Benefits entitlements for new arrivals into the UK rules.

We have all heard that newly arrived job seekers must wait 4 years before they become entitled to welfare support: my question is - what happens if they can't find work? Pre-supposing they won't be allowed to die of starvation and exposure, how will they support themselves, and maybe families, too, until they do find employment? Anybody?

 

They'd either go back home, or not come in the first place unless they had enough savings to support themselves until they found work, or have worked long enough to claim the benefits.

They more or less do that, anyway, though there are a lot of homeless EU nationals living on the streets still hoping to find the secure future they thought they'd get.

I don't think it'll make much difference, to be honest. Both sides put a lot of spin on the figures. David Cameron went on as if he was saving us multi millions by restricting EU migrants right to claim child benefit, but when put into context with the actual costs of providing child benefit the amount saved is piddling.

Especially as it's a form of means testing and, as everyone should know, means testing often costs more to implement than it does just to give the benefit to everyone.

 

So where does the '4 years' rule come in then? And who's gonna take details of their arrival time and date and record it somewhere, so everyone will know when the 4 years are up and they can start claiming? And how will the authorities know they're not starving on the streets if there's no record of their comings and goings, and whether or not they actually found work? Something tells me nobody in government has thought of any of that? What a bloody surprise!

 

These are legal migrants. They’d need to register for an NI number on arrival and should either be initially working or formally job seeking. If an EU migrant applies for welfare but don’t have any of that on record, I expect they’d be required to provide evidence of 4 years of residency in some other way.

They won’t, but then that’s true of British citizens starving on the streets too.

 

In other words it isn't feasible; and even if it were nobody would give a damn - they're so obsessed with dreaming up bad news stories about the referendum they're forgetting to govern. Although that might not be such a bad thing?

 

It seems generally feasible to me, certainly no more difficult that countless other elements of the welfare system and no more difficult than any other line you care to draw regarding who can claim welfare and when (other than “nobody” or “anybody&#8221.

Well yes and you can blame all the people who demanded a referendum in the first place for that inevitability.

 

I was one of them. We must get our sanity back.

 

You’re entitled to your opinion but it doesn’t give you much scope to complain about how the referendum you demanded has distracted so many in parliament (on both sides of the debate) from their actual jobs.

 

Here's your answer.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3589474/The-London-car-park-camp-homeless-migrants-live.html

 

Well Romas are very resourceful! 'the authorities can't move them on'? Bet they haven't tried very hard or the gobby liberati would go ballistic if they had. It'd be hilarious were it not so . . . correction - it is hilarious - a bunch of illegal migrant gypsies run rings around the local authority of a civilized country for ten years! Wonder what the crime statistics in the area are since they moved in? 'Those whom the gods wish to destroy .. . '!

 

At least they're not screwing up the country during the interregnum then?

 

There's plenty of time for that. I don't think we'll be leaving , no matter how the vote goes.

The worst that can happen for remainers like me is that BoJo takes over from Cameron ( which is well within the realms of possibility), goes on to win the next G.E. and keeps Britain in the EU.

edit: Hopefully it wont come to that and the voting goes in favour of remaining.

 

There will be blood on the streets if he does - which of course he won't.

 

No there won't because the sheeple will just go along with it.

As long as he doesn't actually claim he's going to ensure brexit goes ahead, he's home and dry.

The rest of the EU don't want us to leave, so there'll be no problem there.

Let's face it, Corbyn is unelectable. Not only that, no major party wants Britain to leave the EU.

It's a no brainer.

 

Of course they don't - they want our subscriptions ffs! Jesus wept, don't you understand that! Also taking the EU as 'a village', and accepting that every village has its resident idiot, we're its idiot as well as its Lady Bountiful.

 

They believe the EU is stronger with us, which it is.

What does that even mean?

 

Well it means they want our money, and think that if they bull(*)(*)(*)(*) us by saying that the EU is stronger with us, we'll vote to stay in, so they're killing 2 birds with one stone. Some of us can see what they're up to, ( ) and some of us can't. ( )

 

Now, I agree with your last statement, although I'd change "they're* to "we're".

We're part of the EU, so it should be what we're up to.

 

You might be but I'm not. Never wanted to be nor ever will want to be - I'm an Englishman not a European.

 

The majority of our MEP's are eurosceptics so the idea that 'we' are part of Europe is pushing it a bit.

 

No they aren't.

The EU needs reforming, certainly, but we can't do that on the outside.

 

You surely don't believe any of them take the slightest notice of us on the inside do you? They take our subs and laugh at us for paying them so promptly and without question. You're either ever so gullible or you have an agenda.

 

Show me sources for your claims, cerberus, otherwise what you claim is meaningless.

I would like to have a proper discussion about the pros and cons of being a member of the EU.

 

Some claims don't need to have sources, in fact there are no sources when the secrecy of the 'inner circle' of the EU and its democratic deficit don't allow certain aspects to be published in the public domain. Which of my claims do you have doubts about? Tell me, and l'll try to account to you my cynicism about it all? Bear in mind though that the accounts of the EU haven't been cleared by its accountants for 7 years. Does not that straightforward fact raise suspicions in your own mind?

 

All claims do need sources, otherwise there is nothing to discuss.

You must be basing your ideas on information you've heard somewhere.