Think the welfare budget will be cut?
Discussion
I would not hold my breath.
Telegraph said:
New Eastern European 'benefit tourism' fears after safeguards scrapped
Tens of thousands of Eastern European migrants will be able to claim increased benefits in Britain within weeks because the government is being forced to scrap safeguards on receiving handouts.
Workers from former Eastern Bloc nations will become eligible to claim hundreds of pounds in jobseeker’s allowance, council tax help and housing benefits.
Migrants will be able to receive the benefits because restrictions on eligibility – introduced through a scheme introduced by the European Union seven years ago - are due to be abolished in May.
Under EU law all restrictions on citizens of new member states must end after a seven-year “transitional” period.
Ministers conceded last night they are powerless to prevent the changes because Britain needed to maintain “our national and international obligations”. The three benefits combined could be worth up to £250 a week, per person, The Times reported.
The disclosures will lead to concerns that a fresh wave of migrants will embark on "benefit tourism" placing an even greater strain on public finances.
Officials at the Department of Work and Pensions have pledged to be vigilant against fraud and promised to crack down on abusers.
Under the changes, nationals from the eight states will be able to access the three benefits as long as they can prove they have worked in Britain, sought more work and intend to live here.
It also means that tough rules introduced by other EU countries will also be scrapped. At the time the EU expanded only Britain, the Irish Republic and Sweden opened up their jobs market.
It means that countries such as Germany and Austria will be opening their doors to workers for the first time from May.
The scheme was introduced by Labour ministers in 2004 amid concerns that migrants from poor nations would arrive in Britain en masse.
After it was introduced following eight former Soviet bloc states joining the EU it led to “the largest single wave of foreign in-movement ever experienced by the UK”, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
Migrants were barred from receiving jobseeker’s allowance, housing and council tax benefit unless they had worked here continuously for twelve months. But very few qualified mainly due to their work was seasonal.
Official figures show that since 2005 hundreds of thousands of migrants have registered to work, reaching a peak of 224,195 in 2006.
That number fell after that but rose at the end of last year as Britain emerged from recession.
Damian Green, the Immigration Minister, said the Coalition would impose “transition controls2 on all new EU member states in future.
“We’re in the process of delivering major reform to bring immigration down to tens of thousands with the introduction of a new limit on economic migrants from outside the EU,” he said.
A DWP spokesman added: “We have to remain in line with our national and international obligations.
“However, it is absolutely necessary to protect the taxpayer and the benefit system from possible abuse. This is our No 1 priority.”
LinkTens of thousands of Eastern European migrants will be able to claim increased benefits in Britain within weeks because the government is being forced to scrap safeguards on receiving handouts.
Workers from former Eastern Bloc nations will become eligible to claim hundreds of pounds in jobseeker’s allowance, council tax help and housing benefits.
Migrants will be able to receive the benefits because restrictions on eligibility – introduced through a scheme introduced by the European Union seven years ago - are due to be abolished in May.
Under EU law all restrictions on citizens of new member states must end after a seven-year “transitional” period.
Ministers conceded last night they are powerless to prevent the changes because Britain needed to maintain “our national and international obligations”. The three benefits combined could be worth up to £250 a week, per person, The Times reported.
The disclosures will lead to concerns that a fresh wave of migrants will embark on "benefit tourism" placing an even greater strain on public finances.
Officials at the Department of Work and Pensions have pledged to be vigilant against fraud and promised to crack down on abusers.
Under the changes, nationals from the eight states will be able to access the three benefits as long as they can prove they have worked in Britain, sought more work and intend to live here.
It also means that tough rules introduced by other EU countries will also be scrapped. At the time the EU expanded only Britain, the Irish Republic and Sweden opened up their jobs market.
It means that countries such as Germany and Austria will be opening their doors to workers for the first time from May.
The scheme was introduced by Labour ministers in 2004 amid concerns that migrants from poor nations would arrive in Britain en masse.
After it was introduced following eight former Soviet bloc states joining the EU it led to “the largest single wave of foreign in-movement ever experienced by the UK”, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
Migrants were barred from receiving jobseeker’s allowance, housing and council tax benefit unless they had worked here continuously for twelve months. But very few qualified mainly due to their work was seasonal.
Official figures show that since 2005 hundreds of thousands of migrants have registered to work, reaching a peak of 224,195 in 2006.
That number fell after that but rose at the end of last year as Britain emerged from recession.
Damian Green, the Immigration Minister, said the Coalition would impose “transition controls2 on all new EU member states in future.
“We’re in the process of delivering major reform to bring immigration down to tens of thousands with the introduction of a new limit on economic migrants from outside the EU,” he said.
A DWP spokesman added: “We have to remain in line with our national and international obligations.
“However, it is absolutely necessary to protect the taxpayer and the benefit system from possible abuse. This is our No 1 priority.”
Tsippy said:
Simple way of preventing benefit tourism is to make our system unattractive ie change to a voucher / benefits card system where only the basics for living are provided and no more.
^^^^^ Yes. Absolutely essential IMO if we are going to continue with a benefits safety net anywhere near the current level.Some mechanism would be needed to make sure the right person was spending the vouchers to prevent development of a second-hand market with reipients selling vouchers below face value. Not exactly difficult to make that work if the vouchers are only valid at the big retailers but otherwise the problem would be the dodgy corner shop.....
Ozzie Osmond said:
Some mechanism would be needed to make sure the right person was spending the vouchers to prevent development of a second-hand market with reipients selling vouchers below face value. Not exactly difficult to make that work if the vouchers are only valid at the big retailers but otherwise the problem would be the dodgy corner shop.....
ID cards then. Seems to work well enough in other countries."A DWP spokesman added: “We have to remain in line with our national and international obligations.
“However, it is absolutely necessary to protect the taxpayer and the benefit system from possible abuse. This is our No 1 priority.”
All together now, "Roll out the barrel, we're on a barrel of YOUR dosh"....
“However, it is absolutely necessary to protect the taxpayer and the benefit system from possible abuse. This is our No 1 priority.”
All together now, "Roll out the barrel, we're on a barrel of YOUR dosh"....
Mojocvh said:
"A DWP spokesman added: “We have to remain in line with our national and international obligations.
“However, it is absolutely necessary to protect the taxpayer and the benefit system from possible abuse. This is our No 1 priority.”
All together now, "Roll out the barrel, we're on a barrel of YOUR dosh"....
Laugh or cry?“However, it is absolutely necessary to protect the taxpayer and the benefit system from possible abuse. This is our No 1 priority.”
All together now, "Roll out the barrel, we're on a barrel of YOUR dosh"....
WhoseGeneration said:
Bing o said:
ID cards then. Seems to work well enough in other countries.
Sarcasm smiley missing?I have one in Singapore - it shows my employment status, and is the only ID I need to show when I rent a condo, open a bank account, get a mobile phone etc etc. And I can skip through immigration through automated channels. If I lose my job (and therefore my ID card) then I have to leave within 30 days, or get a tourist Visa, and I'd have little chance of getting a job without it (ie cash in hand stuff).
It was only Labour's obsession with biometrics that f
ked up ID cards - the only thing the Singapore government has on me is one thumb print. No reason why an ID card couldn't be used as an entitlement card, and also to weed out illegals. But this being PH, everyone is rabidly anti ID cards without actually thinking about the benefits.
Bing o said:
this being PH, everyone is rabidly anti ID cards without actually thinking about the benefits.
Or perhaps we think why the fk should the rest of us carry around a card so someone else can claim benefits.Or perhaps labour f
ked it up so much with big brother the rest of us don't want the government to know via our thumb print when we take out a loan, buy a paper, rent a house, insure a car, buy a mobile or get a bus ticket.Personally I want the government to run the police, army, NHS, rubbish collection and schools and butt the f
k out of the rest of our lives and leave us the hell alone.I'm only speaking for myself you understand.
Sheets Tabuer said:
Or perhaps we think why the fk should the rest of us carry around a card so someone else can claim benefits.
[b[Or perhaps labour fked it up so much with big brother[/b] the rest of us don't want the government to know via our thumb print when we take out a loan, buy a paper, rent a house, insure a car, buy a mobile or get a bus ticket.
Personally I want the government to run the police, army, NHS, rubbish collection and schools and butt the fk out of the rest of our lives and leave us the hell alone.
I'm only speaking for myself you understand.
The ID card here is basically a plastic passport that shows you have the right to be here. The punishment for landlords who rent an apartment without proof of the leasees residency get a huge fine and jail time. If you think that the government don't know what Loans you have, or where you live, or if your car is insured in the UK, then you are wrong. I don't need my ID to buy a paper or get a bus. I also don't have a problem with showing anyone that I am legally allowed to live and work here. Oh, and the thumb print is only for immigration to prove that it's the card bearer - saves me 10-20 minutes each time...k should the rest of us carry around a card so someone else can claim benefits.[b[Or perhaps labour f
ked it up so much with big brother[/b] the rest of us don't want the government to know via our thumb print when we take out a loan, buy a paper, rent a house, insure a car, buy a mobile or get a bus ticket.Personally I want the government to run the police, army, NHS, rubbish collection and schools and butt the f
k out of the rest of our lives and leave us the hell alone.I'm only speaking for myself you understand.
I've bolded the bit where I think it went wrong in the UK
Bing o said:
The ID card here is basically a plastic passport that shows you have the right to be here. The punishment for landlords who rent an apartment without proof of the leasees residency get a huge fine and jail time. If you think that the government don't know what Loans you have, or where you live, or if your car is insured in the UK, then you are wrong. I don't need my ID to buy a paper or get a bus. I also don't have a problem with showing anyone that I am legally allowed to live and work here. Oh, and the thumb print is only for immigration to prove that it's the card bearer - saves me 10-20 minutes each time...
I've bolded the bit where I think it went wrong in the UK
You have mentioned all the upsides to the I.D. card that you are required to hold, any downsides to the system? Also in your case you were not permitted the choice as to whether you wanted to hold an I.D. card, and that is the crux of the argument over this issue (or was) in the U.K. Governmental intervention into citizens private lives coupled with the apparent lack of security of the I.D. database. I think that and the cost of the scheme outweighed the possible benefits. I've bolded the bit where I think it went wrong in the UK
I guess the almost certain knowledge that it's a government IT project doomed to failiure makes peoples minds up. Every legit person in the UK has a NHS number I believe, it can't be that hard to tack it onto that I'd imagine.
The Polish guys at work find it pretty odd we don't have them, and they need to take all sorts of paperwork to a bank to prove their ID.
Every legit person in the UK has a NHS number I believe, it can't be that hard to tack it onto that I'd imagine.The Polish guys at work find it pretty odd we don't have them, and they need to take all sorts of paperwork to a bank to prove their ID.
Bing o said:
Well, Crankedup, there really aren't any downsides unless you don't have one and are here illegally.
Effectively its a glorified NI number. I don't get the objection to having to show a card with your work eligibility on it. You need only roll it out to immigrants anyway.
IIRC there was a reason as to why the previous Government couldn't / wouldn't roll them out to immigrants only, and complications such as when doe's an immigrant gain U.K. status I guess.The cost issue was horrendous, that being the reason the current Government scrapped the idea, and of course public support was thin. I agree that there are many upsides to the I.D. scheme but personally couldn't trust any U.K. Government to keep hold of the individuals data safe.Effectively its a glorified NI number. I don't get the objection to having to show a card with your work eligibility on it. You need only roll it out to immigrants anyway.
Will the U.K. ever adopt I.D. cards again, I expect so, but not in my lifetime. (well I am retired)
Bing o said:
Well, Crankedup, there really aren't any downsides unless you don't have one and are here illegally.
Effectively its a glorified NI number. I don't get the objection to having to show a card with your work eligibility on it. You need only roll it out to immigrants anyway.
Or in its basic form with the biometrics stuff, it's a driving license for everyone, whether they drive or not. I wouldn't have a problem with this either .. as long as the DVLA don't do the administration stuff;)Effectively its a glorified NI number. I don't get the objection to having to show a card with your work eligibility on it. You need only roll it out to immigrants anyway.
To answer the OP, no, they would never dare.
Oh yes, they'll tinker around the edges, tighten up some means testing just a little bit but they won't really dare change anything.
Far too many voters of all major parties now have their hands in the money pot.
The whole thing is now a "who blinks first" game. Labour and Tory (well some of them we would hope) must know that running a country on 700 Billion, getting taxes of 550 Billion, paying benefits of 180 Billion and going 150 Billion further into the red every year just can't continue.
But they dare not tell the electorate that all the little extras must stop.
Would you want to be the politician that put a stop to an old lady's bus pass and free TV, a mums child benefit or family tax credit, or ask too loudly why we now appear to have more invalids than we did after World War one? Would you dare put a stop to maternity pay or suggest that having more children should never give you any right at all to live in a big house that most working people could never afford? Would you cancel the state pension?
Would you dare to cut university places down to 3 percent (which is all we needed not so long ago and there is no evidence that we've gained from the expansion since then).
Would you introduce a partly privatised health service in which only the basics were free and anything extra had to paid for by the patients?
No, you wouldn't.
It has been said that all democracies contain the seed of their own destruction as, sooner or later, the electrorate realise that they can vote themselves handouts from the public purse. We must be well on the way by now.
Oh yes, they'll tinker around the edges, tighten up some means testing just a little bit but they won't really dare change anything.
Far too many voters of all major parties now have their hands in the money pot.
The whole thing is now a "who blinks first" game. Labour and Tory (well some of them we would hope) must know that running a country on 700 Billion, getting taxes of 550 Billion, paying benefits of 180 Billion and going 150 Billion further into the red every year just can't continue.
But they dare not tell the electorate that all the little extras must stop.
Would you want to be the politician that put a stop to an old lady's bus pass and free TV, a mums child benefit or family tax credit, or ask too loudly why we now appear to have more invalids than we did after World War one? Would you dare put a stop to maternity pay or suggest that having more children should never give you any right at all to live in a big house that most working people could never afford? Would you cancel the state pension?
Would you dare to cut university places down to 3 percent (which is all we needed not so long ago and there is no evidence that we've gained from the expansion since then).
Would you introduce a partly privatised health service in which only the basics were free and anything extra had to paid for by the patients?
No, you wouldn't.
It has been said that all democracies contain the seed of their own destruction as, sooner or later, the electrorate realise that they can vote themselves handouts from the public purse. We must be well on the way by now.
cymtriks said:
or suggest that having more children should never give you any right at all to live in a big house that most working people could never afford? .
On this particular point the effect of capping benefits at £500 a week means that extra children will no longer mean more benefits past a certain point.thinfourth2 said:
ID cards are in theory a good idea.
In fact i would say they only have one downside but its quite a big one
The government would run it
Why cant they just modify the new style driving licences and add the required details ? This would provide drivers with the ID card straight away and they could issue a form of NON licence to those not licenced to drive. Maybe in a different colour. In fact i would say they only have one downside but its quite a big one
The government would run it
Just a thought.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff