Thousands of Romanians and Bulgarians spotted at the borders

[User removed 4]

Within an economic and political union? And numbers? Nope.

grocer Heath LIED to us about this.

 

[User removed 4]

I am afraid that the short answer to this is that it won't. People over here still blame immigrants for their woes.

Perhaps they have a point.

 

[BadFish]

Perhaps they have a point.

Perhaps they see the problems they are faced with and find an easy scapegoat to blame instead of those responsible.

Although I agree that the Aboriginal would certainly have a point, but it is not them I am talking about.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

@somerset and @bashlsdir, do you know what the Schengen area is? How can you possibly NOT follow those rules? It would pretty obvious if those rules weren't being followed. Back in the 90s, I was cycling through France, Germany, Netherlands, Luxembourg and Belgium - and in four holidays I wasn't stopped for my passport ONCE. So yes, I'd say they DO follow that particular rule.

My position is that I'm really struggling to see what possible benefits the British man on the street is going to see, from having large numbers of East Europeans flood into our country. I don't mind immigration and see it as a necessity for a vibrant and tolerant society, but it seems to me that for skills we don't need there should be restrictions on the numbers coming in.

I agree with you on the possible benefits. Far as I am concerned increased migration will just keep driving this low wage economy.
Did you see Inside Out last night on the BBC? Eastern Europeans being paid £2 or £3 per hour working in construction, with the rest of their money being made in benefits.

 

[Simster]

Within an economic and political union? And numbers? Nope.

The problem with that answer is that the economic and political union we joined in 1973 has changed beyond all recognition. Back in the day, we joined an economic union with a dozen broadly similarly wealthy and culturally western economies. Since then, we've had no say in who joins.

And now we see a problem where thousands of unskilled workers from eastern Europe can rock up and undercut the most vulnerable British workers. The sad thing is, you and many others don't seem to care. It seems every bit as selfish as anything a Tory government ever does.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

The problem with that answer is that the economic and political union we joined in 1973 has changed beyond all recognition. Back in the day, we joined an economic union with a dozen broadly similarly wealthy and culturally western economies. Since then, we've had no say in who joins.

And now we see a problem where thousands of unskilled workers from eastern Europe can rock up and undercut the most vulnerable British workers. The sad thing is, you and many others don't seem to care. It seems every bit as selfish as anything a Tory government ever does.

Your quite right here. The EU worked best when only a handful of countries where included. Once they added the others this is where the journey started driving the low wage economies.

There seems to be no end to this madness either with Albania possibly joining.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/43...illions-closer-to-getting-right-to-work-in-UK

Who is helping them to join? Enough said!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...air-signed-up-to-help-Albania-to-join-EU.html

 

[Hamilton]

Really ??
In inner London 55% of primary school pupils dont have english as a first language , in outer london the figure is 39%, the figure across the rest of the UK is one in six, do you think the problems this causes put strain on the education authorities involved , do you think that this hinders children who are native english speakers ?
In 2012, a quarter (25.9%) of all births in England and Wales were to mothers born outside the United Kingdom. In London this figure was 57.4%. In the London Boroughs of Newham, Brent, Westminster and Kensington and Chelsea over 70% of births are to mothers born outside the UK.

A Parliamentary answer revealed that in 2011, 64.9% of all births in London were to couples where one or both were born outside the UK, do you really think that the character and identity of this country WONT be changed by this ?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/the_p_word/newsid_7217000/7217953.stm

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/gove...s-placing-huge-strain-on-britain-7300265.html

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8847831/the-next-nhs-scandal/

I could go on.........

You've presented me with two news reports that are 5 years old and contain some unsubstantiated data. The one that does, even notes that it believe immigrants helped grow the economy by £6billion in the previous year - although again, it fails to note the evidence supporting these claims.

The third piece is an opinion piece from the Spectator.

Try reading this more up to date report...

http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_22_13.pdf

Here is a little takeout from it:

"The perhaps most important finding of our analysis is that immigrants are overall less likely than natives to receive state benefits or tax credits, and similarly likely to live in social housing as natives in the same region. Some differences do emerge, however, between immigrants from the European Economic Area (EEA) and those from outside Europe (non-EEA). Whereas EEA immigrants have made an overall positive fiscal contribution to the UK, the net fiscal balance of non-EEA immigrants is negative, as it is for natives.

Recent immigrants, i.e. those who arrived since 2000, are less likely to both receiving benefits and living in social housing than natives. Furthermore, recent immigrants, both those from EEA and non-EEA countries have made a positive net contribution to the UK fiscal system despite the UK’s running a budget deficit over most of the 2000s."

I understand the concerns people have with the changes that are being brought by this new society we live in, but the answer doesn't lie in shutting the borders.

 

[Guinness Boy]

The problem with that answer is that the economic and political union we joined in 1973 has changed beyond all recognition. Back in the day, we joined an economic union with a dozen broadly similarly wealthy and culturally western economies. Since then, we've had no say in who joins.

And now we see a problem where thousands of unskilled workers from eastern Europe can rock up and undercut the most vulnerable British workers. The sad thing is, you and many others don't seem to care. It seems every bit as selfish as anything a Tory government ever does.

They can't legally. There's a minimum wage and tax credits. Blame shonky employers, or, perhaps, the likes of Tesco's who are constantly demanding cheaper supplies and smaller margins.

 

[User removed 4]

You've presented me with two news reports that are 5 years old and contain some unsubstantiated data. The one that does, even notes that it believe immigrants helped grow the economy by £6billion in the previous year - although again, it fails to note the evidence supporting these claims.

The third piece is an opinion piece from the Spectator.

Try reading this more up to date report...

http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_22_13.pdf

Here is a little takeout from it:

"The perhaps most important finding of our analysis is that immigrants are overall less likely than natives to receive state benefits or tax credits, and similarly likely to live in social housing as natives in the same region. Some differences do emerge, however, between immigrants from the European Economic Area (EEA) and those from outside Europe (non-EEA). Whereas EEA immigrants have made an overall positive fiscal contribution to the UK, the net fiscal balance of non-EEA immigrants is negative, as it is for natives.

Recent immigrants, i.e. those who arrived since 2000, are less likely to both receiving benefits and living in social housing than natives. Furthermore, recent immigrants, both those from EEA and non-EEA countries have made a positive net contribution to the UK fiscal system despite the UK’s running a budget deficit over most of the 2000s."

I understand the concerns people have with the changes that are being brought by this new society we live in, but the answer doesn't lie in shutting the borders.

I could put up links that counter the one you posted, but I've avoided doing so because as yours is, they are seen as biased and partisan.

 

[Simster]

I understand the concerns people have with the changes that are being brought by this new society we live in, but the answer doesn't lie in shutting the borders.

No-one is suggesting SHUTTING them.

But the fact is, you're not actually making a case against exerting a bit more border CONTROL.

 

[BadFish]

I could put up links that counter the one you posted, but I've avoided doing so because as yours is, they are seen as biased and partisan.

Oh go on Bushy, let's get it out there so we can see which is most compelling.

 

[Hamilton]

I could put up links that counter the one you posted, but I've avoided doing so because as yours is, they are seen as biased and partisan.

I think that as you said, we will all keep going round in circles. And, as another poster has said, let's wait 12 months and see what impact the latest additions to our country have.

I just don't want this country rushing into an introvert and isolated knee jerk reaction based upon gut feel. I also know that career politicians like Cameron will do whatever and say whatever they can to get re-elected and people like Farage know this and will play the anti-immigrant stance to goad him into action.

 

[Hamilton]

No-one is suggesting SHUTTING them.

But the fact is, you're not actually making a case against exerting a bit more border CONTROL.

What control do you want? No more than 20% movement between all countries. Will that do?

 

[Simster]

What control do you want? No more than 20% movement between all countries. Will that do?

I've told you what I want. I want immigration from developing economies like Romania and Bulgaria to be restricted based on skills that we need, perhaps using a points system. We have enough poor British sods on benefits who want the work, without the fear of being undercut by people prepared to sleep six to a room for a year to save money for their families elsewhere before returning home.

And you said this: "I understand the concerns people have with the changes that are being brought by this new society we live in, but the answer doesn't lie in shutting the borders."

So where do you think the answer does lie?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Signed up yes, but do you really think there is a joyous consensus now that they are seeing some of the consequences manifest themselves?...... you need to look a bit deeper, there is discontent across many of the 26 at the large influx of itinerant workers from some of the less prosperous regions....even Herr Tub will admit that there are issues.

I'm not sure where you got this idea from. Is it something I have posted? But, of course there are challenges; as there with any new initiative. But, the affected governments and citizens broadly speaking do not have an issue with the principle. In mainland Europe the discussion was had decades ago, and was decided decades ago. Mainland Europe has now moved on. Top say there are major concerns with significant numbers of the EU population is IMHO wrong. Since 2007 when Schengen came in and having lived in mainland europe for almost 2 years and travelled all over the place I have not heard anyone mention it at all; it is just accepted.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I think that as you said, we will all keep going round in circles. And, as another poster has said, let's wait 12 months and see what impact the latest additions to our country have.

I just don't want this country rushing into an introvert and isolated knee jerk reaction based upon gut feel. I also know that career politicians like Cameron will do whatever and say whatever they can to get re-elected and people like Farage know this and will play the anti-immigrant stance to goad him into action.

True. I personally wish the government would spend all its energy on improving and re-balancing the economy (as Osborne promised). This is surely the priority? If the economy is good a lot of the perceived issues will simply go away. The UK really needs to get its priorities in order.

 

[pastafarian]

The Truth About Immigration BBC2 Tuesday 9.30 P.M.

BBC political editor Nick Robinson examines the public's anxieties about immigration and reveals the facts of an issue that has transformed British politics. With Britain braced for a new wave of migrants from eastern Europe, a subject once regarded as toxic is now at the forefront of political discussion. The programme dissects the decisions which led to the biggest surge of immigration in modern history and asks whether politicians can control immigration as much as they claim, looking at the potential consequences of their pledges

 

[Hamilton]

I've told you what I want. I want immigration from developing economies like Romania and Bulgaria to be restricted based on skills that we need, perhaps using a points system. We have enough poor British sods on benefits who want the work, without the fear of being undercut by people prepared to sleep six to a room for a year to save money for their families elsewhere before returning home.

And you said this: "I understand the concerns people have with the changes that are being brought by this new society we live in, but the answer doesn't lie in shutting the borders."

So where do you think the answer does lie?

Short-term, I want to see more time spent on integration. Long-term I want to see more spent on improving education and training opportunities for young people in this country so we can build a world-class workforce.

By the way, you'll love this fella (incase you missed him last night)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25631605

and for more balance he was covered here as well...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ims-Eastern-Europeans-better-paying-rent.html

...and that is why we need to invest in our youth today so that we can build a stronger Britain tomorrow, and stop victimising everyone on benefits. Osbourne has recognised this and decided to embrace it with £25billion in cuts.

His point on housing shortage is also interesting. We need about 250,000 more homes in the UK. Now we could just say, Britain's full, or we could say there's a demand to live and work here and we can benefit from that demand if we take the right decisions. The building of 250,000 homes creates a lot of training and wealth creation opportunities.

 

[BigGully]

His point on housing shortage is also interesting. We need about 250,000 more homes in the UK. Now we could just say, Britain's full, or we could say there's a demand to live and work here and we can benefit from that demand if we take the right decisions. The building of 250,000 homes creates a lot of training and wealth creation opportunities.

Could you please tell me what those benefits might be

 

[soistes]

I have sympathy for your argument, but the British electorate are not asked to approve pretty much anything. We don't want plebiscite/referendums on EVERY major decisions - we elect our MPs to delegate that responsibility and call them to account for the decisions they make.
.

Precisely this. It seems that many people on here do not understand the basic principles of representative democracy, which is a fundamentally British approach to democracy, and one that is worth keeping in my view. The only possible case, within such a system, for a referendum it seems to me is where major constitutional changes are being considered -- if someone were to suggest aboloshing the monarchy and replacing with an elected head of state, for example, that would pose a case for a referendum. Scottish independence is another example. Joining the the EU (or EC as it was then) in the first place was arguably on a par with this, and indeed we did get a referendum on it in 1975.
Leaving the EU should also not be undertaken without asking the population first (not least, because it's such a daft suggestion).
I fail to see how fiddling around with immigration regulations amounts to fundamental constitutional change and requires a referendum.
I would suggest that people who think this way consider moving to Switzerland, where they do have referenda on such matters (.... if they could get past the immigration controls in that country of course....)