UKIP second in Eastleigh...anyone from Eastleigh care to comment?

[SequinsOfEvents]

Bit tongue in cheek but wowsers! 11,000 votes! Crikey!

I am living abroad at the moment and am pleased to be! Can't come home with current political situation....how depressing

[olgaga]

I don't see how access to the NHS could be based on NI contributions. Many people - those who have just left education for example, have no record of NI contributions. Unless your test covers all EU citizens, not just those from elsewhere in the EU, it will be discriminatory.

Access to health care within Europe is already covered by the EHIC.

It will also be difficult to bring in habitual residence tests for welfare because (a) the EU have already ruled than anything but an EU-wide residence test is discriminatory (in 2011) and (b) the bureaucracy would probably be so costly it would be counter-productive.

A test for housing would involve everyone having to show they either worked in the area (which most immigrants will be able to show, as work is generally why they're here), been educated there or have family links. So there will be no real opportunity to restrict access to housing.

I think this is just Tory kite-flying, in response to their embarrassment over the Eastleigh result.

[vesela]

What the German government was trying to do has recently been ruled illegal by a German court, anyway.

This idea that "the UK is the only one that takes the rules literally - all the other countries find a way round it" is a myth.

[vesela]

Olgaga - agree that it's just kite-flying.

As the FT says today in an article looking at the (very limited) options, "One other thing worth noting is that benefit tourism is really not a big problem, whatever people?s perceptions of it might be."

[olgaga]

Yes, it's all politics.

Take a look at this. Then note that the hapless Clegg is chairing the cabinet committee which is examining the "options".

[Xenia]

Yes, vesela but many countries are not as generous as us. I think Bulgarians might get £10 a month for a child say and in Spain everyone gets their unemployment benefit for only 2 years.

if we have one of the most generous systems then people flock here.

The fault is caused by not harmonising benefits throughout the EU but allowing free movement. You either need identical taxes and benefits and free movement or neither.

[MammaBrussels]

Here's an article from Speigel about how Germany are trying to modify those rules

[niceguy2]

A test for housing would involve everyone having to show they either worked in the area (which most immigrants will be able to show, as work is generally why they're here), been educated there or have family links. So there will be no real opportunity to restrict access to housing.

I disagree. I think this is a common sense solution. Let's say (for argument's sake) that you introduce a new rule that priority for housing is given to those who can demonstrate they have worked or been educated in the local area for five years.

Would you seriously still say we should treat an EU 'immigrant' differently if they've been in the local area for five years and paying UK taxes for that time?

[ttosca]

Yes, vesela but many countries are not as generous as us. I think Bulgarians might get £10 a month for a child say and in Spain everyone gets their unemployment benefit for only 2 years.

How about some facts and figures to show how relatively generous the UK is compared with the rest of europe? Comparisons with Bulgaria are misleading because it is a much poorer country than the UK. If you don't compare like with like, then you could use Afghanistan or any other number of the world's poorest countries.

Spain everyone gets their unemployment benefit for only 2 years

And do you have any idea what percentage of benefit claimants (JSA, presumably) claim for more than 2 years? Because:

That generous benefit system, just how generous is it? Well, as it happens, the OECD?s database has fairly recent data (2007) on replacement rates across the industrialised world (for people who were paid between two-thirds and 100% of average earnings when they lost their jobs):

touchstoneblog.org.uk/2011/09/sometimes-i-wonder-why-i-bother/

The notion that Eastern Europeans are travelling across Germany and France, ignoring Scandinavia and the low countries to get at our benefits system is, frankly, bonkers. People who know anything about UK social security have known for decades that one of its characteristic features is its relative lack of generosity.

[ttosca]

In the interests of fairness and open debate, you can look at the fullfact website here:

fullfact.org/factchecks/is_the_uks_welfare_system_the_most_generous_in_europe-27368

Which looks at the various measures of 'welfare generosity' and 'welfare expenditure' of the UK compared with europe and the OECD.

In summary, it depends what you are measuring.

[Xenia]

I think that link supports that the UK is generous - "While the UK was found to have larger than average "social assistance schemes, including housing and family benefits, as well as unemployment assistance" several other nations offered better benefits in other areas." Housing and family benefits are some of the most important things as housing costs are the biggest expenses for most people. We are about to get a benefits cap next month of £26,000 a year maximum benefit which means some people get a lot more. £26,000 is still £34,000 of before tax and NI are taken off. It is very generous that you do nothing at all, no work etc and still can be handed on a plate in effect £34,000 of income before tax for doing nothing and that is the cap it is coming down to for many and is regarded as a sacrifice!

[feeltheforce]

xenia I am shocked if that is true. I am shocked that we pay that kind of money out!

[Talkinpeace]

Historically the UK was the only country that allowed free movement of its citizens within its own borders
which was why people could flock to the cities and launch the Industrial revolution.

By restricting free movement of people within the UK we would be taking a 500 year retrograde step of the type that has hamstrung Euro are economies and is currently adversely affecting the Chinese economy.

Surely the issue is to make better use of the indigenous population and then employers would not seek to hire immigrants.

PS Immigrants have a different type of NHS number - I know because I have one.
And our NI numbers do not tally with our birth years - so we can be easily spotted by officials.

[olgaga]

niceguy that isn't the point. Whatever scheme you think is fair, the point is that we have to apply the same requirements to all EU citizens, including those from the UK.

So a UK citizen moving to an new area to take up a job, where they had no record of residence, education or family links, would also fail to meet the criteria.

[ttosca]

xenia-

Immigrants are not arriving here en masse claiming, or even hoping to claim, £26K in benefits.

You cannot decide policy based on a tiny minority of cases or by Daily Mail headlines.

Since you copied and pasted a quote from the article, so shall I:

"The relative 'generosity' of the UK's benefits system in comparison to other European countries can be measured in a number of different ways, and the outcome will vary depending upon which metric and dataset is chosen.

With this in mind the UK can rank anywhere from top to below average in a European league table of benefits expenditure. If Fraser Nelson was referring specifically to government spending on welfare, he may well have a point, although there is also plenty to challenge his assertion."

You should also show some evidence that large numbers of migrants come to the UK to claim benefits. I don't know of any evidence to support that claim. I have seen a few articles which claim that immigrants are a net contributor to the economy, OTOH.

[MammaBrussels]

So a UK citizen moving to an new area to take up a job, where they had no record of residence, education or family links, would also fail to meet the criteria.

Which also creates geographical immobility in the labour market. Those who are unemployed will find it harder to move to where the work is - Brit or not.

[olgaga]

Exactly, Mamma.

All this is just hot air.

By the way, Xenia you do realise that £26,000 includes housing benefit, and most people who are anywhere near the cap are living in London?

[olgaga]

I might add, there are 5.8 million benefit claimants. 67,000 households will be affected by the benefits cap - 80,000 adults and 190,000 children.

[Talkinpeace]

A friend of mine gets very nearly £25,000 in benefits per year.
She has not worked for 15 years and will not work until both her husband and daughter die of the crippling illness from which they suffer.
Want to swap places with her?

[olgaga]

Talkin, quite right to point out that for most people, claiming benefits is a safety net, not a career choice.

[Xenia]

Y,es it is absolutely amazing how generous we are and yes I know the new benefits cap/limit when it comes in of £26,000 net of tax (£34k gross if you were a worker you would need to earn to receive what the state gives free for a parent with children) will include housing benefit but gosh plenty of very very hard working mumsnetters work full time all year and earn less than that and pay for childcare.

(I'm not particular anti immigration but am anti benefits tourism. China as a big problem that you can only claim healthcare and schooling in your home state so all those millions who move for work with China are trapped by that rule. it is certainly an international issue).

[niceguy2]

Olgaga. I understand that the rule applies to UK citizens. I also understand that it could create some immobility in the labour market.

But this is the real world and every action has a consequence. There isn't a magic wand solution. If people are that concerned about benefits being sucked up by immigrants then this may be the price which has to be paid.

The only other option is to leave the EU which would be akin to the proverbial sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Plus I have to question how many UK people would move into an area they have no ties to and expect the state to support that move. So put another way. If I am born & bred in Manchester, how common would it be for me to decide to move to Leeds, a city which I have no ties with and without having found a full time job first.

[olgaga]

If people are that concerned about benefits being sucked up by immigrants then this may be the price which has to be paid.

That may be so, but the practicalities rule it out.

[Talkinpeace]

niceguy2
How many graduates stay in the town they went to Uni and then look for work?
Of the people I was at Uni with, none of us live near our parents now.

[niceguy2]

Well in your example if you stay in the town you studied in then you can demonstrate you were educated in the area.

If you return home you will be able to demonstrate family in the area and therefore have links to the area.

If you get a FT job in a new area then you should be able to move and get whatever support is available.

[Talkinpeace]

for a year ....
so can many immigrants ....

sorry but this is going back to Feudal times - restricting the free movement of people within an area

what is your diameter ?
by county, by borough

kite flying, unenforceable rubbish

BYE