Latest on EU citizens

"Reciprocal" can mean different things to different people.

I think PetalTop interprets it to mean as being the same terms on which an EEA (such as Italian) citizen would get the same benefit in the UK.

Your interpretation is that the UK citizen would be treated on the same terms as a citizen of that country in that country (the conventional EU interpretation).

But you can see the difference. Mind the gap please, when it come to the interpretation of language.

secret.simon wrote:"Reciprocal" can mean different things to different people.

Indeed.
And there's a fine line between a numerator and a denominator. Only a fraction of people appreciate that.

noajthan wrote:

secret.simon wrote:"Reciprocal" can mean different things to different people.

Indeed.
And there's a fine line between a numerator and a denominator. Only a fraction of people appreciate that.

I think we have to understand the nature of the community on this discussion board. We are discussing immigration, which is a broad issue that has to deal with many more factors like integration, education just to mention a few. So for us to assume that all members are at the same level of understanding or should be able to interpret the jargons used by industry professionals on this board, is a matter of regret.

noajthan wrote:there's a fine line between a numerator and a denominator. Only a fraction of people appreciate that.

That is a really good one. I must try it out on somebody soon.

DFDS. wrote:

noajthan wrote:

secret.simon wrote:"Reciprocal" can mean different things to different people.

Indeed.
And there's a fine line between a numerator and a denominator. Only a fraction of people appreciate that.

I think we have to understand the nature of the community on this discussion board. We are discussing immigration, which is a broad issue that has to deal with many more factors like integration, education just to mention a few. So for us to assume that all members are at the same level of understanding or should be able to interpret the jargons used by industry professionals on this board, is a matter of regret.

If we didn't have a little light relief on the forum (in the form of humour), the forum would be a very boring experience.

secret.simon wrote:"Reciprocal" can mean different things to different people.

I think PetalTop interprets it to mean as being the same terms on which an EEA (such as Italian) citizen would get the same benefit in the UK.

No I don't. I am well aware that often immigrants get given more in the UK, than a British citizen would in their country.

As you used Italy - they don't have benefits for young single mothers and the parents of those young pregnant girls, are expected to keep them and their grandchild. But if they come to the UK then they will be given single parent benefits from the UK, even though a Brit wouldn't be given that in their country.
Take a retired "family memeber" to Italy and they won't give them benefits and free housing as they expect the EU national to keep their own "family members".

Non-EU. i.e. Australia.
The Brit has to take out health insurance when they visit Australia, but the Australains are given full cover in the UK. I assume that will end when England stops giving free emergency cover to everyone - see the consultation run last December.
Tier 5 Youth Mobily Visa with Australia. The Brit has 12 months only on that visa, has to pay a higher tax rate than the locals, has to buy health insurance, no "national minimum hourly rate" protection. The Australian gets 2 years in the UK, pays the same tax rate as the locals and until recently, got free healthacare and protection with the NMW. They moaned like hell when they were told they would now have to pay £150 per year IHS as the talks the UK had with Australia about the IHS, ended up with their citizens having to pay too.

A lot of immigrants retire to the UK if they can, because they "get given more". Retire to the US and the Brit won't be given free healthcare.

As they give all these "freebies", the UK attracts too many of the wrong sort of immigrant. The UK needs to stop giving all these.

SarahM1972 wrote:

Petaltop wrote: Some of these "reciprocal" deals within the EU, aren't reciprocal. Brits in other EU countries have to wait to claim that countries benefits, while their citizens in the UK claim UK benefits after 3 months. The NHS is also free for them to use, but it doesn't work like that in other EU countries. Often the NHS gives more cover than they can get in their own country.

The above makes no sense to me. Sorry if I try to correct this misinformation. I only speak from my experience in my own country, Italy, but Brits cannot claim welfare benefits because Italians cannot claim benefits.... You need to prove you've minimum two full years of tax contributions (104 weeks) into the state work/pension system to claim benefits, whether you're Italian or British. Furthermore, if you've been unemployed one year, you only get 6 months of JSA and then it's over, no more benefits.
When you read about 40% of youth unemployment in Italy, most of the financial burden is shouldered by the parents and not the state, because the majority of youngsters unlikely has the tax contributions needed to claim benefits.

The NHS in Italy is also organised as the British NHS, after three months you can register at a local GP (ASL) and receive a temporary card if you are EEA and want to be a resident.

Not "recoprical" in the way that you can move to the UK for better benefits, from the Brits. Even though EU migrants have given them nothing or very little, but we don't do that for Brits in our country. It is why the UK is the country of choice for many low skilled EEA migrants from poor or debt ridden countries.

Germany has looked into changing EU rules so an EEA country are only pays immigrants the same rate of benefits as they would get in their own EEA country to stop this 'free movement for better benefits', but sadly they weren't quick enough to stop Brexit.

The UK have now moved to right these wrongs, although Brexit will be in before most of these benefit changes take affect. .i.e. for Universal Credit, which will replace the income based benefits, EEA citizens must pay into the UK before they can have benefits.

Already for JSA, the UK have stopped Italians (and all EEA citizens), from living on JSA and other benefits while they look for work in the UK. EEAs can now only have 6 months JSA in the UK now and then no more of any benefits. Just 6 months in the UK now as an EEA jobseeker qualified person and then no right to reside as a jobseeker and they lose all UK benefits.

For those arriving looking for work, it is now no UK benefits for 3 months and then just JSA only and no other benefits not even for housing or for their children, for that other 3 months. EEAs lost in court when they tried to force the UK to return to paying them full benefits as a Brit would get, while they look for work.
https://www.freemovement.org.uk/existin ... g-benefit/

JSA for Brits - they can have 2 years income based JSA and 6 months contribution based JSA, with full UK benefits all that time, including housing benefits and benefits for their children.

Under the welfare reforrms, most will be 'working for their benefits', some benefits will be just a loan and benefits for children will be reduced to below that of Germany, Sweden and France, butt Brexit will be in before all that is rolled out nationwide.

secret.simon wrote:"Reciprocal" can mean different things to different people.

I think PetalTop interprets it to mean as being the same terms on which an EEA (such as Italian) citizen would get the same benefit in the UK.

Your interpretation is that the UK citizen would be treated on the same terms as a citizen of that country in that country (the conventional EU interpretation).

Sorry. I re-read and see what you mean.

Roll on to when Germany manages to change the EU rules, so that migrants only get the same as they would be given in their own country.

It was talked about in Germany years ago (well, when the UK announced they would be reducing their benefits for children to below that of Germany - caused panic in Germany ) Now I am sure they regret not bringing this in before the Brexit vote.

Petaltop you seem to possess a huge degree of ignorance as to how things work in the EU and how legislation are brought about. I find it must disturbing when I have the misfortune of rea ding some of your posts.

Firstly Germany does not make EU law. None of the 27 countries are responsible for making EU law.

The commission and the EU parliament are responsible for making of EU law.

Secondly there is no evidence to back your claim that EU citizens get more in Benefit than EU nationals.

I perfectly respect and will endorse your right to free speech, but when presented as facts, I get deeply concerned.

Obie wrote:Petaltop you seem to possess a huge degree of ignorance as to how things work in the EU and how legislation are brought about. I find it must disturbing when I have the misfortune of rea ding some of your posts.

Firstly Germany does not make EU law. None of the 27 countries are responsible for making EU law.

The commission and the EU parliament are responsible for making of EU law.

Like with the migrants being invited to the EU, you mean? All the countries decided to do that? They didn't.

Obie wrote:Secondly there is no evidence to back your claim that EU citizens get more in Benefit than EU nationals.

What?

Obie wrote:I perfectly respect and will endorse your right to free speech, but when presented as facts, I get deeply concerned.

Seeing as we are being honest, I get deeply concerned with some of your posts. I find your posts incite hatred against the UK. I wonder why you are allowed to be a moderator with this attitude that you display? You seem to hate the UK, but you wanted to get to the UK, now find you hate it, yet still stay here. Not normal behaviour.

I don't propose to argue with you or have any personal discussion with you.

My concern is the baseless and inaccuracy of the information you present on the forum.

I have no issue with you as an individual.

It does a dis-service to the discussion, to have it infested with inaccuracies.

As a moderator, it is my duty to warn you and maintain the integrity of the thread.

Please desist from putting inaccurate and unfounded message on the forum that has the potential to incite discord and vilify decent and hardworking members of the UK population.

I hope the need will not arise for us to have this discussion again.

Let's tone down on the honesty and remember that this is a public forum. There can be a discussion on a topic without emotions getting involved. Let's stick as closely as possible to known facts, not what facts we would like there to be. Interpretation of facts can differ of course, and I am sure that all on these forums can respect difference of opinion of interpretations.

Obie wrote:Firstly Germany does not make EU law. None of the 27 countries are responsible for making EU law.

No, Germany does not make EU law. But being the largest country (in terms of population and hence voting rights in both the Council and in the European Parliament), its voice and opinions on European matters counts more than say, Belgium or Slovakia or Estonia. Hence such opinion, when aired by senior German government personnel or bodies would be considered more indicative of the general direction of travel than say the equivalent government personnel of Portugal or the Netherlands.

Obie wrote:The commission and the EU parliament are responsible for making of EU law.

As I understand it, the European Council (heads of government of the 28 states) outlines the strategy, which the Commission is then tasked with implementing. It then proposes legislation that must be agreed to by both the Council of the European Union (ministers of the member states) and the European Parliament.

For everybody's reference, here is a short guide to the EU Institutions on the EU website and an introduction to the EU Commission on their website.

Your links are very helpful Simon and I must commend you for at least going through the strain of sourcing your views.

However, I totally disagree that the European Council has any legislative power. They guide the political direction of the union and in some circumstances provides contributions or views to drafting legislations, but such power is not conferred on the council.

The comissioners who are 28 , and one of whom are assigned the role as President, are the executive branch of the EU. They swore an oath before the CJEU to act in the interest of the EU than their individual memberstate. They are the guidian of the Treaty.

They prepare legislation, which goes before the parliament.

The EU council made up of the Heads of States, can express collective views, which the commission may take account of in drafting legislation. However the legislative role conferred by the treaty is primarily in the hands of the commission.

In the commission all reps from the 28 state swear an oath to act in the interest of the EU, therefore I find it odd, that the commission , contrary to their oath will be working and acting in the interest of Germany.

Obie wrote:In the commission all reps from the 28 state swear an oath to act in the interest of the EU, therefore I find it odd, that the commission , contrary to their oath will be working and acting in the interest of Germany.

I could've sworn the Commission contained a lot of politicians. However, a more likely explanation would be, "What's good for Germany is good for Europe".

Petaltop wrote: As you used Italy - they don't have benefits for young single mothers and the parents of those young pregnant girls, are expected to keep them and their grandchild.

Rightly so, if I may say. I don't see why as an Italian taxpayer I should pay for other people's children. And abortion is legal in Italy too, so their choice... their money.
Nobody is expected to keep children in Italy, Italian law is clear about that.

And my British born and bred husband would be very keen to see this system implemented in UK too.

Petaltop wrote: Take a retired "family memeber" to Italy and they won't give them benefits and free housing as they expect the EU national to keep their own "family members".

My mum is on one of those benefits until the end of her life so I have no idea where you got that information.

Free housing doesn't exist in UK either, because my brother-in-law family is all on benefits in UK and they pay rent, a small amount of money but they pay for rent.

Petaltop wrote: The Brit has to take out health insurance when they visit Australia, but the Australains are given full cover in the UK.

I assume you've not travelled much if you are believing that.....

Petaltop wrote: A lot of immigrants retire to the UK if they can, because they "get given more". Retire to the US and the Brit won't be given free healthcare.

I've not heard of a single immigrant who wanted to retire here, sorry hahahahaha Not even British pensioners want to retire in UK lol

Petaltop wrote: As they give all these "freebies", the UK attracts too many of the wrong sort of immigrant. The UK needs to stop giving all these.

I'd stop giving all these 'freebies' to people who don't need them, regardless of nationality.

Petaltop wrote:
A lot of immigrants retire to the UK if they can, because they "get given more". Retire to the US and the Brit won't be given free healthcare.

I think it is clear now that Petaltop is doing it on purpose. No, seriously. Tomorrow he will say that the Earth is flat watching you guys trying to persuade him otherwise.

Nimitta wrote:I think it is clear now that Petaltop is doing it on purpose. No, seriously. Tomorrow he will say that the Earth is flat watching you guys trying to persuade him otherwise.

If that is what PetalTop is doing, I think that he is doing this forum a service. There is an anti-immigration feeling out there that played a part in the Brexit vote. We, as migrants and families of migrants, need to address that.

There is a feeling among the public that migrants, particularly EU migrants, take more out of the pot that they put in or should be entitled to take out, at any rate. Looking at the stats and studies, I am convinced that it is not true. But if broad public opinion is hostile to immigration of one form or another, no law or rules or regulations will make that right. We need to hear those concerns and respond to them.

It does not help that many queries in the "Claiming Benefits" forum seem to give the impression that migrants are just waiting to get eligible and then start milking the benefits system. At least in that sense, they show full integration into the British way of life.

Merely closing our ears to any anti-migrant sentiment does not solve problems, it exacerbates it. Unfortunately, there is a tendency on these forums, even at very senior levels, to regard immigration as a good in itself, without taking a broader picture of wider public opinion and thoughts and the disruption that immigration brings to society into account.

We are a forum for migrants to help each other, but should this be without taking into consideration the society that we are migrating to and into which our children will integrate?

secret.simon wrote: No, Germany does not make EU law. But being the largest country (in terms of population and hence voting rights in both the Council and in the European Parliament), its voice and opinions on European matters counts more than say, Belgium or Slovakia or Estonia. Hence such opinion, when aired by senior German government personnel or bodies would be considered more indicative of the general direction of travel than say the equivalent government personnel of Portugal or the Netherlands.

That is why, once again, Merkel topped the list of Forbes, 100 most powerful women.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel remains in the top spot.


http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/lea ... 28e4e4162a

Well this forum has a vision and direction.

It purpose is not compromise fringe views, which are totally unsupported, or even contrary to fact.

The purpose of this forum is to repudiate these views in the strongest possible terms..

So long as I remain a moderator, I will not sit down quiet whiles EU citizens are smeared. I will repel any view that seek to belittle the immense contribution that EU citizens make to the UK, in the strongest possible terms.

I do not go to Stormfront, because I know my views will not be welcomed, and pepole at Stormfront will or should at least understand that a forum like this will not encourage or give a platform to the views they espouse.

Making offensive statement against groups is against the forum rules.

I have corrected Petaltop, and made her understand that her views are unsupported by facts. I will hope that she will appreciate this and desist from the disdainful remarks she make about EU citizens in the UK, and attempts to vilify Germans.

If she continues, then it will amount to her seeking to incite discord and vilify EU national in a discrimatory manner.

As moderators, if we said something which is incorrect, we can be corrected, without insulting the individual who corrected us. The same applies to everyone on this forum.

SarahM1972 wrote:

Petaltop wrote: Take a retired "family memeber" to Italy and they won't give them benefits and free housing as they expect the EU national to keep their own "family members".

My mum is on one of those benefits until the end of her life so I have no idea where you got that information.

Is she a Brit who was taken to Itlay as your dependant family member, paid nothing to Italy, but given "benefits until the end of her life" by Italy?

SarahM1972 wrote:Free housing doesn't exist in UK either, because my brother-in-law family is all on benefits in UK and they pay rent, a small amount of money but they pay for rent.

Yes it does (at the moment) for the group I mentioned; pension age and living in UK social housing. I can think of lots more instances when HB and LHA (private lets) and SMI (Support for Mortgage Interest) pays the rent. If you are on a interest only mortgage, then the interest part is the rent. These are present rules though and it is' all change' under the UK's welfare reforms.

Although it could be argued that your family are still getting free housing as they use the UK's welfare state to pay all their rent, with their top-up rent via the other benefits they claim.

SarahM1972 wrote:

Petaltop wrote: The Brit has to take out health insurance when they visit Australia, but the Australains are given full cover in the UK.

I assume you've not travelled much if you are believing that.....

Look on the NHS website, they advise to take out travel insurance when visiting Australia. Then look on the Austalian site for visiting the UK.

Even the UK's EHIC doesn't give full cover in all EEA countries. That information is on the NHS site too.

England's Decemeber 2015 to March 2016 consutlation, was looking at changing a lot of what healthcare NHS England will give for free to visitors, but we can only go on present NHS rules.

SarahM1972 wrote:

Petaltop wrote: A lot of immigrants retire to the UK if they can, because they "get given more". Retire to the US and the Brit won't be given free healthcare.

I've not heard of a single immigrant who wanted to retire here, sorry hahahahaha Not even British pensioners want to retire in UK lol

Look over on the Claiming Benefits board of this site or the EEA board, and read the posts about these pensioners who were brought to the UK as family memebrs of an EEA citizen, then put on the UK's welfare state.

I am not allowed to link posts to other sites, but look at those sites and see how many want to retire to the UK for free helthacare, better benefits, etc.

SarahM1972 wrote:I'd stop giving all these 'freebies' to people who don't need them, regardless of nationality.

The NHS is a freebie if you didn't pay all your 40 years plus working taxes to the UK by the time you reach pension age, when you are likely to cost the NHS more. Are you happy not to be given that freebie?