Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
EU migrants put undue pressure on public services, says minister - video; James Brokenshire, the immigration minister EU immigration outweighs the economic benefits
Topic Started: Nov 5 2014, 02:49 PM (124 Views)
Boxter
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
EU migrants put undue pressure on public services, says minister - video
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/video/2014/nov/05/eu-migrants-undue-pressure-public-services-minister-video

James Brokenshire, the immigration minister, said on Wednesday that the pressure placed on public services by immigration from within the European Union outweighs the economic benefits. Brokenshire's comments are in response to study that suggested EU migrants to the UK are not a drain on Britain's finances and pay far more tax than they receive in benefits

This report came in two parts, the second part states that immigration from non-E.U. countries has cost this country £120 Billion.
Add that to the twelve billion a year in foreign aid and then ask yourself why we cannot properly fund the N.H.S. schools and care for the elderly or as here in Ulster the Dalriada Hospice for the treatment of MS sufferers and which offers respite care to carers is being shut dowen due to cost slashing measures while the EU gets 11.3 billion PLUS its extra 1.7billion plus as we learn today an extra £90 million every month Cameron with holds the £1.7Billion
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ranger121
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
Be interesting to know what YOUR view is on this subject, hmm?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Boxter
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Be interesting to know what YOUR view is on this subject, hmm?


Quote:
 
This report came in two parts, the second part states that immigration from non-E.U. countries has cost this country £120 Billion. Add that to the twelve billion a year in foreign aid and then ask yourself why we cannot properly fund the N.H.S. schools and care for the elderly or as here in Ulster the Dalriada Hospice for the treatment of MS sufferers and which offers respite care to carers is being shut dowen due to cost slashing measures while the EU gets 11.3 billion PLUS its extra 1.7billion plus as we learn today an extra £90 million every month Cameron with holds the £1.7Billion


The above is my comment on this I would just add the Tories cannot have it both ways they are either pro or anti the EU. The swamping comments now this are cynical ploy to hold onto votes. UKIP is the only anti EU party which is setting the agenda right now. Everyone else is merely responding to that. Every business that comments will tell for the most part the same story. Their trade with countries outside the EU is on the up whilst its stagnant or declining inside it. Thjis is where our real future lies as a trading nation not squandering billions propping up sick economies inside it plus acting as a repository for the reject social problems these other nations are glad to be shot of because they regard us as the begging bowl of the EU
Edited by Boxter, Nov 5 2014, 03:26 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Boxter
Nov 5 2014, 03:18 PM
Quote:
 
Be interesting to know what YOUR view is on this subject, hmm?


Quote:
 
This report came in two parts, the second part states that immigration from non-E.U. countries has cost this country £120 Billion. Add that to the twelve billion a year in foreign aid and then ask yourself why we cannot properly fund the N.H.S. schools and care for the elderly or as here in Ulster the Dalriada Hospice for the treatment of MS sufferers and which offers respite care to carers is being shut dowen due to cost slashing measures while the EU gets 11.3 billion PLUS its extra 1.7billion plus as we learn today an extra £90 million every month Cameron with holds the £1.7Billion


The above is my comment on this I would just add the Tories cannot have it both ways they are either pro or anti the EU. The swamping comments now this are cynical ploy to hold onto votes. UKIP is the only anti EU party which is setting the agenda right now. Everyone else is merely responding to that. Every business that comments will tell for the most part the same story. Their trade with countries outside the EU is on the up whilst its stagnant or declining inside it. Thjis is where our real future lies as a trading nation not squandering billions propping up sick economies inside it plus acting as a repository for the reject social problems these other nations are glad to be shot of because they regard us as the begging bowl of the EU
Illogical to say they are either for or anti, they could be like many others "not yet decided" and expecting to form such an opinion post Cameron negotiations if any. Me I want new membership terms which are largely based on trade, but prepared for some flexibility, if EU say no tow the line I will vote for out. The EU is not heading for Valhalla mote like Gotterdammerung.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
James Brokenshire might be next to jump ship to join UKIP. Because he has established a reputation as an anti-immigrant bigot, and since he is a Tory, he is not to be taken at his word. His latest statement changes the subject of European Union (EU) migration. What provoked Brokenshire was the report by academics at University College London which demonstrates that migrants from other EU states paid much more in taxes than they received in benefits over the past decade, making a net fiscal contribution of £20bn. This comes at a time when Angela Merkel made it clear to David Cameron that he must continue to accept the principle of freedom of movement within the EU or get out. Rambling on about "immigration from non-E.U. countries" is a smokescreen and a diversion from the topic.
EU migrants contribute £20bn in taxes
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Nov 5 2014, 03:47 PM
Illogical to say they are either for or anti, they could be like many others "not yet decided"

How many years/decades of Tory 'not yet decided' fence sitting are the electorate expected to put up with?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Boxter
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
I hope your right because in his job he knows the real truth surrounding immigration. The University College London report which is fuelling this debate concluded that those who arrived after 2000 made a net contribution to the UK Those from Poland Czech republic added £5bn more than they recieved from the state between 2000 & 2011

As for ALL other migrants living in Britain from 1995 to again 2011 they left us worse off by taking out £114 bn more than they contributed.

The EU migrants who positively contributed tended to fall into the younger aged highly skilled well educated category. Why the UCL people discriminate against non EU immigrants given their PC credentials is also strange. Our commonwealth has equally highly skilled well educated in many cases English speaking folk but they lumped them in with the other non EU crowd in a most discriminatory fashion

Rising immigration at the current uncontrolled rate means that by 2034 our population will have swelled by 12 million or like having two new Scotlands. Our infrastructure our environment and our society cannot cope as it is this does not bear thinking about it's devastating impact.

As the above figures indicate far from a positive impact we are already losing on this deal firrstly by their own figures a sum of minus £109 Billion and thats without calculating the value of the other negative impacts highlighted above
Edited by Boxter, Nov 6 2014, 09:32 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
got a link for that "£114B" "by their own figures" Boxter?

Can't see it in their own docs

summary: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1114/051114-economic-impact-EU-immigration

full report: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ecoj.12181/pdf

UCL
 
Immigrants who arrived since 2000 were 43% less likely than natives to receive state benefits or tax credits. They were also 7% less likely to live in social housing.

European immigrants who arrived since 2000 are on average better educated than natives (in 2011, 25% of immigrants from A10 countries and 62% of those from EU-15 countries had a university degree, while the comparable share is 24% among natives) and have higher employment rates (81% for A10, 70% for EU-15 and 70% for UK natives in 2011).

The value of the education of immigrants in the UK labour market who arrived since 2000 and that has been paid for in the immigrants’ origin countries amounts to £6.8bn over the period between 2000 and 2011. By contributing to ‘pure’ public goods (such as defence or basic research), immigrants arriving since 2000 have saved the UK taxpayer an additional £8.5bn over the same period.

Considering all immigrants who were living in the UK over the years between 1995 and 2011, a period over which the net fiscal contribution of natives was negative (and accumulated to about £591bn), EEA immigrants contributed 10% more than natives (in relative terms), while non-EEA immigrants’ contributions were almost 9% lower.

Over the same period from 1995 to 2011, immigrants who lived in the UK endowed the UK labour market with human capital that would have cost about £49bn if it were produced through the UK education system, and contributed about £82bn to fixed or ‘pure’ public goods.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gnikkk
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
ranger121
Nov 5 2014, 03:01 PM
Be interesting to know what YOUR view is on this subject, hmm?
Pretty much the same as everyone else's really, what benefit is there if it isn't financial? Maybe we as a nation don't like the option of sitting on the tube or getting to work on time? What isn't built into the stats is the fact that for everyone who we pay to come here to get a worthless job in this country (and pay buggre all tax) means that one of our own people needs massive financial support. It's hardly rocket science Einstein.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Gnikkk
Nov 7 2014, 12:53 AM
ranger121
Nov 5 2014, 03:01 PM
Be interesting to know what YOUR view is on this subject, hmm?
Pretty much the same as everyone else's really, what benefit is there if it isn't financial? Maybe we as a nation don't like the option of sitting on the tube or getting to work on time? What isn't built into the stats is the fact that for everyone who we pay to come here to get a worthless job in this country (and pay buggre all tax) means that one of our own people needs massive financial support. It's hardly rocket science Einstein.
And that's it in a nutshell

All these reports that say how much immigration benefits us take a very narrow view both in scope and timespan. There is always a knock on effect on Brits finding it harder to get jobs, there is always a long term effect that the immigrants will one day take pensions, there is always a cost due to the sudden population growth on schooling, housing, roads and other needs.

Only when we get a report that really looks holistically is anyone going to believe it. Sadly that means in the meantime many will believe just about any old made up story UKIP can come up with and often do.

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 7 2014, 03:15 PM
Only when we get a report that really looks holistically is anyone going to believe it. Sadly that means in the meantime many will believe just about any old made up story UKIP can come up with and often do.

Or alternatively believe any old tripe the bBC trlls us.

That report saying the immigrants considered in the report made a net contribution of five billion also tried to say that if we take out all the infratructure costs they impose on us, they contributed ten billion ...

and some tossers in the pro eu camp actually believe that to be a fact.

Fact is unless someone came along and did a proper assessment of exactly who is being allowed in, exactly what they are doing, and why someone already here could not do it and what are they doing instead, these reports are just BS pure and simple.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
I refer you to the question asked in post 8 to UKIP's ambassador to UKDebate and the complete absence of any answer

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
johnofgwent
Nov 7 2014, 03:22 PM
Steve K
Nov 7 2014, 03:15 PM
Only when we get a report that really looks holistically is anyone going to believe it. Sadly that means in the meantime many will believe just about any old made up story UKIP can come up with and often do.

Or alternatively believe any old tripe the bBC trlls us.

That report saying the immigrants considered in the report made a net contribution of five billion also tried to say that if we take out all the infratructure costs they impose on us, they contributed ten billion ...

and some tossers in the pro eu camp actually believe that to be a fact.

Fact is unless someone came along and did a proper assessment of exactly who is being allowed in, exactly what they are doing, and why someone already here could not do it and what are they doing instead, these reports are just BS pure and simple.
Exactly. Pure speculation. Even if the contribution was £5b over what was it a decade, who cares as it is not worth all the aggro and yes they did deny others job opportunities. Why did we open up the floodgates for so little in return and put our services under great strain when we could have satisfied most of the job demand for none skilled activities from local supply? Why? It makes no sense. The only logical claim is that Labour did this for political reasons, firstly to create a multicultural whatsit and/or depress wage rates.
I am for inward migration, but controlled for the benefit of this country. If EU membership dictates a free flow of such economic migrants within the EU of EU citizens then OK, but no access to welfare until suitable contributions have been made. It is one thing for Taxpayers to support kith and kin in a generous manner, but all those living in the EU are not our kith and kin.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
rizzo
Junior Member
[ *  * ]
As you know I do not put much faith in statistics as one can extrapolate what ever you want to to make your own particular argument.
Common sense tells me that unlimited immigration cannot be any good for any country. It is not racist or xenophobic it is just simple common sense.
We have welcomed genuine asylum seekers here for centuries and also welcomed skilled workers who can contribute, so where is the problem.
Unfortunately I fear that we are too late now to turn this problem around. Nobody knows how many illegal immigrants we have or how many genuine immigrants have extended families all claiming benefits.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
EU migrants are the least of concerns for the English, I would imagine. All those Muslims from their Commonwealth is a huge problem and the clock cannot be turned back.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply