter. In the year up to June 2010, net migration from nationals of countries outside the EU to the UK totalled 198,000. This is the figure we can more easily control and should control.
Last week, our new immigration cap for people coming here to work from outside the EU came into force. It means for the next twelve months, we will not allow employers to recruit more than 20,700 skilled workers from outside Europe. And we've already shown a cap can work. Last July, we placed interim limits on the number of visas we would give for skilled workers - and this kept the numbers down to under 20,000.
Of course employment is just one of the routes of entry and settlement into this country. Every year tens of thousands of people marry into Britain or join their families here. Now many of these are genuine, loving relationships. But we also know there are abuses of the system.
For a start there are forced marriages taking place in our country, and overseas as a means of gaining entry to the UK. This is the practice where some young British girls are bullied and threatened into marrying someone they don't want to. I've got no time for those who say this is a culturally relative issue – it is wrong, full stop, and we've got to stamp it out.
Then there are just the straightforward sham marriages. Last summer, we ordered the UK Border Agency to clamp down on these and they've had significant success, making 155 arrests. And there was also the shocking case of a vicar who was jailed for staging over 300 sham marriages.
But as well as abuse of the system, there are other problems with the family route. We know, for instance, that some marriages take place when the spouse is very young, and has little or no grasp of English. Again we cannot allow cultural sensitivity to stop us from acting. That's why last November we introduced a requirement for all those applying for a marriage visa to demonstrate a minimum standard of English … and we will defend the age limit of 21 for spouses coming to the UK.
So however sensitive or difficult a subject it may be, we are tightening up the family route. But by far the biggest route for non-EU entrants into this country has been the student visa route. Immigration by students has almost trebled in the past decade. Last year, some 303,000 visas were issued overseas for study in the UK.
But this isn't the end of the story. Because a lot of those students bring people with them to this country … husbands, wives, children. Indeed, last year, 32,000 visas were issued to the dependents of students. Again, many of these applications are for legitimate students doing legitimate courses with legitimate dependents coming over with them. But we know that some of these student applications are bogus, and in turn their dependents are bogus.
Consider this: a sample of 231 visa applications for the dependents of students found that only twenty-five percent of them were genuine dependents. The others? Some were clearly gaming the system and had no genuine or loving relationship with the student. Others we just couldn't be sure about.
The whole system was out of control – and we're now getting to grips with it. We're targeting bogus colleges that offer sham courses. We're making sure that anyone studying a degree-level course has a proper grasp of the English language. We're saying that only postgraduate students can bring dependents.
And we're making sure that if people come over here to study, they should be studying not working … and that when they've finished their studies, they go home unless they are offered a graduate-level skilled job, with a minimum salary.
Taken together, we estimate that these proposals will cut the number of student visas issued by around 80,000 a year. So across all the main routes of entry to Britain – work, family, education – we are taking action, simultaneously. And the key word here is 'simultaneously'.
As the Home Secretary has said, controlling immigration by clamping down on one route alone is "like squeezing a balloon … Push down work visas and the number of student visas will shoot up. Clamp down on student visas and family visas will spring up."
For years, people have been playing the system, exploiting the easiest routes of entry to the UK. Now, because of what we're doing, this country finally has consistent controls right across the immigration system.
Permanent settlement
But as I said in a speech in opposition, what matters most is not who comes into the country but who stays. Of course there are fair and legitimate reasons for people who arrive here temporarily to stay here permanently. But the figures clearly suggest that many gain temporary entry into the UK with no plans to leave. More than a fifth of students who entered Britain in 2004 were still here five years later – and many were supposed to be coming to study short courses.
But the most significant route to permanent settlement is the economic migration route. Last year, 84,000 people who initially came on a work visa got the right to settle here. I want Britain to continue to attract the best workers. But it cannot be right that people coming to fill short-term skills gaps can stay long-term.
As the Cross-Party Balanced Migration Group has argued, it is essential we break that link between temporary visas and permanent settlement.
They are right – that's what this Government is determined to do … and we will consult on how best to proceed on this in the coming months.
Illegal immigration
So this is the progress we are making on cutting legal immigration and clamping down on the abuse of legitimate entry routes. And we are cracking down on illegal immigration too. This is a question of fairness – yes, to the British people … but also to those who have been shipped over here against their will, kept as slaves and forced to work horrendous hours.
So as part of our National Crime Agency, we are establishing a proper border policing command which will crack down on people smuggling. And because of better technology and closer working with the French, we have managed to cut the number of people identified trying to cross the Channel illegally by two thirds last year.
At the same time as stopping illegal immigrants coming to Britain, we are doing something about those who are already here. Two nationwide campaigns targeting illegal migrants have resulted in 1400 arrests, 330 prosecutions and 260 removals. And in the six months to the end of February, we collected some £3.6m in fines from employers of illegal workers.
What's more, we're closing the loophole that has allowed people who have worked here illegally to get unemployment benefits. Estimates suggest that as many as 155,000 illegal workers might be able to do this … with some eligible to claim over £5,000 in employment seekers allowance – each year.
That's wrong - and we're stopping it. We're making sure that only people who have the right to work here can claim benefits. And we also recently announced that anyone who owes money to the NHS will be refused entry to the UK until they have paid back their debts.
So across border control, health policy, benefits policy … we are taking decisive action to close the gaps that for too long have allowed people to come here illegally and to stay here illegally.
Who will do these jobs?
So we can control both legal and illegal immigration. What is required is political will and the drive to make sure this agenda runs right across government.
But the third argument put forward by those who say we can't control immigration is that immigration is not just a problem of supply but of demand. Put simply, immigration will always be high because British people won't do the jobs migrant workers do.
I can see why this argument is made. Since 1997, the number of people in work in our economy has gone up by some 2.5 million. And of this increase, around 75% was accounted for by foreign-born workers … many of whom were employed to clean offices, serve in restaurants or work on building sites. At the same time we have had persistently, eye-wateringly high numbers of British born people stuck on welfare.
But let's be clear about what our conclusions should be from this. This is not a case of 'immigrants coming over here and taking our jobs'. The fact is – except perhaps in the very short-term – there are not a fixed number of jobs in our economy. If one hundred migrant workers come into the country, they don't simply displace job opportunities for a hundred British citizens. Of course they take up vacancies that are available, but they also come and create wealth and new jobs.
The real issue is this: migrants are filling gaps in the labour market left wide open by a welfare system that for years has paid British people not to work. That's where the blame lies – at the door of our woeful welfare system, and the last government who comprehensively failed to reform it.
So immigration and welfare reform are two sides of the same coin. Put simply, we will never control immigration properly unless we tackle welfare dependency. That's another powerful reason why this government is undertaking the biggest shake-up of the welfare system for generations … making sure that work will always pay … and ending the option of living a life on the dole when a life in work is possible.
Economy
Take all these actions together, and I believe we are proving that we can control immigration.
But there's another group of people I want to take on. The ones who accept we can control immigration, but have doubts about what our reforms will mean. The first thing they say is: these policies will deny British business of the talent they need to succeed. That's plain wrong. Nothing – nothing – is more important to this government than growing our economy, creating jobs and prosperity across our country.
That's why far from simply salami-slicing numbers coming here with no thought to the impact that will have on business, we have thought incredibly carefully about how we can select and attract the world's brightest to our shores.
This was something the last government comprehensively failed to do. Yes, they introduced a points-based system for immigration, where people were admitted to our country according to the levels of skills they had … but only after being repeatedly called to do so by the Conservative party.
Yet once they put this in place, they failed to properly control it and effectively manage it. For example, tier one visas were supposed to be reserved for only the highest skilled migrants. But the evidence shows almost a third of people who came over on one of these visas were not employed in highly skilled jobs. Some were found stacking shelves in supermarkets or driving taxis – and that's if they were employed at all.
Tier two visas were supposed to be reserved for skilled jobs such as engineers. But again, these visas were abused and misused. In one case, an applicant applied as an "elite chef" for a fried chicken shop. The main qualifying criterion was the rate of pay. So in this case, his sister, who owned the shop decided to pay him exactly the amount that allowed him to qualify. There was nothing the authorities could do and he was allowed in.
So it has fallen to this government to sort out the system – and we are completely changing the way it works so it is truly geared to the needs of our economy. We are reforming tier one, to make sure that it is genuinely a route only for the best. As part of that package of reform, we are introducing a new route for people of exceptional talent – like scientists, academics and artists. And we are introducing a new entrepreneur visa, to roll out the red carpet for anyone who has a great business idea and serious investment.
We are also reforming tier two visas. Business leaders have told us that as a country, we should prioritise skilled tier two, workers with a job offer rather than highly-skilled tier one workers without a job offer. So that's what we're doing.
For the coming year, even as we have reduced the number of economic migrants overall by seven thousand, we have actually increased the number of tier two visas available. And we have also raised the skills level so it is only open to graduate-level occupations - and excludes other jobs like careworkers and cooks. What's more, we have exempted what are called 'intra-company transfers' from the limit while raising standards at the same time … so firms can still move their employees around the world, but not to fill permanent jobs that could be done by UK workers.
So I completely reject the idea that our new immigration rules will damage our economy.
Universities
The second thing some say is that our policies on student visas will damage our universities. Again, let me make clear: this government will do nothing to harm Britain's status as a magnet for the world's best students. That's why with us, if you're good at your subject, can speak English and have been offered a place on a course at a trusted institution – you will be able to get a visa to study here.
Put another way, Britain's universities are free to market themselves globally saying: "You can come and study here at some of the finest institutions anywhere in the world – and you can stay and work in a graduate job after you leave."
That makes our country a hugely attractive destination for genuine students who genuinely want to study abroad. What we don't want is for this to be a hugely attractive destination for people who only want a passage to Britain. So we are cracking down on the abuses of the system.
In recent years there has also grown up a thriving industry of bogus colleges, providing bogus qualifications as cover for bogus visas. Of the 744 private colleges on the UK Border Agency sponsor register in January, only 131 had attained highly trusted sponsor status.
Yet, as of mid-January this year, the 613 private colleges who are not "highly trusted" have been able to sponsor 280,000 students between them. The potential for abuse is clearly enormous.
Indeed, we have been looking into the practice of some so-called colleges. In one case, students were sent off to so-called work placements in locations up to 280 miles away from the college where they were supposed to be studying on a regular basis.
In another, students were found working in 20 different locations and undertaking no study time whatsoever. In yet another case, there were 2 lecturers for 940 students.
Want to know how ridiculous things have got? An Indian organisation which helps people get student visas has put up a massive billboard in that country. It's got a picture of London bus and the words "get a free ride to the UK" emblazoned across it.
Clearly, we cannot – and should not – put up with any of this. That's why we're getting to grips with the abuse and that's why I reject the idea that our policy will damage our universities.
It really is simple: if you're a genuine academic institution – you have nothing to worry about. But if you're not, you do – and I make no apology for that.
Conclusion
What I have set out today is a sober, comprehensive and effective plan to cut immigration, and cut it substantially. Sober because we come to this debate clear-headed about not only the benefits of immigration … but also its impact on our public services, communities and society. Comprehensive because we are leaving no stone unturned, taking action across all routes of entry to our country. And effective – because we are doing all this in a way that strengthens our economy and enhances the status of our universities.
This time last year, we said we would listen to people's concerns and get immigration under control. Today I can confidently say that we are getting there.
If we take the steps set out today, and deal with all the different avenues of migration, legal and illegal, then levels of immigration can return to where they were in the 1980s and 90s, a time when immigration was not a front rank political issue. And I believe that will mean net migration to this country will be in the order of tens of thousands each year, not the hundreds of thousands every year that we have seen over the last decade.
Yes, Britain will always be open to the best and brightest from around the world and those fleeing persecution. But with us, our borders will be under control and immigration will be at levels our country can manage. No ifs. No buts. That's a promise we made to the British people. And it's a promise we are keeping.
-----------------------
David Cameron veut limiter l'arrivée d'étrangers
-----------------
Immigration speech was a dog-whistle for the right
David Cameron's tough pronouncements on immigration mask policies that harm the poorest and most vulnerable
MAS ESTÃO FEITOS.É QUE EM PORTUGAL AS ESCOLAS NÃO SÃO SEF E COMO A COISA AQUI JÁ NÃO DÁ A RAPAZIADA FAZ UMA CURTA PARAGEM DE DESCANSO PARA A EUROPA DOS BONS SUBSÍDIOS...
PS
ESPERO QUE ESSES "ALUNOS" DESAPARECIDOS ASSIM DE REPENTE NÃO CONTEM PARA O "ABANDONO ESCOLAR"...
QUE VENHAM PARA O MELHOR ACOLHIMENTO DO MUNDO...QUE ESTARÃO QUASE EM CASA.ISTO É FALIDOS...
L'Europe se raidit face à l'afflux d'immigrants
Mots clés : Immigration, EUROPE, FRANCE, ITALIE
Par Jean-Jacques Mevel
« Paris utilisera tous les moyens de droit pour faire appliquer les textes », a affirmé Claude Guéant devant les ministres de l'Intérieur de l'UE réunis lundi à Luxembourg.
« Paris utilisera tous les moyens de droit pour faire appliquer les textes », a affirmé Claude Guéant devant les ministres de l'Intérieur de l'UE réunis lundi à Luxembourg. Crédits photo : GEORGES GOBET/AFP
L'Allemagne et les voisins de l'Italie, emboîtant le pas de la France, envisagent des contrôles renforcés aux frontières.
La vigilance s'accroît mais la désunion menace l'Europe sans frontières de Schengen. L'Allemagne et les voisins de l'Italie, emboîtant le pas de la France, laissent prévoir à leur tour des contrôles renforcés pour interdire leur territoire aux 20.000 Tunisiens que Rome veut doter d'un sésame européen.
L'immigration d'Afrique du Nord et, surtout, la controverse sur les permis de séjour distribués par l'Italie aux clandestins débarqués dans l'île de Lampedusa ont empoisonné le débat entre les vingt-sept ministres de l'Intérieur réunis lundi à Luxembourg. Le gouvernement de Silvio Berlusconi, loin d'obtenir l'élan de sympathie espéré de ses partenaires, s'est retrouvé isolé et menacé d'un cordon sanitaire s'il persiste à se délester du problème sur ses voisins.
«Nous avions demandé de la solidarité et l'Europe nous a répondu: débrouillez-vous tout seuls!, a lâché, ulcéré, le ministre italien Roberto Maroni devant la presse. Je me demande si cela a encore un sens de faire partie de l'Union européenne. Mieux vaut être seul qu'en mauvaise compagnie…»
Accord de façade
Signal du raidissement à l'intérieur de l'UE, Claude Guéant a martelé que Paris utilisera «tous les moyens de droit» pour faire appliquer les textes et renvoyer de l'autre côté de la frontière les migrants tunisiens en situation irrégulière. «Si les conditions ne sont pas remplies lors des vérifications de la police française, la France est en droit de faire réadmettre par l'Italie la personne qui ne les remplit pas, assure le ministre de l'Intérieur. C'est précisément ce que nous allons faire.»
Soixante-douze heures après avoir affiché un accord de façade à Milan, Claude Guéant et Roberto Maroni campent sur leurs divisions. Le ministre français a dénoncé lundi la délivrance de permis italiens qui «ne sont pas en stricte conformité avec l'Europe de Schengen». Il vient de décider la mobilisation d'une compagnie de CRS supplémentaire «pour des contrôles serrés et extrêmement vigilants» près de la frontière, dans les gares et les aéroports. Depuis un mois, précise-t-il, 2800 Tunisiens ont été interpellés en provenance d'Italie et 1700 renvoyés dans ce pays.
Risque d'explosion
À demi-mots, d'autres Européens ont fait savoir lundi à l'Italie qu'ils sont prêts à rétablir sans délai des contrôles frontaliers afin d'endiguer le flot, plutôt que de laisser le public s'enflammer contre l'immigration et faire exploser du même coup l'espace sans frontière de Schengen. «Introduire de nouveaux contrôles n'est peut-être pas dans l'intérêt de l'Europe, a averti le ministre allemand Hans-Peter Friedrich. Mais nous sommes prêts à le faire si nécessaire.»
L'Autriche, par la voix de la ministre Maria Fekter, s'inquiète, elle aussi, de l'effet en retour dans l'opinion. «Laisser entrer des gens qui ne peuvent se nourrir par leurs propres moyens, qui ne peuvent prouver qu'ils ont des ressources ne ferait que préparer le terrain à la criminalité et, en tant que responsable de la sécurité, je ne peux l'autoriser», dit-elle. La Suisse, extérieure à l'UE mais intégrée à l'espace Schengen, abonde dans le même sens. Elle vient de renvoyer en Italie plusieurs dizaines de migrants tunisiens.
Mots clés : Immigration, EUROPE, FRANCE, ITALIE
Par Jean-Jacques Mevel
« Paris utilisera tous les moyens de droit pour faire appliquer les textes », a affirmé Claude Guéant devant les ministres de l'Intérieur de l'UE réunis lundi à Luxembourg.
« Paris utilisera tous les moyens de droit pour faire appliquer les textes », a affirmé Claude Guéant devant les ministres de l'Intérieur de l'UE réunis lundi à Luxembourg. Crédits photo : GEORGES GOBET/AFP
L'Allemagne et les voisins de l'Italie, emboîtant le pas de la France, envisagent des contrôles renforcés aux frontières.
La vigilance s'accroît mais la désunion menace l'Europe sans frontières de Schengen. L'Allemagne et les voisins de l'Italie, emboîtant le pas de la France, laissent prévoir à leur tour des contrôles renforcés pour interdire leur territoire aux 20.000 Tunisiens que Rome veut doter d'un sésame européen.
L'immigration d'Afrique du Nord et, surtout, la controverse sur les permis de séjour distribués par l'Italie aux clandestins débarqués dans l'île de Lampedusa ont empoisonné le débat entre les vingt-sept ministres de l'Intérieur réunis lundi à Luxembourg. Le gouvernement de Silvio Berlusconi, loin d'obtenir l'élan de sympathie espéré de ses partenaires, s'est retrouvé isolé et menacé d'un cordon sanitaire s'il persiste à se délester du problème sur ses voisins.
«Nous avions demandé de la solidarité et l'Europe nous a répondu: débrouillez-vous tout seuls!, a lâché, ulcéré, le ministre italien Roberto Maroni devant la presse. Je me demande si cela a encore un sens de faire partie de l'Union européenne. Mieux vaut être seul qu'en mauvaise compagnie…»
Accord de façade
Signal du raidissement à l'intérieur de l'UE, Claude Guéant a martelé que Paris utilisera «tous les moyens de droit» pour faire appliquer les textes et renvoyer de l'autre côté de la frontière les migrants tunisiens en situation irrégulière. «Si les conditions ne sont pas remplies lors des vérifications de la police française, la France est en droit de faire réadmettre par l'Italie la personne qui ne les remplit pas, assure le ministre de l'Intérieur. C'est précisément ce que nous allons faire.»
Soixante-douze heures après avoir affiché un accord de façade à Milan, Claude Guéant et Roberto Maroni campent sur leurs divisions. Le ministre français a dénoncé lundi la délivrance de permis italiens qui «ne sont pas en stricte conformité avec l'Europe de Schengen». Il vient de décider la mobilisation d'une compagnie de CRS supplémentaire «pour des contrôles serrés et extrêmement vigilants» près de la frontière, dans les gares et les aéroports. Depuis un mois, précise-t-il, 2800 Tunisiens ont été interpellés en provenance d'Italie et 1700 renvoyés dans ce pays.
Risque d'explosion
À demi-mots, d'autres Européens ont fait savoir lundi à l'Italie qu'ils sont prêts à rétablir sans délai des contrôles frontaliers afin d'endiguer le flot, plutôt que de laisser le public s'enflammer contre l'immigration et faire exploser du même coup l'espace sans frontière de Schengen. «Introduire de nouveaux contrôles n'est peut-être pas dans l'intérêt de l'Europe, a averti le ministre allemand Hans-Peter Friedrich. Mais nous sommes prêts à le faire si nécessaire.»
L'Autriche, par la voix de la ministre Maria Fekter, s'inquiète, elle aussi, de l'effet en retour dans l'opinion. «Laisser entrer des gens qui ne peuvent se nourrir par leurs propres moyens, qui ne peuvent prouver qu'ils ont des ressources ne ferait que préparer le terrain à la criminalité et, en tant que responsable de la sécurité, je ne peux l'autoriser», dit-elle. La Suisse, extérieure à l'UE mais intégrée à l'espace Schengen, abonde dans le même sens. Elle vient de renvoyer en Italie plusieurs dizaines de migrants tunisiens.
ANTICORRUPCIÓN "AMIGA"...
Anticorrupción se opone a que la juez acceda a las 480 actas del Gobierno andaluz
J. M.-A. / I. P. - Sevilla - 15/04/2011
La Fiscalía Anticorrupción ha recurrido el auto de la juez que investiga los expedientes de regulación de empleo (ERE) fraudulentos en el que ordenó a la Junta andaluza la entrega de las 480 actas de los Consejos de Gobierno desde 2001 para su custodia. Estas actas, que contienen las decisiones de la última década del Gobierno andaluz, descansan desde hace una semana en un armario de seguridad de los juzgados a la espera de que la juez Mercedes Alaya dé un paso sobre el conflicto jurisdiccional planteado por la Junta.
OI OU METEM JÁ OS CORRUPTOS NA CADEIA OU VÃO FALIR DE SEGUIDA...PORQUE OS INTERNACIONALISTAS SALVADORES DO PLANETA PRIMEIRO SALVAM-SE A ELES PRÓPRIOS...
J. M.-A. / I. P. - Sevilla - 15/04/2011
La Fiscalía Anticorrupción ha recurrido el auto de la juez que investiga los expedientes de regulación de empleo (ERE) fraudulentos en el que ordenó a la Junta andaluza la entrega de las 480 actas de los Consejos de Gobierno desde 2001 para su custodia. Estas actas, que contienen las decisiones de la última década del Gobierno andaluz, descansan desde hace una semana en un armario de seguridad de los juzgados a la espera de que la juez Mercedes Alaya dé un paso sobre el conflicto jurisdiccional planteado por la Junta.
OI OU METEM JÁ OS CORRUPTOS NA CADEIA OU VÃO FALIR DE SEGUIDA...PORQUE OS INTERNACIONALISTAS SALVADORES DO PLANETA PRIMEIRO SALVAM-SE A ELES PRÓPRIOS...
A GUERRILHA IMPORTADA E NACIONALIZADA PELOS EX-DESCOLONIZADORES
Cascais: Vítima de sequestro violento à luz do dia teve de ser assistida
Invadem hospital de catana e pistola
Dois militares da GNR estavam de guarda à entrada principal do Hospital Dr. José de Almeida, em Alcabideche, Cascais, ao início da tarde de ontem, quando os três homens armados com pistola e uma catana roubavam e espancavam, nas traseiras, dois funcionários da unidade. Chegaram de carro, encapuzados, e fugiram com 6400 euros do parque de estacionamento e três computadores portáteis.
Invadem hospital de catana e pistola
Dois militares da GNR estavam de guarda à entrada principal do Hospital Dr. José de Almeida, em Alcabideche, Cascais, ao início da tarde de ontem, quando os três homens armados com pistola e uma catana roubavam e espancavam, nas traseiras, dois funcionários da unidade. Chegaram de carro, encapuzados, e fugiram com 6400 euros do parque de estacionamento e três computadores portáteis.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
COPIADO NO "DESMITOS" COM A DEVIDA VÉNIA
14 Abril 2011
OS VERDADEIROS FACTOS DA CAMPANHA
Nos últimos dias, a "campanha" eleitoral tem sido constituida por um rol de "factos" que só servem para distrair os(as) portugueses(as) daquilo que realmente é essencial. E o que é essencial são os factos. E os factos são indesmentíveis. Não há argumentos que resistam aos arrasadores factos que este governos nos lega. E para quem não sabe, e como demonstro no meu novo livro, os factos que realmente interessam são os seguintes:
1) Na última década, Portugal teve o pior crescimento económico dos últimos 90 anos
2) Temos a pior dívida pública (em % do PIB) dos últimos 160 anos. A dívida pública este ano vai rondar os 100% do PIB
3) Esta dívida pública histórica não inclui as dívidas das empresas públicas (mais 25% do PIB nacional)
4) Esta dívida pública sem precedentes não inclui os 60 mil milhões de euros das PPPs (35% do PIB adicionais), que foram utilizadas pelos nosso governantes para fazer obra (auto-estradas, hospitais, etc.) enquanto se adiava o seu pagamento para os próximos governos e as gerações futuras. As escolas também foram construídas a crédito.
5) Temos a pior taxa de desemprego dos últimos 90 anos (desde que há registos). Em 2005, a taxa de desemprego era de 6,6%. Em 2011, a taxa de desemprego chegou aos 11,1% e continua a aumentar.
6) Temos 620 mil desempregados, dos quais mais de 300 mil estão desempregados há mais de 12 meses
7) Temos a maior dívida externa dos últimos 120 anos.
8) A nossa dívida externa bruta é quase 8 vezes maior do que as nossas exportações
9) Estamos no top 10 dos países mais endividados do mundo em praticamente todos os indicadores possíveis
10) A nossa dívida externa bruta em 1995 era inferior a 40% do PIB. Hoje é de 240% do PIB
11) A nossa dívida externa líquida em 1995 era de 10% do PIB. Hoje é de quase 110% do PIB
12) As dívidas das famílias são cerca de 100% do PIB e 135% do rendimento disponível
13) As dívidas das empresas são equivalente a 150% do PIB
14) Cerca de 50% de todo endividamento nacional deve-se, directa ou indirectamente, ao nosso Estado
15) Temos a segunda maior vaga de emigração dos últimos 160 anos
16) Temos a segunda maior fuga de cérebros de toda a OCDE
17) Temos a pior taxa de poupança dos últimos 50 anos
18) Nos últimos 10 anos, tivemos défices da balança corrente que rondaram entre os 8% e os 10% do PIB
19) Há 1,6 milhões de casos pendentes nos tribunais civis. Em 1995, havia 630 mil. Portugal é ainda um dos países que mais gasta com os tribunais por habitante na Europa
20) Temos a terceira pior taxa de abandono escolar de toda a OCDE (só melhor do que o México e a Turquia)
21) Temos um Estado desproporcionado para o nosso país, um Estado cujo peso já ultrapassa os 50% do PIB
22) As entidades e organismos públicos contam-se aos milhares. Há 349 Institutos Públicos, 87 Direcções Regionais, 68 Direcções-Gerais, 25 Estruturas de Missões, 100 Estruturas Atípicas, 10 Entidades Administrativas Independentes, 2 Forças de Segurança, 8 entidades e sub-entidades das Forças Armadas, 3 Entidades Empresariais regionais, 6 Gabinetes, 1 Gabinete do Primeiro Ministro, 16 Gabinetes de Ministros, 38 Gabinetes de Secretários de Estado, 15 Gabinetes dos Secretários Regionais, 2 Gabinetes do Presidente Regional, 2 Gabinetes da Vice-Presidência dos Governos Regionais, 18 Governos Civis, 2 Áreas Metropolitanas, 9 Inspecções Regionais, 16 Inspecções-Gerais, 31 Órgãos Consultivos, 350 Órgãos Independentes (tribunais e afins), 17 Secretarias-Gerais, 17 Serviços de Apoio, 2 Gabinetes dos Representantes da República nas regiões autónomas, e ainda 308 Câmaras Municipais, 4260 Juntas de Freguesias. Há ainda as Comissões de Coordenação e Desenvolvimento Regional, e as Comunidades Inter-Municipais.
22) Nos últimos anos, nada foi feito para cortar neste Estado omnipresente e despesista, embora já se cortaram salários, já se subiram impostos, já se reduziram pensões e já se impuseram vários pacotes de austeridade aos portugueses. O Estado tem ficado imune à austeridade
Isto não é política. São factos. Factos que andámos a negar durante anos até chegarmos a esta lamentável situação. Ora, se tomarmos em linha de conta estes factos, interessa perguntar: como é que foi possível chegar a esta situação? O que é que aconteceu entre 1995 e 2011 para termos passado termos de "bom aluno" da UE a um exemplo que toda a gente quer evitar? O que é que ocorreu entre 1995 e 2011 para termos transformado tanto o nosso país? Quem conduziu o país quase à insolvência? Quem nada fez para contrariar o excessivo endividamento do país? Quem contribuiu de sobremaneira para o mesmo endividamento com obras públicas de rentabilidade muito duvidosa? Quem fomentou o endividamento com um despesismo atroz? Quem tentou (e tenta) encobrir a triste realidade económica do país com manobras de propaganda e com manipulações de factos? As respostas a estas questões são fáceis de dar, ou, pelo menos, deviam ser. Só não vê quem não quer mesmo ver.
A verdade é que estes factos são obviamente arrasadores e indesmentíveis. Factos irrefutáveis. Factos que, por isso, deviam ser repetidos até à exaustão até que todos nós nos consciencializássemos da gravidade da situação actual. Estes é que deviam ser os verdadeiros factos da campanha eleitoral. As distracções dos últimos dias só servem para desviar as atenções daquilo que é realmente importante.
Posted by Alvaro Santos Pereira at 06:21
Labels: Política, Portugal
OS VERDADEIROS FACTOS DA CAMPANHA
Nos últimos dias, a "campanha" eleitoral tem sido constituida por um rol de "factos" que só servem para distrair os(as) portugueses(as) daquilo que realmente é essencial. E o que é essencial são os factos. E os factos são indesmentíveis. Não há argumentos que resistam aos arrasadores factos que este governos nos lega. E para quem não sabe, e como demonstro no meu novo livro, os factos que realmente interessam são os seguintes:
1) Na última década, Portugal teve o pior crescimento económico dos últimos 90 anos
2) Temos a pior dívida pública (em % do PIB) dos últimos 160 anos. A dívida pública este ano vai rondar os 100% do PIB
3) Esta dívida pública histórica não inclui as dívidas das empresas públicas (mais 25% do PIB nacional)
4) Esta dívida pública sem precedentes não inclui os 60 mil milhões de euros das PPPs (35% do PIB adicionais), que foram utilizadas pelos nosso governantes para fazer obra (auto-estradas, hospitais, etc.) enquanto se adiava o seu pagamento para os próximos governos e as gerações futuras. As escolas também foram construídas a crédito.
5) Temos a pior taxa de desemprego dos últimos 90 anos (desde que há registos). Em 2005, a taxa de desemprego era de 6,6%. Em 2011, a taxa de desemprego chegou aos 11,1% e continua a aumentar.
6) Temos 620 mil desempregados, dos quais mais de 300 mil estão desempregados há mais de 12 meses
7) Temos a maior dívida externa dos últimos 120 anos.
8) A nossa dívida externa bruta é quase 8 vezes maior do que as nossas exportações
9) Estamos no top 10 dos países mais endividados do mundo em praticamente todos os indicadores possíveis
10) A nossa dívida externa bruta em 1995 era inferior a 40% do PIB. Hoje é de 240% do PIB
11) A nossa dívida externa líquida em 1995 era de 10% do PIB. Hoje é de quase 110% do PIB
12) As dívidas das famílias são cerca de 100% do PIB e 135% do rendimento disponível
13) As dívidas das empresas são equivalente a 150% do PIB
14) Cerca de 50% de todo endividamento nacional deve-se, directa ou indirectamente, ao nosso Estado
15) Temos a segunda maior vaga de emigração dos últimos 160 anos
16) Temos a segunda maior fuga de cérebros de toda a OCDE
17) Temos a pior taxa de poupança dos últimos 50 anos
18) Nos últimos 10 anos, tivemos défices da balança corrente que rondaram entre os 8% e os 10% do PIB
19) Há 1,6 milhões de casos pendentes nos tribunais civis. Em 1995, havia 630 mil. Portugal é ainda um dos países que mais gasta com os tribunais por habitante na Europa
20) Temos a terceira pior taxa de abandono escolar de toda a OCDE (só melhor do que o México e a Turquia)
21) Temos um Estado desproporcionado para o nosso país, um Estado cujo peso já ultrapassa os 50% do PIB
22) As entidades e organismos públicos contam-se aos milhares. Há 349 Institutos Públicos, 87 Direcções Regionais, 68 Direcções-Gerais, 25 Estruturas de Missões, 100 Estruturas Atípicas, 10 Entidades Administrativas Independentes, 2 Forças de Segurança, 8 entidades e sub-entidades das Forças Armadas, 3 Entidades Empresariais regionais, 6 Gabinetes, 1 Gabinete do Primeiro Ministro, 16 Gabinetes de Ministros, 38 Gabinetes de Secretários de Estado, 15 Gabinetes dos Secretários Regionais, 2 Gabinetes do Presidente Regional, 2 Gabinetes da Vice-Presidência dos Governos Regionais, 18 Governos Civis, 2 Áreas Metropolitanas, 9 Inspecções Regionais, 16 Inspecções-Gerais, 31 Órgãos Consultivos, 350 Órgãos Independentes (tribunais e afins), 17 Secretarias-Gerais, 17 Serviços de Apoio, 2 Gabinetes dos Representantes da República nas regiões autónomas, e ainda 308 Câmaras Municipais, 4260 Juntas de Freguesias. Há ainda as Comissões de Coordenação e Desenvolvimento Regional, e as Comunidades Inter-Municipais.
22) Nos últimos anos, nada foi feito para cortar neste Estado omnipresente e despesista, embora já se cortaram salários, já se subiram impostos, já se reduziram pensões e já se impuseram vários pacotes de austeridade aos portugueses. O Estado tem ficado imune à austeridade
Isto não é política. São factos. Factos que andámos a negar durante anos até chegarmos a esta lamentável situação. Ora, se tomarmos em linha de conta estes factos, interessa perguntar: como é que foi possível chegar a esta situação? O que é que aconteceu entre 1995 e 2011 para termos passado termos de "bom aluno" da UE a um exemplo que toda a gente quer evitar? O que é que ocorreu entre 1995 e 2011 para termos transformado tanto o nosso país? Quem conduziu o país quase à insolvência? Quem nada fez para contrariar o excessivo endividamento do país? Quem contribuiu de sobremaneira para o mesmo endividamento com obras públicas de rentabilidade muito duvidosa? Quem fomentou o endividamento com um despesismo atroz? Quem tentou (e tenta) encobrir a triste realidade económica do país com manobras de propaganda e com manipulações de factos? As respostas a estas questões são fáceis de dar, ou, pelo menos, deviam ser. Só não vê quem não quer mesmo ver.
A verdade é que estes factos são obviamente arrasadores e indesmentíveis. Factos irrefutáveis. Factos que, por isso, deviam ser repetidos até à exaustão até que todos nós nos consciencializássemos da gravidade da situação actual. Estes é que deviam ser os verdadeiros factos da campanha eleitoral. As distracções dos últimos dias só servem para desviar as atenções daquilo que é realmente importante.
Posted by Alvaro Santos Pereira at 06:21
Labels: Política, Portugal
COM AS ALTERAÇÕES DAS LEIS DO TRABALHO OS INTERNACIONALISTAS VÃO AMARGÁ-LAS
HUELVA | Cáritas alerta de que viven en condiciones 'infrahumanas'
La otra cara del 'oro rojo'
Dos inmigrantes subsaharianos, en una chabola. | E. Domínguez
Más de 2.000 inmigrantes malviven en los asentamientos ilegales de la fresa
Cáritas alerta de las condiciones "infrahumanas" que sufren estas personas
Los campos de fresa de la provincia de Huelva lo son, también, de pobreza y desesperación. El tercer mundo está aquí al lado, a apenas 20 minutos en coche de la ciudad y sus comodidades. Más de 2.000 inmigrantes, según Cáritas, malviven ya en estos alcázares de la miseria que son los asentamientos ilegales. Cada año, con la llegada de la campaña de la fresa, estos poblados trufan de angustia las cercanías de las plantaciones.
La crisis y la consiguiente contratación de braceros nacionales no han conseguido frenar el 'efecto llamada'. Al contrario. El año pasado en esta misma fecha, Cáritas tenía contabilizado unos 1.100 inmigrantes ocupando en los asentamientos ilegales. Hoy, como queda dicho, son más de 2.000, casi un 50 por ciento más.
Uno de los asentamientos más grandes de la decena larga que hay repartidos por pueblos freseros como Lepe, Lucena y Palos se encuentra pegado a Moguer, a la espalda de un polígono industrial en el que abundan las naves de empresas de explotación hortofrutícola.
Ciudad miserable
Casi 300 personas, en su mayoría procedentes de países subsaharianos como Mali o Senegal, han construido una ciudad miserable en la que no existe la más mínima garantía de salubridad: ni agua potable, ni luz eléctrica, ni saneamiento, ni recogida de basuras, ni limpieza, más allá de la que sus habitantes puedan proporcionarse.
Agrupados por países de procedencia, los poblados de los malíes y de los senegaleses se unen por la mezquita-chabola que, mirando a la Meca, han improvisado con palés de madera, alambres y plásticos abandonados de los invernaderos, los mismos materiales con los que ha construido las 'casas', las 'cocinas', las 'salas de estar' y los 'dormitorios'.
El grupo de Senegal, con la hora del almuerzo cercana, se afana en preparar la comida. Hoy, como casi siempre, toca 'tiébou dienne', un guiso típico del país al que le cabe casi todo y que los inmigrantes del asentamiento preparan con pescado, pollo, patatas y verduras conseguidas de los contenedores de basuras o de la solidaridad de la gente.
Vivir de la caridad
Omar Diop, de 21 años y fontanero de profesión, explica que la subsistencia en el poblado depende casi exclusivamente de la caridad de las organizaciones como Cáritas o la Cruz Roja, que acuden con cierta regularidad a prestar la poca ayuda que pueden llevar.
Los habitantes del poblado llevan entre mes y medio y dos meses esperando que alguien les contrate, aunque sólo sea por un jornal. Cada mañana, a las seis, recorren a pie una distancia que puede alcanzar los diez kilómetros hasta los campos de fresa de la comarca. En todo este tiempo solo han encontrado negativas. "Sólo uno de nosotros estuvo un par de días limpiando caballos en una finca cercana", narra Omar. Se da la circunstancia de que algunos de ellos tienen permiso de residencia en vigor.
A Mor Loum, senegalés de 45 años, se lo acaban de denegar. Llegó en cayuco a Tenerife hace ahora un lustro. No ha tenido suerte desde entonces. Es de los pocos al que no le importa mostrar su rostro al fotógrafo. La mayoría se niega, sobre todo por temor a que sus familiares puedan ver en las tremendas condiciones en las que viven, ya que piensan que han conseguido estabilizarse y encontrar trabajo en España.
La solidaridad, desgraciadamente, es limitada. Lo advierte Javier Rodríguez, coordinador del programa de exclusión de Cáritas, quien explica que la organización está "desbordada" por la continua atención que necesitan estas personas.
Universitarios en los asentamientos
Entre los inmigrantes que malviven en los asentamientos abundan los estudiantes universitarios. Es el caso de Adama, malí de 26 años, o de Alí, senegales de 29, ambos estudiantes de Economía en sus países de origen, una carrera que dejaron por la llamada del falso mito del primer mundo.
"En cuanto pueda, me vuelvo a mi país", asegura Alí, quien, a estas alturas de desesperación, tiene muy claro que "ni loco" volvería a España. "Esto es inhumano, no entiendo por qué no nos dan trabajo con la cantidad de fresas que hay que recoger", lamenta mostrando sus papeles en regla.
Cáritas asegura que las contrataciones en origen, que este año han quedado como un instrumento meramente residual, "han hecho mucho daño como sistema", ya que trasmite la idea a los agricultores de que no se puede contratar a inmigrantes que acuden con sus papeles en orden a las plantaciones.
El tiempo pasa despacio en un asentamiento, pero entre la siempre infructuosa caza del jornal, los rezos, la búsqueda de comida y su preparación, y, sobre todo, la contingencia necesaria para la mera supervivencia, los inmigrantes apuran las pocas semanas que le restan a una campaña que, además de riqueza y empleo, también genera miseria y desesperación.
OS INTERNACIONALISTAS QUE DEFENDERAM O IMPÉRIO CÁ DENTRO E POR NOSSA CONTA VÃO SER DESPEDIDOS E SUBSTITUÍDOS PELOS SEUS COITADINHOS.É QUE ESTES FICAM MUITO MAIS BARATINHOS PARA O PATRONATO( O RESTO PAGA O ESTADO) E ASSEGURAM A "COMPETITIVIDADE"...
QUEM COM FERROS MATA, COM FERROS MORRE...
O ALLGARB COM UMA COISA DESTAS MESMO AO LADO PODE E DEVE DORMIR DESCANSADO, COMO ALIÁS SE TEM VISTO...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)