Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

EU court rules benefit tourists can be excluded from welfare schemes

The European Court of Justice declares EU member states must have 'the possibility of refusing' social benefits to 'economically inactive' EU citizens






By Bruno Waterfield in Brussels and Steven Swinford

11:10AM GMT 11 Nov 2014





Britain can ban European Union migrants from claiming "special non-contributory cash benefits" for up to five years, according to a landmark judgement in Luxembourg.


The EU courts have ruled that it is up to the Government, not Brussels, how it drafts legislation that that excludes foreign, European nationals from claiming social assistance benefits.


As well as asserting national sovereignty over out-of-work welfare benefits, the European Court of Justice has stopped unemployed migrants from using human rights legislation to appeal against measures blocking them from benefits.


"The directive on free movement of EU citizens and the regulation on the coordination of social security systems do not preclude domestic legislation which excludes nationals of other member states from entitlement to certain ‘special non-contributory cash benefits’, although they are granted to nationals of the host member state who are in the same situation," the EU court ruled on Tuesday.


The flagship judgment, following a case in Germany, confirms that governments can treat European jobseekers differently from their own nationals who are in the same situation without any recourse by migrants to EU human rights laws.


"When the member states lay down the conditions for the grant of special non-contributory cash benefits and the extent of such benefits, they are not implementing EU law, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU is therefore not applicable," said the ruling.



More: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/11222702/EU-court-rules-benefit-tourists-can-be-excluded-from-welfare-schemes.html

I am so glad everybody feels so much better by the recent successes in Welfare and of course recent successes in Europe.

Pity the same could not be said for the economy, NHS, education, social cohesion, Law and order, and protection of civil rights. That investigations into paedophilia and others social care problems are not being smothered.


But I like strong government, especially when members of the governing party suggest discussions and investigations are being being covered up by its own party's elite.

Roll on Rochester and That Strange-fellow's comment afterwards!

What makes me laugh Fred is that the right wing press themselves have been showing in the last few days EU immigrants come here for jobs and that they contribute more to the treasuries coffers than they take out.

Again smoke and mirrors from Camoron and IDS tonight.

It wont stop the free movement of labour from the EU to this country one jot.

And the ruling only covers EU countries.

The biggest problem non EU immigrants isnt even touched upon by the court ruling.

Spot on gf!

employed immigrants contribute more than their share, in particular those that do not send 90% of their money home

the problem we have been having in recent years, is the huge influx of general scallywags, indigents, those with no qualifications whatsoever, and extended families
in other words, we have shown no sensible discrimination in favour of those who have something to offer from day 1

Arranged marriages and like do you mean Cyners?, if yes Im 100% with you.

ps, just sent you e-mail.

Yes.

People arriving with wife and two kids are on £500 a week from the word go.

There is no incentive to work, because unless they really are well trained, they wont earn that sort of money.

Lets see what dave has in mind, cos it looks like a big let-off for him, and just in the nick of time.

I doubt it Max people are fed up with what we have now, thats enough and I doubt itl make any difference at all despite the blustering of Camoron.

People want to come here for our standard of living, a european act wont stop them when they are so desperate.

I think the benefits system, very generous by anybodies standards, is a big draw.

Why would you come to blighty if there is no money/benefits/housing on offer?

As for the jobs thing, employers who take the piss, ie starbucks, pret a manger etc should have a quiet talking to....(with menaces)

MaxK
That only applies to asylum seekers. Other immigrants from non EU countries are mainly illegal and shouldn't get any benefits. The UK like most countries takes asylum seekers. We are nowhere the highest asylum destination as a percentage of our population. The same applies to foreigners in general.

The problem Labour have is the electorate does not(rightly so) trust them with the economy, they are clueless and if Labour get back in two of the protagonists of the last disastrous Labour government are free to wreck havock again.
Immigration, NHS and education are extremely important in their own right, but without a flourishing economy everything goes down the pan.
2517

We have lower than average immigrants in the EU and across the world.

We have 8.3%

The average in the EU is 8.6%

This is substantially less than that of major immigration countries such as Australia (23 per cent), Canada (19.3 per cent) and the USA (12.3 per cent)

Norway has 14.9%

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue Haystack.

What I am arguing is that we don't have that much of a problem. The world is becoming more culturally diverse and this is a trend that you can't change. You might try and stop it for a while, but the trend is there to be seen. The best solution is to control the process as much as you can in a sensible way.

The most important thing is not to let our infrastructure get overwhelmed.

The immigration costing jobs for UK people is rearing its head because the economy has been in a poor state. If we had a booming economy, we wouldn't care about the immigrants. In fact we would be pleased if they came to do all the jobs that we didn't want to do.

In code Max, that means hes frightened of UKIP.

By Bruno Waterfield in Brussels and Steven Swinford

11:10AM GMT 11 Nov 2014





T


Britain can ban European Union migrants from claiming "special non-contributory cash benefits" for up to five years, according to a landmark judgement in Luxembourg.


The EU courts have ruled that it is up to the Government, not Brussels, how it drafts legislation that that excludes foreign, European nationals from claiming social assistance benefits.


As well as asserting national sovereignty over out-of-work welfare benefits, the European Court of Justice has stopped unemployed migrants from using human rights legislation to appeal against measures blocking them from benefits.


"The directive on free movement of EU citizens and the regulation on the coordination of social security systems do not preclude domestic legislation which excludes nationals of other member states from entitlement to certain ‘special non-contributory cash benefits’, although they are granted to nationals of the host member state who are in the same situation," the EU court ruled on Tuesday


The flagship judgment, following a case in Germany, confirms that governments can treat European jobseekers differently from their own nationals who are in the same situation without any recourse by migrants to EU human rights laws.

"When the member states lay down the conditions for the grant of special non-contributory cash benefits and the extent of such benefits, they are not implementing EU law, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU is therefore not applicable," said the ruling.

The judgment could have major implications for an EU challenge to Britain’s "habitual residence test" and will be seen by the Government as recognition that abuse of Europe’s free movement rules does exist.

"The UK and other national governments can therefore use this precedent to defend their restrictions on EU migrants’ access to non-contributory benefits," said Stephen Booth, of the Open Europe think-tank

"However, extending this principle and putting greater restrictions on to non-contributory in-work benefits, such as tax credits, the NHS and social housing, would require changes to EU legislation. This case could embolden UK allies to support such a move."

The German case involved two Romanian nationals, Elisabeta Dano and her son Florin, who were refused benefits in Leipzig because she "did not enter Germany in order to seek work there".

She and her son have been residing in Germany since November 2010.

"One of the conditions for a right of residence is that economically inactive persons must have sufficient resources of their own," said the EU court. "The directive thus seeks to prevent economically inactive EU citizens from using the host member state's welfare system to fund their means of subsistence."

The European Commission welcomed the judment as bringing "more clarity" to the rules on EU free movement.

Fishfinger - 11 Nov 2014 19:23 - 50007 of 50014

"People want to come here for our standard of living, a european act wont stop them when they are so desperate."

Why the fuck have you been prattling on about food banks, and how everyone has to eat tripe and chips, for the last year, if the standard of living is so good in the UK?

Because gf just likes to follow the party line and make cheap points with little regard to logic, sense and consistency.

Strewth, Haystack, you don't think Fishfinger's one of them Labour party activists, do you? But he gave a 100k grand to the Tory party out of the petty cash tin not so long ago, doncha know?