This seems like a pretty poor bit of journalism. The article points out some accusations but does not effectively refute all of them.

Taking a few of these one at a time:

Catching all our carp: They say it's "short on fact" but is it? How do we know? The facts they present (the views of fishery owners) point to it being a problem. What other evidence is available? The author dismises the claims of the few people who have any real info on this subject without stating any reason. I just looked at a carp fishing forum and the members seems to agree that it is a problem. I wonder why we should not believe the people who would know?

Taking all our benefits: "A closer look however, reveals that well over half of this amount is child benefit, which can be claimed by anyone with a child". So what? That is a benefit that is going to new EU members out of the national budget. I take it this means that the £145m figure is correct then? I don't know the veracity of the other figures so some of the other points may have some weight. They might not be taking ALL out benefits but they are taking some.

Stealing our unwanted clothes: This is something I do have experience of. Every couple of weeks I get this leaflet. It looks like a charity leaflet, just like the real ones asking for donations. But instead of it being a charity, it's a firm selling the clothes to E.Europeans. Neither I, nor the Guardian writer, know if they are "poor" by any particular definition. I didn't realise this was not a charity initially and did feel a bit cheated that I'd given a firm free product rather than taking it to Oxfam like I normally do. Again what is the point they are making here? Adding "whatever next?" is emotional byplay.


Eating our swans: I don't know about this. Sounds like there was an incident of some swan eating. I don't know how it was reported. The writer doesn't give us the full wording so one cannot comment

Income tax: If Brown tells us there are ""schemes that have been marketed right across eastern Europe" which encouraged individuals from those countries to set up as companies before they came to Britain in order to avoid paying income tax" then maybe there are? He was the Chancellor. If this is the case the the supposed financial benefits of foreign workers would be substantially less. If it's less than the additional costs then this would be a bad thing. The auther offers no figures and no refutation other than a glib and loaded quip about "they come over here...". Pathetic journalism IMO.


Increased unemployment: "flood of workers from eastern Europe" - well yes. Just a few more than the predicted 13,000 - 650,000? or more. No-one really knows. There are 250,000 kids of school age alone which points to a fairly high figure I guess. The government are saying that a large number of the jobs they created have been taken. No sure if this is something to be concerned about but clearly 100's of 1000's of people in work must have an effect on job availability?

Bad service in restaurants: I agree. When waiters cannot understand what you want it's very annoying. It's the bar owners fault. It's something I've come across a fair bit that almost never happened before. I don't blame immigrants themselves but it happens all the same.

Drink driving: Again no counter-figures to refute the Mail's claims so do we know it's true or not? The snipe at the scottish sterotype doesn't offer much illumination.