The EU and how it works

OK now to Benefits.

Bear in mind that as we already know the immigrant is less unlikely to claim than likely but these are the rules if she needs to claim

To get help you must prove residency and be registered as a worker.
The benefits you can claim are -
Pension credit
Income support-Income base JSA - you have to prove residency of 3 months
Housing benefit/rate relief - stopped since 01/04/14
Disabilty Living Allowance
Attendance allowance
Carers allowance
income related employment and support allowance
tax credits

This also holds good for UK citzs working or not in the EU.

The next thing I want to look at is something I am particularly interested in and that is the Democracy deficit and sovereignty.

Well Brian May did say that the British voters needed the truth about the EU before they vote and not spin --he just needs to talk to the grans - we know or at least on the way to knowing.

I was listening to a recording of Nigel Farage and Jeremy Hunt the others didn't say anything much on Question TIme and it was brilliant because of what I have learnt over the past couple of days I was able to say wrong! wrong wrong. I new the truth and didn't need the spin sooooo good

Rest of World!!

Full Fact do say it's difficult to find figures, just like you, whitewave.
What's ROW?

If I were a migrant and read this, I would want to go back home before my health deteriorated.

up

Had a look at the Health Tourist thing Dj and found it interesting but the trouble is it does not distinguish between EU and the ROW with figures being estimates and I am trying to find actuals which is where I am coming unstuck.

REPORT FOR HOUSE OF COMMONS ON IMPACT OF EU MIGRATION ON HEALTH EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES 2011 - this does not include benefits that is in next report.

NOTE this is vastly reduced as it is about 50 pages long so thought I would just look at key points

Clearly, migration by adding to the population increases consumption in these areas. Impact however will not be the same as non migrant impact as migrants tend to be younger, of working age, better educated. But they will have greater impact on such areas as education- children who don't speak English and have specific health issues. It is important to note that migrants tend to be young and often well educated.

Health key findings

Migrants are generally healthier than average
There is a low rate of GP registration
Health of migrants deteriorate the longer they stay

It is therefore reasonable to conclude that migrants in general are unlikely to pose a disproportionate burden on the NHS

Social Services key findings

There is little research evidence for this
There is some evidence that there is a lack of awareness and difficulty in accessing personal social services
Low level of use probably reflects low level of need - this may increase with age.

Education

There is some reports of over-subscribed pupil rolls resulting from migration, however many schools currently have spare capacity
data on pupil performance suggests a positive relationship between pupils with English as a second language and achievement. Evidence of significant out-performance in schools in London relative to other regions suggests that a high level of migrants does not worsen school performance.

The next report is one by the UCL looking at the impact of immigration on UK's tax and welfare system.

This is perhaps the most important economic debate in the UK's relationship with the EU and the principle of free movement.

In UK evidence is surprisingly sparse . However the report found that on the overall fiscal impact research shows that EU migrants to the UK have paid more in taxes than they have received in benefits. This has helped to relieve the fiscal burden on UK born workers.
In contrast UK workers made an overall negative fiscal contribution. (perhaps they should get rid of us and just keep the EU crowd)

Of course none of this reflects how people "feel" and are personally affected by and about immigration as that is nearly all anecdotal. This cannot be covered in this thread.

STATE BENEFITS

Recent immigrants are 43% less likely to receive state benefits or tax credits. Research also show a strong educational background of immigrants UK citz. with degree 24% EU arriving with 35% degree.
1 in 2 UK workers have a low educational achievement only 21% of EU migrants.

That is it for today and more or less it for immigration although I do want to look at how soon the migrants can claim benefits and at what level etc.

Oh thanks I didn't realize that I will look at it later - having a break

But Fullfact only uses official DOH and NHS statistics. It's trusted by the government, even!

Thanks for that Yes I have read some of that stuff - but I am trying to be careful to avoid anything that is not of official web sites like the House of Commons Library the official EU site and the various government sites like the NHS and Kings Fund. I think the truth of it is that there is no record kept of the use EU nationals make of the NHS. Much of what we see in the statistics is about Health Tourists and we are not interested in that on this thread just stuff to do with the EU.

Does this help, whitewave?

fullfact.org/health/costs_health_tourism-37227

dj permanent residence status gives various benefits just as I have begun to outline above in the NHS I will look at others as we go on.

I will look further into the concept and report back

EU citizens and the NHS - remember I am only looking at EU nationals and not Health Tourists as a whole.

Information from the Kings Fund and NHS site

Some services are free of charge to anyone they are GP AND A&E, and of course various infectious diseases.

Other access depends on immigration status.

Immigrants from the EU qualify if they have ordinary resident status (see above) so use of the NHS is not (as I once thought) dependent on nationality, payment of taxes, NI contributions, etc.
Those who don't yet have this status can still have free treatment only if there is a reciprocal arrangement with their country of origin, and by using the EHIC issued by that country. Just as we do when we go on holiday (I had to use it once in France when I crushed some vertebra in my back and very impressed I was too - especially when I was taken to hospital by some big burly firemen - they seem to double up as ambulance people?)

Now with regard to the statistics of the cost, I have spent a lot of time trying to find this however I eventually found this on the Kings Fund

There is a large degree of debate around this area, but there is a total lack of reliable data on the use of the NHS by immigrants and visitors.
So don't believe anyone who says different!!!! That's my bit.

What is permanent residence status?
What benefits does it give?

Just thought I would begin to look at areas of debate beginning with the one we seem to hear about the most

IMMIGRATION AND THE PRESSURE ON OUR RESOURCES.

STATISTICS - Gleaned from the House of Commons Library

Y/E Sep 2014 net migration 298K
Looking more in depth - 624K immigrated to the UK (non EU citizens up from 49K to 292K. EU citizens uo to 251K. UK citizens 82K.

327K emigrated from the UK

Employment statistics of EU nationals living in the UK.
Oct - Dec 2014 higher by 269K - of these 37K are either Romanian or Bulgarian - I have included these as they seem to get a certain amount of flack.
UK nationals for the same period - higher by 375K

EU Nationals - this of course applies to UK nationals in other EU countries
Just as an aside - this is one area that DC is hoping to reform - I can look at that when looking at the pressure for reform.

EU, EEA and Swiss nationals can stay in the UK for up to 3 months for any purpose. Those staying longer must be exercising their free movement rights as a worker, job-seeker,self-employed or self sufficient person.

After 5 years they acquire permanent residence status. i.e. ordinarily living in the UK.

Next I will look at the pressure on the NHS, education and other state benefits etc.

dj Well it is a bit different as the EU's fundamental right item 1 in my list whilst recognising the ECHR also goes further to talk about employment law and stuff and this is what I think the UK largely opted out from. So remember the 48 hr ruling? That sort of thing - plus maybe strike rights etc. I haven't looked at it in it's entirety but I could if you really want to I just thought that at this stage we should just get an overall picture. Maybe if we haven't last the will to live at that stage look at various stuff in more depth.

So by abolishing the Act, it will potentially cost businesses more again.
Doesn't make sense to me.

Right to clarify confusion.

The EU recognised and acceded to the ECHR but thought that there was a need to outline some fundamental human rights, and brings together all the personal, civic,economic and social rights within the Treaty of Lisbon which made these rights legally binding
Here's the thing - All member states are required to be signatories to the ECHR and it is accepted that the ECHR in Strasburg is competent to review EU Acts.
Further emphasise in the Lisbon Treaty is the promotion and protection of the rights of the child.

The UK opted out of part of this as I mentioned before because of the potential stream of people taking cases to the ECJ HOWEVER what I forgot to mention is that it was the potential high cost to businesses that these people would have forced them to incur.

NOW with regards to the UK's 1998 HR Act. It was decided to enshrine in law the rights contained in the ECHR as we had signed up to it anyway. This allows for a remedy for breach of the convention available in the UK courts without the need to go to Strasburg.
It is intended that the UK by abolishing the 1998 Act will break the link between British Courts and the ECHR. This means that HR cases under the ECHR will have to go back to Strasburg

Oops! Should have mentioned whitewave's post of Tue 12-May-15 16:30:27.

But never mind, go your own sweet way...

The rights enshrined in the EChR are enshrined in the Charter of Fundemental Rights ( along with other rights). The ECJ can strike down EU legislation which contravenes those rights.

Right, GrannyTwice. So what's the difference between human rights and fundamental rights, which is what whitewave mentioned? I assumed they would be the same.

This is very interesting.

In the spirit of this being an information thread - the ECJ is the court for the EU, interpreting EU law ettc . The ECHR is nothing to do with the EU.

You could have taken the point jingl made at 21.27.

Yes, Ana. Whatever you say, Ana. You could always stop quibbling, of course.