There is so much misleading debate between Politicians and Citizens that it is timely for one British Citizen to express an opinion - and a new Policy within the EU.
If the UK does not remain in the UK after 2017 Referendum, that is a different matter although I believe that my suggestions will still apply.
When discussing Immigration, it is important to qualify what we mean by the word Immigration.
From the British viewpoint I think that it means -
- Immigrants from the European Union countries
- From The British Commonwealth Countries such as India, Pakistan,, West Indies amongst others.
- Immigrants wanting to become British Citizens
- Benefit and Healthcare Tourists,
- Asylum Seekers
- One Immigrant recorded means eventually 4, 5 or more family members with high birth rates.
So, when we talk about Immigration we had better define who we are talking about .Otherwise, we enter the world of fantasy. misinterpretation, false conclusions, double talk, racialism and sheer Political points scoring - all to the detriment of Democracy and the decent British Citizens.
It is a fact that there are nearly 30.000 Asylum seekers still awaiting a decision after many years in free living quarters and about £36 per week social benefits.
There is a continuous flow of migrants striving to enter the UK via Calais France. The Mayor of Calais recently blamed the UK Government for this turmoil in Calais Because Migrants from Yemen, Egypt, Somalia and other countries see the Benefits in Britain as El Dorado.
So what should the UK do about Immigration ?
- Most British Citizens are not against Immigration. We need an influx of trained, decent people to staff many of our job vacancies in the NHS, Education and Government Departments to give just a few examples.
- So, just like in Australia, there must be a Points System which can be used according to the Job Vacancies in the UK.
- Many thousands of Immigrants are serving the UK well already and they are welcome to continue to do so.,
- However, these Immigrants remain citizens of their country of birth.
- The UK will not strive to stop Immigration but will seek to control Immigration in the interests of The UK taxpayer.
One of the Foundation Stones of The Treaty of Rome and following Treaties is The Free Movement of Labour across National Boundaries.
The UK can comply with this rule but on an equal playing field basis.
Foreign Nationals should be supported by their own Country of Origin and not by the UK Government for any financial benefits or by the EU as proposed below.
This means that if they need Social Subsidies, their country of origin and as holders of a Foreign Passport - they should claim from their country's' Government.
They do not get British Social Security payouts.
They are not entitled to free housing or Welfare payments.
- The UK must end the current practice of paying Child Allowances to Immigrants such as from Poland who get payments for their children living back in Poland or any other EU country.
- The practice of the UK allowing 1 adult immigrant into the country - who then qualifies to bring his 4 children and wife with him - and then his Mother, Father, Uncles, Nephews,in fact his whole family should be ended.This is crazy and extremely costly to the British Taxpayer.
This covers the EU and the British Commonwealth countries.
Workers Yes - dependants - NO - unless they bring sufficient monetary resources with them so that they are not a burden on the British Taxpayer.
For EU Immigrants, a fund should be established in Brussels - The EU Welfare Fund ( EUWF ).
Healthcare and Social Costs should be charged by the UK - and all the other EU States directly to this fund for repayment.
This will avoid the current practice of certain member states from not repaying their citizens bills.
The EU would then be responsible for retrieving theses monies from the member state. Failure to repay would be mean penalties which would hurt.
- Regional needs must be another qualification for a Work Permit.
- Immigrants from the EU or Commonwealth should not be able to enter the UK and just disappear from the system. They must qualify on the Points / Regional basic needs.
A Job Vacancy must be advertised for 3 months before an Application from an Immigrant can be considered.
- A big loophole in the current Policy is twofold -
- The Applicant is an Asylum Seeker or he/she wants to study in the UK.
There are so much conflicts in the World that if there is not a cap on Asylum Seekers, the UK will be overrun with these people.This is where the United Nations should come in. They should identify Emerging Nations who need Labour and seek to get these Governments to take these Asylum seekers.
Since this is a Global Problem we need Global solutions.
2 -Students seeking entry to study here can be a good thing. However, they must have sufficient funds available and if they need Healthcare If they need help, costs must be re-funded by the proposed
EUWF.
If they come from Commonwealth countries or elsewhere. their Governments must deposit funds into a OSRF - Overseas Students Refund Fund - so that the costs to the UK Taxpayer are not abused.
If these Government fail to set up a Fund and there are Student Extra Costs, an appropriate amount of money must be deducted the UK Overseas Development Fund. That will make them think twice about being a Debtor or non Payer.
- Finally, criminals from the EU or Commonwealth must be re-patriated and the expense of prison paid for by the Foreign Government. The UK does not want Foreign Criminals. This must be applied to UK Criminals who commit crimes in Foreign Countries.
Is these ideas sensible for the UK or not ?
They are for debate and challenge but maybe - just maybe - most of the ideas make sense in 21st Century Britain. They are not Racialist Policies. They are sensible suggestions fro the British Taxpayer and Citizens.
BUT - A Warning. EU Commission President, Barroso has said - New restrictions could breach the fundamental principle of free movement of labour
.
My response could be - Does the Treaty of Rome 1957 Articles 83 and 84 and subsequent Treaties define that the free movement of labour means that EU citizens must have the right to enjoy all the existing levels of Welfare payments at the same rates and conditions in every country in the EU ?
If not because they cannot afford on par rates - is this not an EU problem to deal with and solve- with subsidies paid out of the EU Budget or EUWF as suggested earlier?
The UK is already a net contributor to the EU Budget. Why should the UK pay more by subsiding workers from other EU states such as - Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, and others ?
Why should not the EU subsidies these poorer states for Welfare payments ?
When the founding fathers of the EEC drew up the Rome Treaty 1957 - Holland, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, Germany, Italy - they were advanced economies. Even after the 1973 Treaty , the EU did not envisage admitting many poorer countries who would need vast subsidies and whose economies were weak. There was a failure in 1973 and subsequently to deal effectively with these issues. This was a failure of the collective EU Members and not the UK Governnment who were reluctant to use their Veto.. Perhaps in hindsight they should have used the Veto.
You must decide. After all - it is your Country - is it not ? Or, are we at the mercy of the EU
Commissioners and the EU Parliament ?
No comments:
Post a Comment