Immigration and the UK's strained relationship with the European Union is a very hot topic at the moment.
It seems to me that UKIP and their supporters are being at best disingenuous and at worst lying.
The talk is all about EU immigration - people from the EU, particularly from Eastern Europe, flooding the UK. This then is where the argument starts to fall apart. These immigrants are flooding the UK and taking low paid jobs and so depriving local people of employment opportunities. These same immigrants are flooding the UK and sponging off of Welfare because the UK authorities are too soft.
Leaving aside the inherent contradiction in these two statements, let's dissect that for a moment.
These East Europeans take jobs that UK people don't take. That is probably true to a considerable extent. Certainly all the figures suggest that these East Europeans are very predominantly in work. In many cases they are in work which is below what their educational qualifications would suggest as being appropriate but they are in work. Being in work, they are only eligible for those Welfare benefits that are on offer to all low paid employees - UK citizens and non-UK citizens. These benefits like Working Tax credits and Child Benefit are a symptom of Labour's Gordon Brown's constant meddling in the UK tax system. Labour's Brown was/is 'old school' socialism. The sort that taxes everyone very highly and then the kindly State apparatus gives back to those that can work their way around the claims system. In this Socialist Utopia, you work for the State and then the State decides how much pocket money you shall have, to live on!
But back to immigrants. So these EU immigrants do jobs that the local population feel are somehow 'beneath' them. These though are jobs that society needs to have done. Office cleaning? Fruit or vegetable picking or packing? Clearing tables? The need is there and so is the supply of local labour however, the tax and the welfare systems combine to make it not worthwhile for the 'locals' to take these jobs. The income level achieved on Welfare benefits is such that actually taking a low paid job can cost a claimant a net loss in income. They and their families can be worse-off by being in work. This is because of income taxes that disproportionately hit low wage people and 'pound for pound' cuts in benefits based on income coming in.
The changes made by the Coalition, on an admittedly Lib Dem fundamental policy, are addressing the tax side of the equation. The raising of the threshold at which people start to pay tax, benefits millions of people but particularly the low paid. The Conservative pledge to build on this policy is very encouraging and worthy of support.
The Coalition policies on Welfare reform, this time Conservative inspired, are also starting to untangle the convoluted benefits system and make it clearer for people and, more importantly, to change the philosophy such that 'work' pays. That this has been done at a time when the nation has been undertaking a policy of austerity (although lack-lustre in my view) is a credit to the Conservatives and reflects a weeding out of the highly dubious claimant numbers that had grown up over recent years. A very high percentage of people that were claiming 'incapacity' benefit decided to drop their claims when they were told that they would need to be medically examined.
Recent reports point to a very positive net contribution to the UK economy from EU immigration. I know that these people have 'an axe to grind' and so the figures might be a little overblown but no one is questioning that the position is a net positive and this is after considering the costs associated with this EU immigration - higher NHS, schools and local council services use, etc..
I think though that the use by UKIP of EU immigration is a cloak. The real target is actually non-EU immigration. It isn't the pale-faced Poles or Czechs that bother them, so much as the black-faced Africans and Indians and Pakistanis and increasingly, displaced people from the Middle East. Read the sub-text to the UKIP election campaign for the Police and Crime Commission position in South Yorkshire. The Labour Party were, rightly, condemned for their negligence, bordering on encouragement of the abuse of up to 1,400 young girls in Rotherham but UKIP didn't fail to point out that the perpetrators were overwhelmingly (exclusively?) Asian men - usually Pakistanis.
All of the TV stories show black faces or swarthy types milling about in Calais and trying to steal away onto trucks. That is the immigration to which UKIP refers. It isn't the Bulgarian that flies Ryanair into Stanstead and travels on to London and takes a job cleaning toilets, for minimum wage!
I know I invite vitriol by saying it but how does UKIP's concerns about immigration differ from that of the odious BNP or National Front?
The issue with immigration is that people do want to come to the UK. Some will come because the Welfare programmes are too easily accessible. Others will come because the UK economy is growing and there are jobs available which are not being taking by locals.
To significantly reduce the 'Welfare' arrivals, the UK government needs to severely restrict the opportunity to claim benefits - something like, you cannot claim benefits until you have been paying into the system for for two years. Oh, and apply that to locals as well - wouldn't want to be discriminatory!
To reduce the numbers of those that come to the UK for work? Kind of a dilemma. A strong economy should be a welcomed event, however, in terms of incentivising local's off of Welfare and into work, government needs to continue to get out of the business of subsidising low-paying employers. Do this by increasing the tax thresholds, indeed accelerate this and combine it with squeezing Welfare benefits out of the tax system (and in the process, simplifying that overly complex beast).
UKIP is cleverly conflating British disenchantment with the EU, with a frankly racist immigration policy. Don't be fooled! You wouldn't vote for BNP or the National Front, would you?
It seems to me that UKIP and their supporters are being at best disingenuous and at worst lying.
The talk is all about EU immigration - people from the EU, particularly from Eastern Europe, flooding the UK. This then is where the argument starts to fall apart. These immigrants are flooding the UK and taking low paid jobs and so depriving local people of employment opportunities. These same immigrants are flooding the UK and sponging off of Welfare because the UK authorities are too soft.
Leaving aside the inherent contradiction in these two statements, let's dissect that for a moment.
These East Europeans take jobs that UK people don't take. That is probably true to a considerable extent. Certainly all the figures suggest that these East Europeans are very predominantly in work. In many cases they are in work which is below what their educational qualifications would suggest as being appropriate but they are in work. Being in work, they are only eligible for those Welfare benefits that are on offer to all low paid employees - UK citizens and non-UK citizens. These benefits like Working Tax credits and Child Benefit are a symptom of Labour's Gordon Brown's constant meddling in the UK tax system. Labour's Brown was/is 'old school' socialism. The sort that taxes everyone very highly and then the kindly State apparatus gives back to those that can work their way around the claims system. In this Socialist Utopia, you work for the State and then the State decides how much pocket money you shall have, to live on!
But back to immigrants. So these EU immigrants do jobs that the local population feel are somehow 'beneath' them. These though are jobs that society needs to have done. Office cleaning? Fruit or vegetable picking or packing? Clearing tables? The need is there and so is the supply of local labour however, the tax and the welfare systems combine to make it not worthwhile for the 'locals' to take these jobs. The income level achieved on Welfare benefits is such that actually taking a low paid job can cost a claimant a net loss in income. They and their families can be worse-off by being in work. This is because of income taxes that disproportionately hit low wage people and 'pound for pound' cuts in benefits based on income coming in.
The changes made by the Coalition, on an admittedly Lib Dem fundamental policy, are addressing the tax side of the equation. The raising of the threshold at which people start to pay tax, benefits millions of people but particularly the low paid. The Conservative pledge to build on this policy is very encouraging and worthy of support.
The Coalition policies on Welfare reform, this time Conservative inspired, are also starting to untangle the convoluted benefits system and make it clearer for people and, more importantly, to change the philosophy such that 'work' pays. That this has been done at a time when the nation has been undertaking a policy of austerity (although lack-lustre in my view) is a credit to the Conservatives and reflects a weeding out of the highly dubious claimant numbers that had grown up over recent years. A very high percentage of people that were claiming 'incapacity' benefit decided to drop their claims when they were told that they would need to be medically examined.
Recent reports point to a very positive net contribution to the UK economy from EU immigration. I know that these people have 'an axe to grind' and so the figures might be a little overblown but no one is questioning that the position is a net positive and this is after considering the costs associated with this EU immigration - higher NHS, schools and local council services use, etc..
I think though that the use by UKIP of EU immigration is a cloak. The real target is actually non-EU immigration. It isn't the pale-faced Poles or Czechs that bother them, so much as the black-faced Africans and Indians and Pakistanis and increasingly, displaced people from the Middle East. Read the sub-text to the UKIP election campaign for the Police and Crime Commission position in South Yorkshire. The Labour Party were, rightly, condemned for their negligence, bordering on encouragement of the abuse of up to 1,400 young girls in Rotherham but UKIP didn't fail to point out that the perpetrators were overwhelmingly (exclusively?) Asian men - usually Pakistanis.
All of the TV stories show black faces or swarthy types milling about in Calais and trying to steal away onto trucks. That is the immigration to which UKIP refers. It isn't the Bulgarian that flies Ryanair into Stanstead and travels on to London and takes a job cleaning toilets, for minimum wage!
I know I invite vitriol by saying it but how does UKIP's concerns about immigration differ from that of the odious BNP or National Front?
The issue with immigration is that people do want to come to the UK. Some will come because the Welfare programmes are too easily accessible. Others will come because the UK economy is growing and there are jobs available which are not being taking by locals.
To significantly reduce the 'Welfare' arrivals, the UK government needs to severely restrict the opportunity to claim benefits - something like, you cannot claim benefits until you have been paying into the system for for two years. Oh, and apply that to locals as well - wouldn't want to be discriminatory!
To reduce the numbers of those that come to the UK for work? Kind of a dilemma. A strong economy should be a welcomed event, however, in terms of incentivising local's off of Welfare and into work, government needs to continue to get out of the business of subsidising low-paying employers. Do this by increasing the tax thresholds, indeed accelerate this and combine it with squeezing Welfare benefits out of the tax system (and in the process, simplifying that overly complex beast).
UKIP is cleverly conflating British disenchantment with the EU, with a frankly racist immigration policy. Don't be fooled! You wouldn't vote for BNP or the National Front, would you?
A fair attempt at untangling a difficult situation and yes you are of course correct on the underlying subtext. But in the interests of balance maybe you should pull apart UKIPs policy on immigration, stated over and over again by UKIP spokespeople. In short. A points based system such as Australia that does not discriminate by race colour or creed, but by merit. Without including this in your missive, you are simply another cog in the propaganda machine.
ReplyDelete