| The Comments |
Not sure what it has got to do with Brexit potblack?
Unless you are trying to say that we are going to get lots of E Europeans getting married here on benefits?
When I was younger, this, we having got married in a Reg Office in order to save for a house deposit, would have got us wound up.
I gave up being wound up when they had a couple on benefits living in a council house, kids and all the latest toys on the floor complaining that their benefits only allowed them to get out to the pub twice a week, in a programme on 'World in action' about poverty. This on a day when I had had to refuse an invitation at work to go to the pub as I had no money.
You just have to realise that politicians do not live in the same world as normal people and it will always go on. If you can, you have to rise up the geasy pole and get above it all.
This message was last edited by tteedd on 12/02/2017.
0
Like
|
Yes tteedd it does not relate directly to BREXIT. But if some people think when we do exit everything is going to be under control and rosy they can think again. The UK seems to be the champions of the world in squandering tax payer’s money and not enforcing controls it already has. Benefit’s system gone mad, health tourism non EU, can’t be bothered to claim back on EHIC system, etc.
You already said it ‘’ You just have to realise that politicians do not live in the same world as normal people and it will always go on.’’ A case of I’m alright Jack. Sad to say.
_______________________
NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER: A mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others.
1
Like
|
Not bad if you can get . This message was last edited by windtalker on 12/02/2017.
1
Like
|
Ads
Yes we need a regulated welfare system that is fair to all when they need it and it should never be allowed to become a way of life for life for anyone uk citizen or not
The uk needs to get its own house in order instead of blaming anyone or anything else
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
1
Like
|
Sorry Tadd, no-one is saying that the UK Govt has been blameless ( in fact I've been highly critical of David Cameron's Govt failures, not least in his failure to comprehend and respond to regional pressures brought about by uncontrolled freedom of movement, such aspects as cancelling a fund originally intended to assist those areas under the most pressure ).
But neither is it acceptable to turn blind eyes to a system that further exacerbates the problems by denying the UK Govt the ability to control external EU pressures on the benefit system etc, nor deny that the UK Govt is in transition, I.e. in the process of reformimg the benefit system ( albeit well overdue reform, but hopefully in a balanced measured manner that incentivises work whist remaining aware of the need not to exacerbate poverty...not an easy task ).
Which to be honest is more than can be said of the current EU bureaucrats, who STILL refuse to recognise the impact from their intransigent approach and failure to reassess and take due account of differentials between member states.
Given the complexities I don't think many consider the way ahead will be easy, but one thing for sure is that it's in everyone's interest that we all strive for mutually beneficial outcomes.
1
Like
|
Sorry Ads but the EU does NOT deny the UK the chance to reform or control the UK benefit system neither do they apply external pressure. The elgibility for UK benefits is down to the UK and nobody else
What control does the EU have over say Spain's system
the reforms you talk about are not enough so far
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
1
Like
|
ads has a distorted view of what the EU actually is and what it's function and relationship to the member states represents. Not uncommon among Brexiteers I have to say. They seem mostly to inhabit an illusory perception that the EU Commission is actually governing their sovereign member states.
The idea that the EU would have any controlling or regulatory influence over member states welfare system is unthinkable. Can you imagine the allegations of dictatorship and interference if it did?
Britain cannot expect any help from Frau Merkle in the coming Brexit negotiations.
British diplomats in Berlin are warning the government that Merkel means what she says in public about prioritizing EU stability over safeguarding trade with the U.K.
“There is still some delusion in London about the role Germany and Merkel will play in Brexit negotiations,” said Holger Schmieding, chief economist at Berenberg Bank. “Merkel’s political interest in keeping the EU-27 together outweighs any interest the German car industry or any other industry has in the British market. Political interests take absolute precedence.”
Bloomberg News. 13 Feb.
That conforms to my own view that the EU will sacrifice all trade advantages with the UK for more pressing political concerns of unity among the 27 remaining member states.
Britain is going to pay a very high price for Brexit. The hardships to come are going to politically and economically destabilise the nation.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
The EU certainly does have the power to control as demonstrated from the negotiations prior to Brexit where the "terms" were identified in the following article which was identified in a previous posting.
According to the Telegraph - "what Cameron asked for and what he actually got" :_
Migration and benefits
Pledge
"We will insist that EU migrants who want to claim tax credits and child benefit must live here and contribute to our country for a minimum of four years." - Conservative Party Manifesto 2015
What he got
Draft text: This was Cameron’s trophy achievement. It consists of a mechanism to “limit the access of union workers newly entering its labour market to in-work benefits for a total period of up to four years from the commencement of employment” if the UK, or any other member state, can show that EU migrants are “putting an excessive pressure on the proper functioning of its public services”.
No details are provided on what “excessive pressure” means, but a note on the mechanism says it will be tabled on the understanding that "it can and will be used" by the UK and the UK will do so "in full expectation of obtaining approval". However the control of the brake appears to remain firmly in the hands of the Commission who must be "notified" by any member state that they believe they are eligible to use it.
The text also adds an important caveat that the “limitation should be graduated, from an initial complete exclusion” to be followed by “gradually increasing access to such benefits” the longer that an EU worker stays in the host member state’s labour market.
Final deal: All of the above, including a declaration that the four-year brake will be available to Britain for “a period of 7 years”. This is a ‘win’ for Cameron, although he had reportedly demanded up to 13 years availability.
On the negative side, Mr Cameron’s negotiators were unable to remove the “tapering mechanism” which will see EU migrants start to receive benefits when they start to contribute to the system – probably after their first year of work.
Critics will point out that the deal only fully denies in-work benefits for one year, not four. There is also no mention of the benefits changes being protected by treaty change, which some critics have warned could leave them vulnerable to challenge in the European Courts.
For further detail of the article covering all pledges see http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/eu-deal-what-david-cameron-asked-for-and-what-he-actually-got/
Hardly surprising then that UK citizens lost faith in David Cameron and trust in the EU to heed and effectively respond to their ongoing and growing concerns in the lead up to Brexit.
1
Like
|
ads - Your points about Camerons negotiations relate to EU migrants, citzens of other EU states coming to Britain not the UK benefit system as a whole. The two issues are different.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
The two are totally related in so much as the E U dictates the terms under which EU migrants become eligible for benefits and this is exactly my point about not being able to control external pressures, plus the EU are failing to take account of member state differentials in their ongoing negotiating stance.
This message was last edited by ads on 13/02/2017.
2
Like
|
Not 'dictates' ads; the EU negotiates and consensus is reached. Why see everything in the negative? Remember UK nationals receive the same benefits when emigrating to another state depending on what is agreed. Or are you suggesting the UK is unfairly targeted by the EU?
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
Ads
"We will insist that EU migrants who want to claim tax credits and child benefit must live here and contribute to our country for a minimum of four years." - Conservative Party Manifesto 2015
Yes it was rejected (by the EU not one person) because DC wanted a separate arrangemnet for UK citznes and immigranst which is not what was agreed at the outset of the EU.
This was deemed by many in the EU as discrimination and rightly so
If he had said the UK are changing the UK's benefit system so nobody gets benefits until contirbuitons were made for 4 years etc then he woudl have been able to do this without the EU having a say
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
1
Like
|
I am highlighting the fact that so long as the EU have the power to dictate the terms ( since they have the power to deny terms), the EU are failing to review the differentials between member states when they open negotiations with member states, which is critical to fair comparison evaluations.
So in the case of the UK they make no allowance for the circumstance where, for instance, a member state is not experiencing high unemployement, provides lower benefit levels, have no tax credit systems to assist their nationals, have lower levels of debt, have relative greater spending power due to cost of living indices etc. All manner of differences that need to be intellectually evaluated, but that have the potential to act as unfair " pull mechanisms" resulting in swift migration flows without the ability of that member state to control or be compensated.
Without this detailed level of evaluation, this provides the potential for unfair advantage (for example in particular with the Eastern Med states as we witness by the large migration numbers.)
This is not I hasten to add a fault of the citizens but of the SYSTEM that fails to take such differentials into account. The system has failed countries that are exposed to such swift and uncontrollable "pull factors" which has resulted in an inability of those countries affected to control "external pressures". with all the subsequent knock on effects, which as already expressed, sadly have the potential to impact cohesion.
Many member states citizens feel equally frustrated by the lack of willingness by EU bureaucrats to review such uncomfortable realities that are directly impacting their everyday lives, hence the growth of "populist" movements where citizens perhaps feel this the only way by which they can get their voices heard.
IMHO the EU bureaucrats refusal to review and fairly evaluate in this manner therefore is just one example of many factors that need to be reviewed, for the sake of all it's citizens if the union is to carry the support of it's citizens forward and seek out mutually beneficial but FAIR outcomes.
This message was last edited by ads on 13/02/2017.
1
Like
|
Ads
I am highlighting the fact that so long as the EU have the power to dictate the terms ( since they have the power to deny terms), the EU are failing to review the differentials between member states when they open negotiations with member states, which is critical to fair comparison evaluations.
The reason this will not work is the same as the reason it would not work across the regions of the UK as the Uk do not differntaiate between them
All tersm were agreed when each member state voted and signed tehtreaties and agreements it is not the EU it is the member states who decide. The UK wanted change (an in partculr to fix its own problems) and it was not approved get over it
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
0
Like
|
Sadly it is this form of intransigence to seek out mutually beneficial solutions and outcomes when treaty arrangements have been "found wanting" that have led to citizen disillusionment leading to unrest which many other European member states have recognised.
To imply that there is no willingness to review and respond to unintended consequences is exactly why people have sadly lost faith in the EU.
It doesn't have to be like this!
P.s Differentials across regions in the UK ARE currently being evaluated..There is a willingness to recognise unfair factors across regions and the current Govt are starting to listen to their citizens concerns and respond ( but it will take time of course). They certainly aren't in denial or as intransigent as appears to be the case with the EU bureaucrats I'm afraid.
This message was last edited by ads on 13/02/2017.
This message was last edited by ads on 13/02/2017.
This message was last edited by ads on 13/02/2017.
0
Like
|
You cannot have treaties being re-negotiated on the whim of one member state. Treaties are binding agreements. You accept the rules of a club when you join. Unless their is a concensus among a majority of members to change those rules they remain in place. That is not intransigence just workable common sense.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
The whim of one member state Mickeyfinn???? Do you not hear the voices of ctizens across member states with regard to all manner of issues that require attention?
What is not being recognised here however, is that there appears to be the ability to address the differential issues in the negotiating processes across member states, if there was willingness to recognise and review unfair and risky uncontrolled pull factors, to re-evaluate for the need for a more effective factoring mechanism to take acount of the many differences between member states.
This message was last edited by ads on 13/02/2017.
1
Like
|
** EDITED - off thread **
This message was last edited by eos_moderators on 2/13/2017 7:04:00 PM.
_______________________
NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER: A mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others.
0
Like
|
ads - he whim of one member state Mickeyfinn???? Do you not hear the voices of ctizens across member states with regard to all manner of issues that require attention?
It has become politically fashionable among a minority of disaffected European peoples to support populist political movements against the status quo.
It’s a normal part of the democratic process. It does not mean a majority support it. There are challenges for the EU I concede that but Britain leaving does not a domino collapse make.
That is one of the reasons Britain cannot expect to be better off outside the block than in it.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
One aspect to understand Mickeyfinn is that the UK Govt are not looking for a collapse of the EU by any means, and wish to find mutually acceptable outcomes to this UK democratic decision. It requires give and take of course but having been exposed to fear mongering in the lead up to the EU referendum, etc, which has not transpired, plus the change in leadership (Theresa May) and the determination to stand strong but willing to seek solutions and outcomes, the mood is far more upbeat but equally resolved to ensure the best way forward from Brexit.
I know that this is not comfortable for some to accept the democratic wish of the UK, but now having viewed many many live debates in Parliament, Select Committees, ongoing live interviews across all political spectrums, and having the agreement of Parliament with a large majority vote to trigger article 50, this is now proceeding.
I'm sure that we both want the best for Europe and the UK, but IMHO (very humble!!) I live in hope of the EU member states achieving the change that most desire to improve their lives, as do we in the UK, very mindful of striking mutually beneficial terms that will prioritise and enhance cohesion so that we can work together in a different way, but nevertheless work wherever possible to the best advantage of all citizens.
1
Like
|