BRFR Cake Stop 'breaking news' miscellany

[Pblakeney]

The AI report BT posted was more or less the same as the FT article, which more or less tells me the source material is more or less the same (sorry to be all Tim Hartford about this).

But I still would like to know how this breaks down. I think it will include the costs to manage those placements in addition to the placements themselves, and so include a big chunk of local authority social work costs.

May as well go to the source then, although it doesn't give a cost breakdown.
"8 The cost of placing children in residential care has risen significantly in recent years. Between 2019-20 and 2023-24, local authority spending on looked-after children increased by 54% to £8.1 billion in 2023-24, £1.5 billion more than the annual budget. This contributed significantly to local authorities’ wider financial pressures. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of upper-tier councils identified spending across children’s services and education as the most substantial cause of short-term financial pressures in 2024. Most of the cost increase relates to residential care spend almost doubling to £3.1 billion, although the number of children in residential care increased by only 10% between March 2020 and March 2024. In 2023-24, local authorities spent an average of £318,400 per child in a children’s home, equivalent to £6,100 per week. The Local Government Association has identified placements costing up to £63,000 a week. DfE has described children’s social care as financially unsustainable (paragraphs 1.6, 1.12 and 1.14, and Figure 4)."

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Managing-childrens-residential-care-summary.pdf

 

[TailWindHome]

Matt Goodwin/ Reform

Yikes

 

[briantrumpet]

Matt Goodwin/ Reform

Yikes

View attachment 15290

I'm assuming that's wrong in pretty much every aspect.

 

[Pross]

I'm assuming that's wrong in pretty much every aspect.

Yep, we're not bringing in Deliveroo drivers - they become Deliveroo drivers.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

I'm assuming that's wrong in pretty much every aspect.

The actual numbers are correct but as you may have guessed, the presentation is designed to create a certain narrative. India and Pakistan are in the top 5 non EU nationals immigrating to the UK. It neglects to mention China, Nepal and Nigeria being the other three (no Afghanistan). Immigrants from Pakistan are overwhelmingly students, not workers.

It also neglects to highlight that immigration numbers are falling year on year and emigration numbers of brits are generally stable.

It is the basic racist framing, let's shift away from Asylum/boat crossings as we have banged that drum to death and start blaming all brown people from certain countries for all our woes. Now latest immigration stats have shown a large decline, the racist grifters have to change tack to earn their clicks!