Off Topic EU deabte. Which way are you voting ?

Rights to National Health Service (NHS) treatment
First, EU law certainly does not make the UK a safe haven for EU citizens who would like to come to get healthcare at the expense of UK taxpayers.
Those who come for short periods, for example on holiday, can receive basic and emergency care, by using the European Health Insurance Card (EHIC – formerly known as an E111).
However, under the EHIC system, that care is ultimately paid for by their own Member State of residence. Such visitors are in general not entitled to non-urgent treatment for existing medical conditions and neither are they entitled to come to the UK specifically to obtain NHS treatment.
EU law on the coordination of social security systems provides that those EU citizens – and only those – who can show that they are either employed or self-employed in the UK or non-active but habitually resident in the UK (see above for the criteria) are fully entitled to treatment by the NHS on the same terms as resident UK citizens.
UK law is in line with this principle and does allow EU citizens who are genuinely resident in the UK to have full access to NHS treatment.
UK citizens in other Member States have access to state funded healthcare systems there on the same basis.
But the UK does not recognise entitlement to NHS treatment as comprehensive sickness insurance cover within the meaning of EU law on free movement of EU citizens. It is on that issue that the Commission launched “infringement proceedings” (legal action) in 2011 against the UK.
In the Commission’s view, EU law requires that in assessing whether a non-active EU citizen should be entitled to remain in the UK under the free movement rules, the UK authorities must consider NHS cover – IF the person qualifies for it – as sufficient sickness insurance, without requiring them to obtain private insurance. It is worth emphasising again that the mere fact of being present in the UK is NOT enough to ensure qualification for NHS cover.
EU rules do not prescribe to EU countries how they should set up their national health-care systems. They can shape those systems as they see fit and the only obligation is that they cannot discriminate against EU citizens from other EU countries.
Like a number of other Member States (Spain, Portugal, Denmark, Sweden, Finland), the UK has decided to set up a scheme which does not link entitlements to individual contributions.

 

Actually not problem solved.

The question is to what welfare benefits an EU citizen is entitled to from the moment
they set foot in the UK and declare they are here looking for work.
Or do they have to be "self-sufficient" for the 90 day window ??

 

Why the salary stipulation? I don't understand. Either you're a valuable resource, or you're not. Surely salary is immaterial?
Although, having said that, £35,000 isn't a huge amount if you're living in the London area.

 

In London yes but it's a big wage where I'm from and more than I earn.

 

Norway has had to incorporate approximately three-quarters of all EU laws into its own domestic legislation”.

 

Also interesting to see how it goes if we do go it alone is Switzerland...

It's not all amicable like some Brexit people claim it will be if we come out and impose harsh rules on immigration.

Switzerland voluntarily adapts to EU laws from time to time
The Swiss relationship with the EU is different to Norway’s.
It’s also got a trading relationship through the European Free Trade Association, without being part of the European Economic Area.
This also involves taking on EU laws.
But instead of laws constantly flowing into its legal system, it negotiates new treaties or amends old ones in return for access to the single market and other EU activities.
Some of the important treaties are linked, so that if Switzerland or the EU pulls out of one, the others also collapse.
This system means that Switzerland doesn’t formally lack control over its own laws.
It’s under strain, though, after a Swiss referendum vote to cap immigration from the EU.
This has been criticised by the EU as against the rules of the treaty dealing with free movement of people, and led to the suspension of talks over cooperation in research funding.
There’s a lot of uncertainty about how to resolve this. News outlets report that the current Swiss deal with the EU could be under threat.
And the EU has previously said that it’s concerned about the way this system is working in general.

 

That's where some play the rules, it's bound to happen but it's interesting to see that it's not the free for all that some say it is.

 

There were two hilarious responses from Fosse, and you ****ers missed both...p83 I think.

I get you Fosse, that's all that matters.

 

You cannot say either way, if you are not empirically measuring specific things.

 

Yeah true and that works both ways with Brexit people claiming that it's all on a plate for immigrants.

 

But UKIP wants to 'control' immigration from the EU but is completely comfortable with people moving between England and Scotland. You can't possibly have such a policy without inherent discrimination on racial grounds.

 

... certainly is buddy ... ... got a simple view on immigration ... if you come here and are prepared to work to better your life ... welcome ... no matter what your race, creed or colour is ... I would probably have shagged your sisters when I was younger ... if they were pretty ...

In contrast ... I have no time for the indigenous types who have never ever worked a day or contributed to the country .... and would support any party advocating forced exportation of such to Greenland


Got nothing against Greenland btw .... but it is a huge expanse of unoccupied space with capacity to absorb the human waste of ...

 

http://www.scl.bz/zz09uhn-media.pdf

This is an interesting article about the potential effects of a Brexit, mainly from an investment point of view, but taking into account market volatility, strength of the pound and even the potential political landscape.

 

That is a bit of a worry, yes. But if the yoot can get off their arses to get Captain Birdseye elected as leader of the Labour Party I'm hopeful they can save our country from the angry old gits who want to stick two fingers up to our biggest trading partners.

 

You have lost me, we are the same people, other than the Scotch have more Ginger people

 

Nope, still bollocks.

 

My whole point is that if you think English people and Scots are the 'same' but want different rules to apply to French, Poles etc then you must think these people are 'different'. All the arguments about full schools, NHS, housing etc apply equally well to Scots moving to London or English people moving from Exeter to London or even English people being born in London. But the UKIP solution to these problems involves having a policy that only applies to the small part of the issue caused by migrants from outside of the UK.

 

I would rather have a brilliant heart or brain surgeon from the UK and 6 or 7 hospital cleaners also from the UK but we don't train enough doctors and very few 'indigenous' people seem willing to be hospital cleaners

 

So if we get rid of the immigrants who do these jobs there wont be more job opporunities for the scum who are on the dole as they don't want to clean the bogs?

 

Why do you think foreign people are cleaning the bogs now?!