Today saw the release of the
first data sets from the 2011 census
by the Office for National Statistics,
and whereas early indications were that the population of England and
Wales would have surged
by more than three million, the actual figure turned out to be higher
than officially expected: an increase of 3.7 million. This was the
fastest rate of population increase measured since the first census was
taken in 1801, and takes the average population density for England to
407 people per square kilometre. If we exclude the essentially urban
microstates of Monaco, the Vatican and Malta, England is now the most
densely populated country in Europe, closely followed by the Netherlands
at 404 per square kilometre. This increase is alarming, and all three
of the parties of government that have presided over this increase must
acknowledge responsibility for this unacceptable de facto open borders
policy (see a statement by
David Willetts in December last year advocating an influx of labour).
The data thus far released deal only with "age
and sex, and
occupied households estimates for England and for Wales". The more
interesting data on ethnicity and religion it would seem will not be
forthcoming for quite some time. What is clear though is that the vast
proportion of the population increase will have been driven by
immigration and higher fertility amongst sections of the
immigrant-descended population. An alarming indication of what to expect
is provided by the identities of the two local authorities with the
fastest population growth rates in England: Tower Hamlets and Newham. In
2001, Newham had the second
highest proportion of Muslims in the UK at 24.3% of the total, whereas Tower Hamlets, according to 2010 estimates,
was 36.4% Muslim. Likewise,
Bradford has displayed an increase significantly higher than the national norm. What clearer illustration of demographic Islamisation could be provided?
The
census has demonstrated
that England has suffered disproportionately from mass immigration,
with the increase in its population accounting for 3.56 million of the
3.72 million total. This is not only undesirable, but completely
unsustainable and reckless. The natural dynamics of our native
population can be seen in the ONS graph below, for if we look at the
figures for 1971 to 1981, we see a slight decline. This is the
population trajectory towards which we should be aiming, considering the
gross overpopulation of our country. Irrespective of the figures contained in the census, there is one overriding certainty: they represent a significant underestimate of the true figure. Many will not have bothered to complete the census return, including obviously those who have arrived here illegally. What their numbers are, we cannot hazard to say with any degree of accuracy, but at a minimum we should reckon upon a million illegal immigrants.
According to one report that appeared in
The Independent in 2007, senior and reliable sources claimed that the UK population was already between 77 and 80 million. The latter figure certainly tallied with the reckoning of one of the country's large supermarket chains.
Mass immigration has contributed towards an absurd situation in which we are told repeatedly
that even at a time of extensive flooding we need to cut down on our
domestic water consumption, and that compulsory metering is the answer.
Then there is the
pressure on our housing stock, for even in Wales for example, a story ran on the
BBC website two days ago
revealing that planners project that Cardiff's population will rise by a
quarter by 2026 and have thus allocated land for the construction of
45,000 new homes. If that is to happen in Wales, what will happen in
England? Our countryside, with its distinctive landscape, its farms and
wildlife are under threat from our leaders' addiction to population
growth. What of the permanent phenomenon of mass unemployment that
bedevils our country, and of the underemployment of many graduates? Are
these concerns to be ignored as irrelevant and "unscientific", swept
aside by an oligrarchic elite that cares not about the welfare of the
people it claims to represent? Probably.
England, of course, is not the only country to be buckling under the weight of immigration originating predominantly from outside of Europe, for the
arrival of a vast number of illegal immigrants from countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somalia, is in Greece placing an intense strain upon a state and people already in grave crisis.
As to the reporting of these initial census results, the BBC, as is its wont, is not referring to "immigration", but to "migration"; this difference in linguistic usage being quite intentional, "migration" being employed with a view to making this unprecedented phenomenon appear to be in the natural order of things, and to be legitimate. It is in fact, neither. The most objective reporting of these results by a well-known body is likely to be forthcoming from
Migration Watch.The Balkanisation of our country continues apace.
UPDATE: For the
2011 Census results relating to the Muslim population, click here.
England's high-density housing: we deserve better
