Immigration

News that UK population growth has slowed was relayed with smug solemnity by the BBC.  A Government policy to reduce net migration was unmentioned whilst the mass xenophobia of the Brexit vote was, apparently, the cause.  Staffing of the NHS will collapse whilst fruit and vegetables will rot in the ground in the Fens.  No matter that there are still more than enough people coming in each year to populate a large town and that health and housing provision is not keeping pace.  But that’s enough of Laura and Kamal doom; cut now to the comely Katya in Brussels who dutifully repeats the EU briefing line.  But there is something I spot in her eyes that tells me she knows more than she is letting on – I think she gets the uncomfortable truth faced by the increasingly desperate EU leaders but, presumably, her bosses in the studio won’t let her spell it out?  It is the realisation that simply talking tough about mass migration is no longer enough to ensure political survival.

The Hip 3

In the 70^th Anniversary Year of the foundation of the NHS, the hip attended an appointment with a musculoskeletal Extended Scope Practitioner at a nearby hospital.  On the day, news about the NHS was inescapable: we were told that the institution is the envy of the world yet, paradoxically, no other country appears to have copied out template.  Meantime, Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Front Bench sported outsize badges pledging their religious faith in Health Service.  I have very little relevant experience as a customer.

The hospital was easy to find and there was a large car park which was free to use.  The reception was light and airy and I was directed to Physiotherapy where I arrived 5 minutes early for my appointment.  Having ascertained my credentials, I was asked to take a seat and moments later I was summoned by my Extended Scope Practitioner.  My history was available. The consultation and examination were extremely through – I felt very much at ease and confident that all my signs symptoms, aspirations, and anxieties had been registered.  But another x-ray was necessary.  Pleasingly this was done immediately (though not before carefully checking my name address and date of birth) and I returned to the waiting room about 20 minutes later.  Within seconds I was re-summoned by my man and the consultation continued in light of the new evidence .  The bottom line is that the hip is severely degenerative and that choice on the way forward is mine!  It is here that I voice my only complaint.  I am probably too old-fashioned, but I expected a professional consultant to give me a professional recommendation – something like, “I’ve seen dozens of people like you and my recommendation to maximise the utility of the rest of your life is as follows.”  I was out of luck, perhaps a sign of the nervous legal atmosphere we seem to inhabit these days, but I was granted more time to make my decision.  I’m embarking on a couple of months of physiotherapy support followed by a further consultation to decide the way ahead.  Exactly one hour after arriving at reception I made my way back to the car.  Although I am slightly disappointed that the future is not yet settled, I am very satisfied with the consideration and efficiency with which I have been treated and somewhat buoyed by an increased confidence of an outcome.

I am accumulating relevant experience and so far, so good!

Mushroom v BBC Continues

I feel as though I am beating my head against a brick wall and I intend to take matters further with Ofcom. Meantime, here is my draft reply to the BBC Executive Complaints Unit - any suggestions from readers would be very welcome?

BBC NEWS (10PM) 14 FEBRUARY 2018

Thank you for your letter dated 18 June 2018. Your summary rejection of my complaint was expected and I now intend to refer my case to Ofcom.

I am grateful that you have not returned to the red herring of the Foreign Secretary’s remarks but surprised you still relate back to the “is 40% the same as nearly half” argument which you have previously conceded. Allow me, therefore, a similar indulgence to point out that you could have said, with equal precision, “nearly 60% of our exports go to non-EU countries,” but you chose not to make your point this way. The impartial will draw their own inference.

You admit that your intention was to elucidate a current trend of comparative economic performance. You then used your “current trend” to leave the viewer with the impression that, in future, the UK’s economic performance would continue to diverge, negatively, from that of the EU. You now claim that your choice of data points to support your conclusion “seems to you an eminently reasonable choice.”  Unfortunately, believing something to be reasonable does not, necessarily, make it so, as I argue below.

My case is, which you appear unwilling to address, is that the economic facts did not support your conclusion.  Indeed, in your desire to create an editorial impression, you deceptively manipulated data and graphical representations. Specifically, by ignoring contrary information (which must have been available to you) and exaggerating the scale of your graphical representation, to “elucidate your current trend,” you left your viewers with the misleading impression that leaving the EU would result in an increasing disparity of economic growth over future years. The facts do not support this scare-mongering generalisation.  Firstly, the economic truth is that the recent (last year or two) outperformance of the rest of the EU over the UK in isolation is insignificant in the larger picture of the UK’s outperformance of the rest of the EU during the whole period since 2007/8 – the “eminently reasonable” period you chose to make your editorial point. Secondly, there are clear but temporary reasons for the recent apparent EU surge. The Bank of England has done a great deal to tighten money and credit since 2017, attempting to return to more normal conditions, and it is not surprising that the UK economy has slowed accordingly. Similar action is not being pursued in the Eurozone where zero interest rates and vast tranches of quantitative easing continue to provide a temporary, but unsustainable, stimulus to those economies. You did not mention this vital caveat.  Moreover, German growth forecasts have just been slashed by about 25% - a trend which was already apparent to those who wished to see it at the time of your broadcast. Finally, Ahmed resorted to exaggerating the scale of the graphic to inflate the impression of divergence. In sum, neither your argument nor your visual aids justified the impression gave.

As I have said, believing something to be reasonable does not make it so, no matter how much the BBC would wish it to be compatible with their mental model of the circumstances.  Herein, it seems to me, lies the BBC problem of being objective in debates where an unconscious bias has already decided the “right” answer.