Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
SarahBell

Poland Doesn't See 'eye-To-Eye' With Uk On Curbing Benefits

Recommended Posts

David Cameron says he has yet to reach agreement with Poland over his call for benefit curbs for EU migrants.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35060059

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/19/-sp-thousands-britons-claim-benefits-eu

• At least 30,000 Britons on unemployment benefit in EU, Guardian research shows
• Unemployed Britons in richer EU states outnumber claimants from those countries in UK

Doesn't say how much tax credits people claim in this country...

http://static.guim.co.uk/ni/1418312656641/EU_Unemployment_Datablog_do.svg

Won't let me post that as an img.

Edited by SarahBell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why Cameron is pushing so hard on this one. If the problem is immigrants claiming benefits, then turn the benefits into contribution-based schemes like everywhere else in Europe. Say you need 5 years NI to access any benefits/housing, and the problem is solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish george had said in his budget a few weeks ago

that they tax credits can only be claimed after 4 years working and this is what europe wants us to do. If you the public dont like please tell europe.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish george had said in his budget a few weeks ago

that they tax credits can only be claimed after 4 years working and this is what europe wants us to do. If you the public dont like please tell europe.

.

It could be justified by saying it's to bring the UK benefit system closer to the rest of the eu. They could even pass an eu law on it and then Dave could use his usual excuse that they had to do it in the UK because it's eu law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The longer Poland holds out on agreement the more Polish people in the UK will qualify under the 4 year rule - depending on exactly when the new agreement comes into force.

If it's immediately after an eu referendum late in 2017 then delaying tactics won't matter but nearly all of those in the UK at the time of the general election will qualify - and if they don't already qualify by then they'll only have to wait a short time before qualifying.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, a deafening silence about how much is claimed and how much of it is sent straight abroad.

It's a shame that this information about how our taxes are spent is kept secret - I can't imagine why?

I think finally people are starting to wake up re the EU and a BREXIT looks ever more likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unemployed Britons in richer EU states outnumber claimants from those countries in UK

Interesting stat for the guardian to cherry pick, lol.

Meanwhile, UK workers in Nigeria get paid more than nigerians in the UK, thus, everyone should emigrate. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, a deafening silence about how much is claimed and how much of it is sent straight abroad.

It's a shame that this information about how our taxes are spent is kept secret - I can't imagine why?

I think finally people are starting to wake up re the EU and a BREXIT looks ever more likely.

remittance.

http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/migrant-remittances-and-uk

World Bank data suggest the UK is a receiver as well as a sender of remittances

As shown in Figure 1, real remittance inflows (inflation adjusted) to the UK have increased by an annual average of 5% since 1989, reaching close to GBP 5,040 million in 2011. However, these inflows represent a small share of the UK GDP (about 0.3% in 2011). The UK occupies the fifteenth place in the world in value of remittances received and the fifth place among EU countries. The main countries from which remittances are sent to the UK include Australia, the United States and Canada (World Bank 2012).

. The World Bank (2012) estimates that the countries receiving the larger amounts of remittances from the UK in 2011 were India, Nigeria, France, Pakistan and Poland. The UK occupies the twentieth-fourth position at global levels in regards to the value of remittance outflows and the ninth position among EU countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the issue really the amount of benefits toing and froing between different countries - mentioned by the likes of the guardian. I don't think so.

The issue of concern is the sheer numbers incoming related to stuff like housing and infrastructure - the (apparently) immediately available extravagant benefits/tax credit system is one motivation for the massive numbers but the amount of benefit/tax credit money itself is not the main concern in this particular issue.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why Cameron is pushing so hard on this one. If the problem is immigrants claiming benefits, then turn the benefits into contribution-based schemes like everywhere else in Europe. Say you need 5 years NI to access any benefits/housing, and the problem is solved.

Yes can't understand why we are so generous whilst other member states do not offer the same generosity.......what is/was the agenda? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

• At least 30,000 Britons on unemployment benefit in EU, Guardian research shows

• Unemployed Britons in richer EU states outnumber claimants from those countries in UK

I recall the bbc or guardian shouting about the stastic last year, that more brits claim in rich countries than citizens of rich countries claim here. You don't have to think about it long to realise this will almost always be the case. Their usual weaseliness..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why Cameron is pushing so hard on this one. If the problem is immigrants claiming benefits, then turn the benefits into contribution-based schemes like everywhere else in Europe. Say you need 5 years NI to access any benefits/housing, and the problem is solved.

Because they don't want to fix the problem, because it'll also fix the professional benefits claimant problem in the UK. It doesn't matter whether someone is pro/anti/ambivalent about the EU, they should wonder why a government isn't prepared to implement a simple fix like this.

Take something like a citizens income, want to prevent the whole world claiming it, simple you have to have lived in the country for 18 years before you get it. Doesn't break any EU rules as everyone is entitled, but you have to have lived there for 18 years.

Basically it seems to me the Tories want to blame das Juden immigrants and benefits claimants for the problems the country has. Labour won't deal with it because they still want the benefit claimant vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why Cameron is pushing so hard on this one. If the problem is immigrants claiming benefits, then turn the benefits into contribution-based schemes like everywhere else in Europe. Say you need 5 years NI to access any benefits/housing, and the problem is solved.

(a ) Because he inherited it from NuLab's social engineering programme.

(b ) Because it suits him politically now to portray this as a Big Issue.

Edited by porca misèria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real benefit reform is a bit of 3rd rail fro the Cons - and they know it.

Gorddy really fcked up an attempt to reform benefits and free the lower 20% from poverty.

He really did do the unthinkable - he dragged 50% into guaranted poverty with his tax credits.

And they were Gorddies TC.

The UK from 2002 to now is like being on a train driven by a loon, Brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

remittance.

http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/migrant-remittances-and-uk

World Bank data suggest the UK is a receiver as well as a sender of remittances

As shown in Figure 1, real remittance inflows (inflation adjusted) to the UK have increased by an annual average of 5% since 1989, reaching close to GBP 5,040 million in 2011. However, these inflows represent a small share of the UK GDP (about 0.3% in 2011). The UK occupies the fifteenth place in the world in value of remittances received and the fifth place among EU countries. The main countries from which remittances are sent to the UK include Australia, the United States and Canada (World Bank 2012).

. The World Bank (2012) estimates that the countries receiving the larger amounts of remittances from the UK in 2011 were India, Nigeria, France, Pakistan and Poland. The UK occupies the twentieth-fourth position at global levels in regards to the value of remittance outflows and the ninth position among EU countries.

From the link (Oct 2013) :

Key Points
  • There is considerable uncertainty about the value of remittances to and from the UK. Since the end of foreign exchange controls in 1979, there is no official mechanism for recording remittances.
  • It is almost certain that estimates (particularly outflows) are lower than the true amount of flows.
  • There is little information on the characteristics of remitters in the UK, including characteristics such as income levels and welfare programme participation. Some studies suggest that there are ethnic differences in remittance behaviour in the UK.
  • From 1989 to 2011, remittance outflows from the UK increased by an annual average of about 3% in real terms, reaching close to GBP 2,031 million in 2011. The World Bank (2012) estimates that the countries receiving the larger amounts of remittances from the UK in 2011 were India, Nigeria, France, Pakistan and Poland. The UK occupies the twentieth-fourth position at global levels in regards to the value of remittance outflows and the ninth position among EU countries.

    Note that because of the lack of separate information on workers’ remittances in the UK, the World Bank Migration and Remittances Factbook estimates remittances to and from the UK as the sum of compensation of employees and migrants’ transfers. Therefore, it is almost certain that estimates of remittances (particularly outflows) are lower than the true amount of flows.

I'm not sure I get your point?

I'm sure the Govt. has a pretty good idea how much of our taxes flows straight out via benefits of one kind or another - but for some reason they pretend they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron is not going to be able to stop in-work benefits for citizens of other EU countries working in the EU

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/10/cameron-compromise-in-work-benefits-ban-eu-migrants

From the story

"Cameron is signalling a more flexible approach after Szydło warned him that the “basic principles” of the EU’s rules on freedom of movement must be respected. Poland and other eastern European countries, whose citizens would be hit harder than citizens from wealthier member states, believe the ban breaks the EU’s laws on discrimination. The ban on in-work benefits would require a treaty change because EU citizens are entitled to be treated in the same way as UK citizens in the workplace, including top-ups to their wages through tax credits.

Szydło said: “Of course, there are discussions and issues where we do not see eye to eye today. Among those issues are welfare and benefits.”

But Cameron took heart when Szydło signalled a degree of support for his plans to make it all but impossible for EU migrants to claim out-of-work benefits. She said: “We fully accept the right of the United Kingdom to take sovereign decisions with regard to welfare policy. We want to find a solution that is acceptable to the United Kingdom.”

Cameron is indicating that he is prepared to show flexibility after a constructive dinner on Wednesday night with Szydło, who is from the strongly nationalist and conservative Law and Justice party. Cameron is understood to have found the conversation with Szydło refreshing as they touched on common ground on the need to emphasise that the EU is a collection of sovereign nation states rather than a political union.

Cameron’s thinking emerged as the view crystallises in Brussels that he will need to climb down on the welfare issue if he wants a deal by February. Cameron, according to a senior source in Brussels, “has to adapt his position to reality” on the welfare row. “All the legal experts say this is not feasible,” the source said."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron is understood to have found the conversation with Szydło refreshing as they touched on common ground on the need to emphasise that the EU is a collection of sovereign nation states rather than a political union.

Yeah refreshing.

If the UK was that sovereign there would be no need to be going around eu countries touting for political hand outs. The reality is that it's not sovereign any more.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could be justified by saying it's to bring the UK benefit system closer to the rest of the eu. They could even pass an eu law on it and then Dave could use his usual excuse that they had to do it in the UK because it's eu law.

precisely.

which is what we should do.

of course,the rest of the EU will then say it's against EU rules.

at which point we can reply, no....speak to germany, it's their model we have copied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real benefit reform is a bit of 3rd rail fro the Cons - and they know it.

Gorddy really fcked up an attempt to reform benefits and free the lower 20% from poverty.

He really did do the unthinkable - he dragged 50% into guaranted poverty with his tax credits.

And they were Gorddies TC.

The UK from 2002 to now is like being on a train driven by a loon, Brown.

Exactly, cruel germandering. I have witness people cut their hours as they could no longer retain their earnings. Working more meant their tax credits were cut.

Tax credits are a political weapon, as cruel as anything dreamt up by Pol Pott, Stalin, or North Korea. Witness the language used by many when they are discussed. They really can't see how enslaved they've become.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, cruel germandering. I have witness people cut their hours as they could no longer retain their earnings. Working more meant their tax credits were cut.

Tax credits are a political weapon, as cruel as anything dreamt up by Pol Pott, Stalin, or North Korea. Witness the language used by many when they are discussed. They really can't see how enslaved they've become.

They interviewed some people on the news - one girl from Poland I think said "I don't want to work the same but be paid less" ... cos the tax credits are now ingrained as part of your right. (As we saw from the mass hysteria about the QT hard worker)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish george had said in his budget a few weeks ago

that they tax credits can only be claimed after 4 years working and this is what europe wants us to do. If you the public dont like please tell europe.

.

I think they will have to apply the same rules to us as Europe and what's wrong with that. Surely 4 years of work before you draw benefit is fair, it's about time Brits got weaned off the welfare teat. I've got over 35 years of contributions and would get nothing if I ceased in self employment and nothing for the rest of my working life (15 more years).

We have the ridiculous situation of Eastern Europeans with no skills topping up Big Issue self employment, buskers, scrap metal collection, caterers who can't cook etc with tax credits.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They interviewed some people on the news - one girl from Poland I think said "I don't want to work the same but be paid less" ... cos the tax credits are now ingrained as part of your right. (As we saw from the mass hysteria about the QT hard worker)

Move to where the wage gives you the same amount then - or more.

That was one of the reasons justifying the creation of the eu - of course nearly every reason given originally has turned out to have been a con.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have too much of a problem with n-work benefits paid to people working in this country, wherever they originally hailed from. The money is taxed, sloshes around the UK economy, is taxed again, sloshes a bit more then is taxed. It's all a merry-go-round that benefits the UK. It's the idea of sending money overseas that I have an issue with. Why is child benefit paid for children who are not in this country? The logic escapes me?

To be fair, I also believe UK pensions should only be paid to those who live in the UK. If people choose to move overseas in retirement then it should be self-financing through their own pension provision, not via the taxpayer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have too much of a problem with n-work benefits paid to people working in this country, wherever they originally hailed from. The money is taxed, sloshes around the UK economy, is taxed again, sloshes a bit more then is taxed. It's all a merry-go-round that benefits the UK. It's the idea of sending money overseas that I have an issue with. Why is child benefit paid for children who are not in this country? The logic escapes me?

To be fair, I also believe UK pensions should only be paid to those who live in the UK. If people choose to move overseas in retirement then it should be self-financing through their own pension provision, not via the taxpayer.

Well indeed I guess the system loses plenty from retired expats living abroad, especially superannuated public sector ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   90 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.