UK faces EU intervention over tests for migrants

The European Commission may refer the UK to the EU Court over English tests for migrants, said European Union (EU) Commissioner Laszlo Andor on Friday.

In a Twitter question and answer session on the free movement of workers in the EU, the Hungarian Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion said the EU Commission had already referred the UK to the EU Court and would, “… look at [the] latest measures and act again if necessary.”

In reference to the UK government’s response to concerns over Bulgarian and Romanian migrants, the Commissioner said, “[The] UK should avoid rhetoric and measures that run risk of [the] UK being seen by others as nasty.”

In January, the UK will see the lifting of restrictions on Bulgarian and Romanian workers, a move which has garnered widespread opposition from Conservative MPs.

“Responsible politicians should avoid legitimising xenophobic reactions that indeed weaken the European spirit,” said Mr Andor.

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Iain Duncan Smith earlier this week announced further benefits restrictions for both EU and non-EU migrants, and returning British citizens who have been living abroad.

Under the new habitual resident test, only migrants who are able to pass a series of tests, including an English test, will have access to benefits.    

“The British public are rightly concerned that migrants should contribute to this country and not be drawn here by the attractiveness of our benefits system and we are taking action to ensure that is the case,” said Mr Iain Smith.

The tougher restrictions will go ahead next week regardless of Brussels’ calls to drop the plans, which could see the UK face court action on the basis of discrimination.  

“[The] EU already has very clear rules - the Habitual Residence Test. [The] UK should apply it (like all other Member States),” said Mr Andor.  

The UK’s existing habitual resident test is being legally challenged by the European Commission for allegedly unfairly and unlawfully denying EU migrants access to unemployment and family welfare benefits, among other allowances.

The Commission believes the test to be discriminatory and not in line with European free movement legislation.

The UK’s efforts to deter so-called benefit tourists have drawn some support from other EU member states, including Austria, the Netherlands and Germany. Yet the EU Commission has dismissed the concerns as scaremongering, with the UK having failed to provide evidence of abuse.  

Mr Andor said, “No EU country has given any hard evidence that widespread or systematic benefit tourism exists.”

         
Related articles

Britain fails to renegotiate EU free movement rules

Benefit tourism claims under fire

Britain fails to renegotiate EU free movement rules

Home Secretary Theresa May’s proposals to place greater restrictions on free movement in the EU were dismissed by the European Commission on Thursday.

At the Brussels meeting of EU ministers, EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding attacked the UK’s welfare system, saying it was “too generous” and “any abuse of benefits by EU migrants is the fault of the British authorities.”

EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding attacked the UK’s welfare system

Last week May suggested a cap on numbers if immigration crosses a certain threshold and proposed new member states reach a certain level of economic output or income per head before full free movement rights are permitted.

“We must be able to slow full access to each other’s labour markets until we can be sure it will not lead to mass migration,” said May.

The Netherlands, Germany and Italy have shown some support for free movement reform.

The meeting follows the announcement by Prime Minister David Cameron of plans to limit EU nationals’ access to benefits in the UK, a move which may turn out to be unlawful under EU law.

Among the limitations on the availability of benefits to EU migrants proposed by Cameron are no unemployment benefits for the first three months, no housing benefits on arrival and no benefits after six months.

Reding said the changes will be monitored in Brussels and challenged legally should they break European law.

“Our EU rules are good and they are here to stay. Member states need to apply them to tackle abuse,” said Reding.

The European Commission is expected to release a report on free movement abuse during the two-day meeting which is scheduled to end today.

The proposals come ahead of the removal of labour market restrictions on Bulgarian and Romanian workers in the UK in January 2014.

The latest figures from the Office for National Statistics reveal the biggest rise in immigration in the year preceding June 2013 was migrants from EU nations. 

October saw the publication of a European Commission report which claims less than 38,000 EU migrants claimed Jobseeker's Allowance in the UK in 2012 and unemployed migrants made up just 1.2 per cent of the total population.

Free movement is a fundamental principal of the EU and one which is closely tied to trade and economic integration. Eurostat data says there were 2.3 million EU citizens in the UK and 2.2 million UK citizens in other EU countries in 2012.

 

Benefit tourism claims under fire

The European Commission has requested evidence of the UK government’s claims of large-scale ‘benefit tourism’ by EU migrants to the UK. 

The claims, which the Commission believes to be unfounded, have sparked dispute between the executive body and the government.

The Commission’s legal challenge to the government's efforts to increase restrictions on who can claim benefits in the UK has been criticised by Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary.

The clash follows the publication of a European Commission report which claims unemployed EU migrants number at fewer than five per cent of benefit claimants in the majority of the EU nations studied.

According to the report, less than 38,000 EU migrants claim Jobseeker's Allowance in the UK and unemployed migrants made up just 1.2 per cent of the total population in 2012.

EU migrants are “net contributors,” said European Commission spokesman Jonathan Todd, who added that the UK government has failed to provide credible evidence of the claims despite requests which have spanned three years.

“The vast majority of migrants go to the UK to work, and they actually contribute more to the welfare system than they take out,” said Todd.

Downing Street has defended the claims and reaffirmed the notion there is “widespread and understandable concern” over EU migrants coming to the UK to access benefits.

However, the Commission said there is no evidence that EU migrants are migrating to other member states with the motive of benefiting from their social welfare systems.

“The study makes clear that the majority of mobile EU citizens move to another member state to work and puts into perspective the dimension of the so-called benefit tourism which is neither widespread nor systematic”, said EU Commissioner László Andor.

Ensuring migrants don’t become a burden on the state has become a focus of the government in recent years, evidenced by changes not only to benefit restrictions on EU migrants, but to the requirements which British nationals must meet in order to sponsor a non-EU family member to settle in the UK.

The July 2012 changes, which saw the government introduce a minimum annual income threshold of GBP 18,600 for sponsors, have been justified by the government on the basis there is a pressing need to protect the taxpayer against welfare drain by migrants in this category.

However, such migrants have no recourse to public funds during their initial five-year probationary period and according to a recent study by Middlesex University London, non-EU partners were not a burden on the welfare system under the old rules.

With an absence of factual evidence pointing towards abuse of the benefit system by both EU and non-EU migrants, the proportionality of the restrictions is questionable. It seems the government is once again playing on the public’s fears rather than facts in trying to make a credible connection between migration and welfare dependency.