Brexit hits speed bump as court rules lawmakers must get say

[Johnyo]

The Freedom of Movement is conditional and as a directive it is up to the national states to how it is implemented into national laws. If in the Uk it is more generous than the actual directive requirements then that would be as the result of UK parliament

Correct. If Spain or France has the right to refuse other EU nationals from living on benefits on their beaches so had the U.K. The right to refuse benefits is down to each countries parliament. Blame the Torys not the EU.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[HauptmannUK]

13 minutes ago, gmac said:

Not that either.  I am talking about the EU nationals coming to the UK because they have heard that they can get free handouts from the state not Brits moving the other way.  Yes the freedom to move is currently there but other EU countries are not so foolish in giving handouts to every  immigrant that arrives with his hands held out for cash.

The UK has a lot of lattitude in how it handles EU nationals and benefits. 

However I don't believe that many EU nationals come to the UK for benefits. I think that most come to work.

I think that there IS a problem with UK companies preferentially recruiting EU nationals over UK citizens because they feel that they can get somebody younger/keener/cheaper/better qualified. There is also a problem with illegal non-EU migrants and asylum applicants (who shouldn't be working) taking jobs in the Black Economy.  All of this has generated pressures in the lower-income levels of the economy. The middle and higher income strata have by and large not suffered (maybe even benefitted from this situation).

However, I think this issue is more as a result of UK government policy than it is to EU policy. In contrast to the other richer EU nations, the UK has pursued a very laissez- faire attitude to employment regulation. No national identity card system, no border exit checks and sloppy enforement of already weak employment laws. 

A lot of what has been going on in the British workplace would be illegal in Germany (I speak from first-hand experience in both countries). 

[Johnyo]

The UK has a lot of lattitude in how it handles EU nationals and benefits. 
However I don't believe that many EU nationals come to the UK for benefits. I think that most come to work.
I think that there IS a problem with UK companies preferentially recruiting EU nationals over UK citizens because they feel that they can get somebody younger/keener/cheaper/better qualified. There is also a problem with illegal non-EU migrants and asylum applicants (who shouldn't be working) taking jobs in the Black Economy.  All of this has generated pressures in the lower-income levels of the economy. The middle and higher income strata have by and large not suffered (maybe even benefitted from this situation).
However, I think this issue is more as a result of UK government policy than it is to EU policy. In contrast to the other richer EU nations, the UK has pursued a very laissez- faire attitude to employment regulation. No national identity card system, no border exit checks and sloppy enforement of already weak employment laws. 
A lot of what has been going on in the British workplace would be illegal in Germany (I speak from first-hand experience in both countries). 

100% agree


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[jpinx]

4 hours ago, HauptmannUK said:

The UK has a lot of lattitude in how it handles EU nationals and benefits. 

However I don't believe that many EU nationals come to the UK for benefits. I think that most come to work.

I think that there IS a problem with UK companies preferentially recruiting EU nationals over UK citizens because they feel that they can get somebody younger/keener/cheaper/better qualified. There is also a problem with illegal non-EU migrants and asylum applicants (who shouldn't be working) taking jobs in the Black Economy.  All of this has generated pressures in the lower-income levels of the economy. The middle and higher income strata have by and large not suffered (maybe even benefitted from this situation).

However, I think this issue is more as a result of UK government policy than it is to EU policy. In contrast to the other richer EU nations, the UK has pursued a very laissez- faire attitude to employment regulation. No national identity card system, no border exit checks and sloppy enforement of already weak employment laws. 

A lot of what has been going on in the British workplace would be illegal in Germany (I speak from first-hand experience in both countries). 

Cameron spent a lot of time trying to get a restriction on incoming numbers from the EU, when really that time should have been spent in tightening up the benefits system and making it a lot less attractive to incomers.  UK would do well to examine the German system which has, as it's most basic requirement, ID cards and a fixed address.  Imagine the outcry from the great British Public if that were to be enforced in UK ?

 

As for the Borders, it's a sad testimony to the incompetence of British Beaurocracy that they can not control movements on and off an island.

 

As I have said many times - what happened to the common sense rules from years ago that made an employer justify employing a foreigner over the local labour? 

 

 

Edited November 13, 2016 by jpinx

[CharlieK]

6 minutes ago, jpinx said:

As for the Borders, it's a sad testimony to the incompetence of British Beaurocracy that they can not control movements on and off an island.

 

I won't argue with an idiot. But the UK cannot control its borders because the EU will not allow it to. It even insists that on Brexit the UK has to accept open borders to trade with the EU!  

Edited November 13, 2016 by CharlieK

[jpinx]

Just now, CharlieK said:

 

I won't argue with an idiot. But the UK cannot control its borders because the EU will not allow it to. It even insists the on Brexit UK has to accept open borders to trade with the EU!  

I'll let the personal slur slide since it takes one to know one, but if you read my post again you will be able to understand that the post was an entire story. Cherry-picking the comments to suit your vitriol is worthy only of the gutter-press hacks. 

 

Controlling the incomers does not only happen at the border, there is meant to be registration and follow-up, which is incredibly ineffective in UK because of the lack of ID cards and registered addresses, and the non-UK ghettos in some of the cities across the country.  France had a similar problem but seems to be getting some progress with clearing the worst offenders.  Thailand does a better job of tracking foreigners within it's borders!

[CharlieK]

5 hours ago, jpinx said:

Someone might know how long an EU national needs to be in employment and paying contributions and taxes before they can stop work and go on the dole?

 

They come to the UK to work not to sign on the dole. unlike their Uk counterparts who prefer the dole to working!

[CharlieK]

3 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Thailand does a better job of tracking foreigners within it's borders!

 

 

[jpinx]

8 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

They come to the UK to work not to sign on the dole. unlike their Uk counterparts who prefer the dole to working!

That is very true, but that is also a product of an over-easy benefits system.  The UK has brought the flood of incomers on itself -- hell mend them !

Edited November 13, 2016 by jpinx

[CharlieK]

Just now, jpinx said:

That is very true, but that is also a product of an over-easy benefits system.  The UK has brought the flood of incomers n itself -- hell mend them !

 

No the UK joined the EU who insist on open borders.

 

They come because they can earn more in the UK than they can in their own country. A Polish doctor earns about £200 per month in Poland in the UK it is a lot more than that. 

[jpinx]

28 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

No the UK joined the EU who insist on open borders.

 

They come because they can earn more in the UK than they can in their own country. A Polish doctor earns about £200 per month in Poland in the UK it is a lot more than that. 

At the time of joining there was no "open borders" policy and far fewer member countries (1972). 

Open borders was an aspect of the Schengen agreement which UK did not join.

Edited November 13, 2016 by jpinx

[jpinx]

32 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

No the UK joined the EU who insist on open borders.

 

They come because they can earn more in the UK than they can in their own country. A Polish doctor earns about £200 per month in Poland in the UK it is a lot more than that. 

Quoting a salary out of context shows a lack of grasp of the true economics.  It needs to be put into the context of the economy of where it is earned.  Imagine quoting the salaries in Thailand and comparing with UK, etc.  We see this all the time from so-called charities saying that a worker in some 3rd world country is earning a small fraction of what his equivalent is earning in USA, etc, but they neglect to say that the cost of living in that 3rd world country is a very small fraction of the same in USA or where-ever.  Apples and Pears anyone??? 

Edited November 13, 2016 by jpinx

[jpinx]

53 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

No the UK joined the EU who insist on open borders.

 

They come because they can earn more in the UK than they can in their own country. A Polish doctor earns about £200 per month in Poland in the UK it is a lot more than that. 

UK is *not* part of the open borders area (Schengen) .. everyone arriving at UK borders is supposedly vetted....

 

The Schengen Agreement is a treaty which led to the creation of Europe's Schengen Area, in which internal border checks have largely been abolished. It was signed on 14 June 1985, near the town of Schengen, Luxembourg, by five of the ten member states of the then European Economic Community. ........ in 1999 they were incorporated into European Union law by the Amsterdam Treaty, while providing opt-outs for the only two EU member states which had remained outside the Area: Ireland and the United Kingdom.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Agreement

Edited November 13, 2016 by jpinx

[jpinx]

More facts -- not opinions -- hopefully to clarify matters a bit more....

 

The UK is not a member of the passport-free Schengen zone, so it retains border controls and checks, and Britain has refused to take part in any EU scheme to reallocate refugees from the war in Syria (though it has separately promised to resettle 20,000 refugees by 2020). Furthermore, immigration from outside of Europe is not affected by Britain’s EU membership.

 

http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2016/03/10/leaving-eu-affect-immigration-britain/

[CharlieK]

ukandeu.ac.uk/the-uk-and-the-schengen-system/

 

Because of the UK’s opt-out from the main part of Schengen, it can still check people coming from the rest of the EU to see if they are entitled to enter the UK or not. Due to EU rules on free movement of people, the UK must admit EU citizens and their family members, unless there is some indication (perhaps in the Schengen Information System) that they are wanted persons or that they are using stolen passports. However, the entry of anyone else into the UK is controlled by UK law. In other words, the UK still controls its borders as regards most non-EU citizens.

[jpinx]

13 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

ukandeu.ac.uk/the-uk-and-the-schengen-system/

 

Because of the UK’s opt-out from the main part of Schengen, it can still check people coming from the rest of the EU to see if they are entitled to enter the UK or not. Due to EU rules on free movement of people, the UK must admit EU citizens and their family members, unless there is some indication (perhaps in the Schengen Information System) that they are wanted persons or that they are using stolen passports. However, the entry of anyone else into the UK is controlled by UK law. In other words, the UK still controls its borders as regards most non-EU citizens.

Yes --  the reality is as clear as mud.  The "EU rules on free movement" that you refer to are some other bit of EU law that was slipped in --  in spite of UK opting out of Schengen..  Yet more proof of the EU's determination to over-ride the wishes of the representative governments of the member countries.

[jpinx]

Another little gem,,,,,

 

... the ‘Canada model’, or it could be China, Singapore, or any country which has a trading relationship with the EU but is not part of the Single Market. Now, you could have far greater control of your borders, and you would not have to accept free movement of people. But, you would lose access to the Single Market and have to start creating trade arrangement with every single one of the other 27 members of the EU,...

http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2016/03/10/leaving-eu-affect-immigration-britain/

 

 

So - -the EU is trying - on behalf of all it's members -  to do a deal with USA , Canada, (amongst others) which will *not* include any free movement clause, but it is saying such a deal is not available between all EU countries and an independent UK.  That seems a bit two-faced.......

Edited November 13, 2016 by jpinx

[Loeilad]

7 hours ago, gmac said:

Not that either.  I am talking about the EU nationals coming to the UK because they have heard that they can get free handouts from the state not Brits moving the other way.  Yes the freedom to move is currently there but other EU countries are not so foolish in giving handouts to every  immigrant that arrives with his hands held out for cash.

You really need to get you facts straight before you blurt out on stuff like that. If you move witihin the EU you are entitled to the same benefits as anyone - the fact is that UK benefits are actually a alot LESS than in other countries and in reality people movee form UK a lot and receive very good benefits from the countries thay move to.

 

you need to check you facts and see who's moving where and why....they move to UK to WORK and UK makes a profit out of the taxes they pay - of course this was all glossed over by the leave campaign and their media who simply fed lies - and you appear to have swallowed the lot.....

 

[jpinx]

29 minutes ago, Loeilad said:

You really need to get you facts straight before you blurt out on stuff like that. If you move witihin the EU you are entitled to the same benefits as anyone - the fact is that UK benefits are actually a alot LESS than in other countries and in reality people movee form UK a lot and receive very good benefits from the countries thay move to.

 

you need to check you facts and see who's moving where and why....they move to UK to WORK and UK makes a profit out of the taxes they pay - of course this was all glossed over by the leave campaign and their media who simply fed lies - and you appear to have swallowed the lot.....

 

I'd ask both of you to quote references and sources of your information

 

[7by7]

8 hours ago, gmac said:

 

Not quite.  I have no right to live in Thailand, I apply to the immigration department on an annual basis and they allow me to stay here if I have enough money.  EU nationals on the other hand can come to the UK with nothing and expect the state to look after them. 

 

No they can't!

 

They have the right to come to the UK if exercising an economic treaty right;

• student
• jobseeker
• worker, employed or self employed
• living off independent means, e.g. a pension.

They cannot claim benefits straight away; even if they come as a jobseeker.

 

If they enter as a jobseeker and have not found work within three months and have no realistic prospect of doing so they have to leave.

 

If they are working in the UK and then become unemployed they can claim benefits; but cannot become an unreasonable burden upon the state. If after three months they have no realistic prospect of finding work then they have to leave.

 

British nationals have exactly the same rights in other EU states; and approximately 1.8 million of them are currently exercising one of those rights.

 

The ignorance displayed in your post is, I believe, one of the main reasons why the British public made the wrong decision.

[7by7]

From  "4. EEA Nationals" in this Parliamentary briefing paper

Quote

People coming to the United Kingdom from EEA countries5 do not have unrestricted access to UK social security benefits and tax credits.  In May 2004, the legislation governing entitlement to certain benefits and housing assistance was amended so that a person cannot be “habitually resident” unless they have the “right to reside” in the Common Travel Area (the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man or the Republic of Ireland).

 

The “right to reside” test applies to claims for a range of benefits.............

 

Broadly speaking, a person who moves from one EEA country to another has a right to reside in that country if they are economically active, or are able to support themselves.  This applies to people from the “old” EU countries as well as those from the newer accession states. On 30 April 2006, the Rights of Residence Directive 2004/38/EC came into force, giving everyone, including economically inactive people, a right to reside for the first three months; but the UK Government amended the rules on access to benefits to ensure that people who had a right to reside solely on the basis of the new three-month right of residence would not be able to claim benefits for that reason

 

(7by7 emphasis)

 

[Loeilad]

35 minutes ago, jpinx said:

I'd ask both of you to quote references and sources of your information

 

te hallmark of someone who's run out of argument.

If you want to make an assertion, do the research - everyone else knows - it is you who are ill-informed - you should get up to speed with te rest of us - it's tyour responsibility.

[jpinx]

5 minutes ago, Loeilad said:

te hallmark of someone who's run out of argument.

If you want to make an assertion, do the research - everyone else knows - it is you who are ill-informed - you should get up to speed with te rest of us - it's tyour responsibility.

ok -- here's a reference - first one out of the hat - and it contradicts what you appear to be saying...

 

When the costs of living are accounted for, low paid workers in the UK are the second richest in the EU15 after Luxembourg.

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/284

 

 

[Loeilad]

5 minutes ago, jpinx said:

ok -- here's a reference - first one out of the hat - and it contradicts what you appear to be saying...

 

When the costs of living are accounted for, low paid workers in the UK are the second richest in the EU15 after Luxembourg.

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/284

 

 

Oh dear - you really aren't very good at this - probably why you are so ill-informed. firstly I suggested "research" not a "search".

secondly if you don't know the difference then it is unlikely you will ever get up yto speed on this. It also helps if you actually read and understand your little snippets.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Loeilad

[jpinx]

4 minutes ago, Loeilad said:

Oh dear - you really aren't very good at this - probably why you are so ill-informed. firstly I suggested "research" not a "search".

secondly if you don't know the difference then it is unlikely you will ever get up yto speed on this. It also helps if you actually read and understand your little snippets.

I bow to your immense intellect and knowledge of the benefits system in every EU country.  it would be a great service to all of us who need to make an informed decision if you could actually supply some facts.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/10391238/Benefits-in-Europe-country-by-country.html

 

https://fullfact.org/immigration/uks-welfare-system-most-generous-europe/

 

 

Edited November 13, 2016 by jpinx

[Johnyo]

After reading the last 15 comments it becomes clear why Brexit won. The leavers really believed that "them foreigners can just come to our country and live for nothing from my hard earned taxes".

 

Maybe one day they will realise they've been royally screwed by what amounts to nothing more than a power grab by the Tory right to remain in power after their policy's had failed the British people over the last 6 years. The sad thing is the Torys would probably get a landslide victory should there be a general election tomorrow. It will take a good part of a generation for the damage to really show.

[jpinx]

6 minutes ago, Johnyo said:

After reading the last 15 comments it becomes clear why Brexit won. The leavers really believed that "them foreigners can just come to our country and live for nothing from my hard earned taxes".

 

Maybe one day they will realise they've been royally screwed by what amounts to nothing more than a power grab by the Tory right to remain in power after their policy's had failed the British people over the last 6 years. The sad thing is the Torys would probably get a landslide victory should there be a general election tomorrow. It will take a good part of a generation for the damage to really show.

That is only one of the reasons people voted for Brexit.  There are plenty of others, but today's discussion seems to be all about benefits. 

[Johnyo]

14 minutes ago, jpinx said:

That is only one of the reasons people voted for Brexit.  There are plenty of others, but today's discussion seems to be all about benefits. 

 

I realise this but you have to wonder on what other issues they were misinformed. 

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, jpinx said:

That is very true, but that is also a product of an over-easy benefits system.  The UK has brought the flood of incomers on itself -- hell mend them !

 

As an aside, arrived at LHR this morning. 100% of Border Agency (or whatever they're called) were South Asian (of what generation I don't know). At the rental car office, exactly the same. I get in the car and turn on the radio - Britains first radio station just for Muslims! Welcome home! 

[jpinx]

5 minutes ago, Johnyo said:

 

I realise this but you have to wonder on what other issues they were misinformed. 

The fact is that all the polls prior to the Referendum over some period of time back,  gave results that were within the same error bracket as the actual vote.  This is a strong indicator that people did not change their minds at the last minute because of any of the campaigning.