A lesson in immi...
- Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
12 October 2013 21:43248015here is a lesson in immigration,and it happened here a few years back.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/romans-dealt-immigration-far-better-2365556 - 13 October 2013 01:26248023Sadly for the Romans, Brian, the vast majority of Roman immigrants in Britain were slaughtered off by Queen Budica and her warriors.
Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
13 October 2013 06:57248027alex,is that all you could come up with. - 13 October 2013 08:18248031And this is the current state of our immigration Brian - kind permission of the Telegraph:
"More than 600,000 unemployed European Union migrants are living in Britain at a cost of £1.5 billion to the NHS alone, according to an EU report.
The authoritative study, obtained by The Sunday Telegraph, shows the number of jobless European migrants coming to Britain has risen dramatically in the past five years, intensifying demands for the Government to renegotiate EU membership.
Opponents of the EU seized on the figures to suggest Britain could not afford to allow European migrants to come here at will while continuing to provide a universal benefits system.
The 291-page report, to be published this week by the European commissioner in charge of employment and welfare, discloses:
• The number of "non-active" EU migrants in Britain has risen by 42 per cent between 2006 and 2012;
• 611,779 "non-active" EU migrants were living in Britain last year, up from 431,687 just six years ago. The total is equivalent to the population of Glasgow;
• The number of EU migrants coming to Britain without a job increased by 73 per cent in the three years to 2011;
• The current annual cost to the NHS of "non-active" EU migrants is estimated at £1.5 billion (€1.8 billion);
• In contrast, the estimated cost to France's health system of "non-active" EU migrants is a fraction of that to the NHS, at just £3.4 million.
The report was written for Brussels and ordered by Laszlo Andor, the socialist commissioner in charge of employment and social inclusion.
The Sunday Telegraph can disclose that he is to bring a court case to make it easier for European migrants to claim benefits in Britain. He will challenge a scheme that makes certain benefits available only to migrants from the EU who are "economically active" and is intended to make Britain less attractive to so-called benefit tourists.
But the EU-sponsored legal case would overturn this scheme, a move the Department for Work and Pensions said would make Britain more attractive to people wanting to live off the state.
Meanwhile, a court case last week detailed how a gang of Czech benefit fraudsters stood to make £1 million in bogus claims for child tax credits and child benefit, emphasising that benefit tourism can also include fraud on a vast scale.
Eurosceptic MPs said last night that the study and court case showed that Britain had to tighten up its borders and introduce stronger controls on welfare handouts.
The Government currently has no idea how much of Britain's welfare budget, including unemployment benefits, is given to EU citizens because a claimant's nationality is not recorded in the system.
Douglas Carswell, the Conservative backbench Euro-sceptic MP, said yesterday: "It is extraordinary how the European project has debased and debauched the original, noble idea of the welfare state.
"These figures show that the wave of benefit migrants has become a tsunami of economic refugees fleeing the eurozone crisis to try to find jobs here.
"We cannot both continue the free-at-the-point-of-use welfare state and benefits system and allow Europeans to flee the eurozone and come here.
"It is decision time. I would rather we quit Europe and had our own system of social protection."
Roger - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
13 October 2013 09:35248042roger 1 suggestion,let government do something about it,instead of pussy footing around. - 13 October 2013 09:40248044And one of the best things we can do about it, is to leave the EU. In fact on EU immigration, it is the ONLY thing we can do about it.
Roger - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
13 October 2013 09:45248046no roger,wrong way to go about it,more firm action is needed.those claming benefits should be told if they don't get a job say within 6 months they will be removed back to country of origin.no ifs or buts. - 13 October 2013 09:49248048That will never be robust enough and the EU won't allow it anyway.
Roger - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
13 October 2013 09:53248050self rule under eu rules roger,non of the other countrys bother follow the rules so why should we.
but I did see a report the other day,and apparently france pays double the benefits than we do,so whats stopping them staying there.i tell you why,we are a soft touch and france cant be botherd with then.so as soon as meausers are put in place the better. - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
13 October 2013 10:34248060roger,here is a counter to your argument courtesy of the daily mail.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2037998/UK-immigration-Polygamy-welfare-benefits-insidious-silence.html - 13 October 2013 14:12248083One survey has shown that 25% of Romanians aged between 18 and 35 want to emigrate to Britain: that's one and a half million people, plus their families and children.
Any citizen of an EU state working in Britain cam automatically bring over their whole family.
As of 1st January 2014, when hundreds of thousands of Romanians and Bulgarians start come over in mass, South East England is going to be in a dire crisis.
Moreover, the more these people get a job, all the more the British people will be without an employment prospective.
That the Government meanwhile is saying that all unemployed young British people under 25 should lose their benefits because they are unemployed, shows how contradictory the Government is.
In fact, they want millions of Romanians and Bulgarians to work here, not to live off benefits.
However, each working Romanian and Bulgarian in the UK has knocked a Brit into unemployment.
Each working Romanian and Bulgarian in Britain is entitled to all child benefits and housing benefits whenever required, as well as immediate unemployment benefit once their work contract finishes.
(Some work-agency contracts last 3 days).
The worst thing that can happen to Britain is that these mass Romanians and Bulgarians come over here and get a job.
They'd be living in houses, the unemployed Brits would be sleeping in the parks.Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - 13 October 2013 15:04248086DIRECTIVE 2004/38/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 29 April 2004
"...(9) Union citizens should have the right of residence in the host Member State for a period not exceeding three months without being subject to any conditions or any formalities other than the requirement to hold a valid identity card or passport, without prejudice to a more favourable treatment applicable to job-seekers as recognised by the case-law of the Court of Justice.
(10) Persons exercising their right of residence should not, however, become an unreasonable burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State during an initial period of residence. Therefore, the right of residence
for Union citizens and their family members for periods in excess of three months should be subject to conditions."
(11) The fundamental and personal right of residence in another Member State is conferred directly on Union citizens by the Treaty and is not dependent upon their having fulfilled administrative procedures.
(12) For periods of reside nce of longer than three months, Member States should have the possibility to require Union citizens to register with the competent authorities in the place of residence, attested by a registration certificate issued to that effect.
(13) The residence card requirement should be restricted to family members of Union citizens who
are not nationals of a Member State for periods of residence of longer than three months.
(14) The supporting documents required by the competent authorities for the issuing of a registration certificate or of a
residence card should be comprehensively specified in order to avoid divergent administrative practices or interpretations
constituting an undue obstacle to the exercise of the right of residence by Union citizens and their family members.
(15) Family members should be legally safeguarded in the event of the death of the Union citizen, divorce, annulment of marriage or termination of a registered partnership. With due regard for family life and human dignity, and in certain conditions to guard against abuse, measures should therefore be taken to ensure that in such circumstances family members already
residing within the territory of the host Member State retain their right of residence exclusively on a personal basis.
(16) As long as the beneficiaries of the right of residence do not become an unreasonable burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State they should not be expelled. Therefore, an expulsion measure should not be the automatic consequence of recourse to the social assistance system. The host Member State should examine whether it is a case of
temporary difficulties and take into account the duration of residence, the personal circumstances and the amount of aid granted in order to consider whether the beneficiary has become an unreasonable burden on its social assistance system and to proceed to his expulsion. In no case should an expulsion measure be adopted against workers, self-employed persons or job-seekers as defined by the Court of Justice save on grounds of public policy or public security.
(17) Enjoyment of permanent residence by Union citizens who have chosen to settle long term in the host Member State would strengthen the feeling of Union citizenship and is a key element in promoting social cohesion, which is one of
the fundamental objectives of the Union. A right of permanent residence should therefore be laid down for all Union citizens and their family members who have resided in the host Member State in compliance with the conditions laid down in this
Directive during a continuous period of five years without becoming subject to an expulsion measure.
(18) In order to be a genuine vehicle for integration into the society of the host Member State in which the Union citizen resides,
the right of permanent reside nce, once obtained, should not be subject to any conditions.
(19) Certain advantages specific to Union citizens who are workers or self-employed persons and to their family members, which may allow these persons to acquire a right of permanent residence before they have resided five years in the host Member State, should be maintained, as these constitute acquired rights, conferred by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1251/70 of 29 June 1970 on the right of workers to remain in the territory of a Member State after having been employed in that State1 and Council Directive 75/34/EEC of 17 December 1974 concerning the right of nationals of a Member State to remain
in the territory of another Member State after having pursued therein an activity in a self-employed capacity 2.
(20) In accordance with the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality, all Union citizens and their family members residing in a Member State on the basis of this Directive should enjoy, in that Member State, equal treatment with nationals in areas covered by the Treaty, subject to such specific provisions as are expressly provided for in the Treaty and secondary law.
(21) However, it should be left to the host Member State to decide whether it will grant social assistance during the first three
months of residence, or for a longer period in the case of job-seekers, to Union citizens other than those who are workers or self-employed persons or who retain that status or their family members, or maintenance assistance for studies, including vocational training, prior to acquisition of the right of permanent residence, to these same persons.
(22) The Treaty allows restrictions to be placed on the right of free movement and residence on grounds of public policy, public security or public health. In order to ensure a tighter definition of the circumstances and procedural safeguards subject to which Union citizens and their family members may be denied leave to enter or may be expelled, this Directive should
replace Council Directive 64/221/EEC of 25 February 1964 on the coordination of special measures concerning the movement and residence of foreign nationals, which are justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health1..."
The above is an extract from the first 'pdf' file linked to on this page...
http://ec.europa.eu/anti-trafficking/Legislation%20and%20Case%20Law/EU%20Legislation/Labour%20Law%20and%20free%20movement%20of%20people/Directive%20of%2029%20April%202004%20on%20right%20to%20free%20movementIgnorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - 13 October 2013 15:32248088never use one paragraph when 50 will do the same, keeps people employed i suppose.
21 and 22 are open to interpretation tom and i have no idea what is meant by secondary law in 20. - 13 October 2013 15:46248089Yes Howard, as you no doubt saw for yourself, there is 47 pages of the stuff.
The 'gist' though is that there is no clear must-take-all-like-it-or-lump-it system in place.Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - 13 October 2013 16:40248094member states cherry pick which rules they will follow tom but the european court of human rights can overrule many of the directives
as an example the first 4 lines of 22 are nullified by the "right to family life" ruling of the echr. - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,888
13 October 2013 16:48248096lets remember the tories came into office promising to sort out out
years later the numbers increase....... same old toriesALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 13 October 2013 17:21248107Many in Romania and Bulgaria know that by being the first to arrive, they'll stand more chance of getting emergency housing and free B/B, so there may be a flood from day one 2014, busloads of people descending at Eastern Docks and bursting through the barriers, heading on foot along Townwall Street attracted towards Burlington House, and on into the town.
The Castle Inn ho(s)tel should be the first hit, mainly by those carrying up to £55.23p in financial resources; then waves will expand on into Pencester Gardens, with search parties heading out to look for more parks and common greens.
Connaught Park will be inundated, and human masses carrying plastic bags will be swelling along Folkestone Road.
Long columns will start walking up Jubilee Way heading towards London; while Dover's seafront becomes a shanty town.Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - 13 October 2013 17:43248115so not all bad then alex?
incidentally where does the figure of £55. 23 pence come in? - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,888
13 October 2013 17:44248117the price of beef?ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 13 October 2013 19:05248134The grand sum of £55. 23p would be the maximum figure that an average working person in Romania and Bulgaria, on a minimum wage of 158 euro a month and with 3 children, brings with them.
These will attempt "to find work" within three days.
The majority will have 5 euro and 23 cents. These will be the massed unemployed of these two countries.
I've come across a number of people trying to get a train to London without even the money for the ticket.
They are convinced London will solve all their problems.
They leave Romania and Bulgaria with literally nothing except the bus ticket to Dover and a bag of socks and 23 pence.
Others I've encountered on occasions were desperately trying to get back to Romania and needed some money to put towards the ticket.
One even pretended to be a Pole and said he'd tried out all the Polish shops in Dover but that they weren't interested.
He wasn't a Pole.
These people are desperados!Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ