Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

Hils , you keep bringing up time and time again how easy it would have been to change laws to sort out immigration from the EU when the simple truth is it would not have been allowed by the EU.

Your NI idea for instance , what a load of rubbish. Why not , unless you went to school here for 5 years or you were actually born here !

That NI idea would never pass EU regulations.

I challenge you to tell me which EU regulation it would fail to pass, Dilbert. I don't expect you to come back any time soon, however, because the simple fact is that there aren't any.

The French social security system, for instance, is such that they don't give out any benefits to people who haven't been contributing to the system for a minimum period of time.

PS. I don't understand what you're trying to say in the second paragraph above (Why not , unless you went to school here for 5 years or you were actually born here !).

hilary - because any change in the law would be seen as akin to "tax evasion" - eg post event enactment

That's bollocks, Cyners. The UK can already do pretty much what they want legally - it's just that they choose not to.

European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Regulation (EC) No 883/2004) Case C-308/14

though i think you're wrong, i won't argue as i am happy to admit i don't actually know

Tell me what part in the matter of European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Regulation (EC) No 883/2004) Case C-308/14 you don't understand, and I'll be happy to explain it to you.

Or do you just want the synopsis which says that the European Court of Justice ruled in 2016 that the UK can withhold benefits to EU migrants without a right to reside? Please don't confuse a right to reside with a right to freedom of movement. Most EU member states typically only grant residency rights after an EU national has exercised freedom of movement rights to reside in another EU state for a continuous period of four of five years.

thanks hilary
so how come no side of the argument seems to have brought this up?


i am certainly unsure of what "after an EU national has exercised freedom of movement rights to reside" actually means
is there any obligation for this individual to have found "proper" employment and contributed to the system?
is there not an obligation (under uk legislation) for a council to find a home for said person, being homeless?

Of course it's as easy as you say that's why no one has even suggested it let alone do it.

Re the second part , why not use one of them as the criteria instead of NI if it's that simple ?

I probably chose the wrong words, Cyners. Instead of 'after an EU national has exercised freedom of movement rights to reside', I perhaps should have written 'after an EU national has exercised freedom of movement rights to live and/or work'.

Freedom of movement is probably the greatest gift a human can have, imo, and I can't understand why the Brits are so keen to relinquish those rights. Given that immigration was the most dominant reason that Brexit happened, I don't understand why the benefits to migrants matter hasn't been raised previously, although the ruling I mentioned was only made shortly before the referendum vote in 2016. I've got no idea if it's being applied universally in determining benefit applications, or discretionary, or at all to any degree.

but not right of freedom into switzerland by one and all, nor assuredly any right to reside at all :-)

Switzerland enjoys freedom of movement, Cyners, and it's in the Schengen area. And it's easy enough for financially independent EU citizens to obtain a B permit (that covers the first 5 years of residency).

I don't get your point.

No BB anymore as MoneyAm closing and Shares site doesn't have one. Might as well go back to ADVFN

Tried Shares site. Pretty slow and poor facilities.

the only really useful thing on MAM is the charts which are very easy to use
i guess this old dinosaur will have to learn how to use (and post) those on advfn

so switzerland will let in any old ragtag immigrant without a murmur?
if so, i bet the local residents where said immigrants rock up must welcome them with open arms

and what is the definition of "financially independent" and also what then happens after 5 years?

Switzerland does have an immigration problem, Cyners. It's become a halfway-house for those looking to get into Germany. It's a bit cold for them up in the hills though, so not a problem here.

After 5 years, you go from the B to the C permit which provides permanent residency. Financially independent means having comprehensive insurance and enough money in the bank not to be a burden on the state. What did you think it meant?

:o)

Does Switzerland have a similar benefits to ours?

ah so switzerland does not exactly welcome immigrants

"financially independent" is determined however that country chooses, whether switzerland or even the channel islands

Manuel.

They will have a special patrol on their border waiting to receive you when you flee from Little England.

The skiing's certainly better, Haystack. That's a massive benefit as far as I'm concerned.

:o)