world

British PM May outlines Brexit course

27 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

Immigrants were claiming approximately GBP0.5 billion in benefits.

Immigrants shouldn't be claiming any benefits. Try that trick in Japan and you'll be on the first plane out of Narita.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Louis AmselJan. 18, 2017 - 09:50PM JST

If I'm not mistaken, South Asians account for the largest group of immigrants in the U.K. How does quitting EU help addressing this issue if they aren't from EU countries?

It never was about them, it was the Poles, Germans, Estonians, etc the white Christian immigrants that the Brits hated.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Hope I am not coming over rude and condescending.

Far from it, my friend.

I thought this is just not calculable because of the vast spread of mathematical deviations.The calculations formulated from a so called 'virtual family' and not based actual research. The economic impact is in fact reduced to a set of assumptions.

In other words, conjecture hiding behind jargon. Pardon my poor esteem for these frequent bedfellows.

As the topic is Brexit (and kudos to @Louis Amsel for mentioning the very fertile and eminently conflatable elephant in the room), Britain risks a major net negative, (to borrow from the jargon) in blocking the free movement of people:

PARENTAL ADVISORY: fact-centric UCL experts

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1114/051114-economic-impact-EU-immigration/

2 ( +2 / -0 )

If I'm not mistaken, South Asians account for the largest group of immigrants in the U.K. How does quitting EU help addressing this issue if they aren't from EU countries?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Everyone seems to think England's going down the crapper...

Does anybody remember PIGS ? How about the refugee crisis? Islamic State terrorist attacks in France, Germany, Belgium ?

I'm not saying England doesn't have her problems, but let's just see how 2017 pans out for Europe shall we ? We have the Dutch national election in March, and then the French and German elections after that.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Hi SenseNotSoCommon,

Hope I am not coming over rude and condescending.

Though the run up to the 23rd June election both remain and exit were publishing surveys and reports purporting to calculate when migrants contributions actually achieved a point that as a 'family unit' contributions (income tax & national insurance) had a net positive effect on the economy. In essence they were pay in more than taking out.

I thought this is just not calculable because of the vast spread of mathematical deviations.The calculations formulated from a so called 'virtual family' and not based actual research. The economic impact is in fact reduced to a set of assumptions.

Provisional Long-Term International Migration (LTIM) estimates......scroll to the excel doc.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/datasets/migrationstatisticsquarterlyreportprovisionallongterminternationalmigrationltimestimates

This illustration exemplifies the complexities to reach a viable conclusion through a maze of estimates. The methodology is essentially based on assumptions, virtual modeling, and estimates.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Need to read the full report and it (sic) methodology.

How about you explain:

Even a family of two adults/ two children generating a income of between £30,000 to £50,000 would take 6 years plus, before that family become net positive

...as a quick search of your document shows no mention of the economic impact.

What is your definition of 'net positive,' for example, and how is it calculated?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Hi SenseNotSoCommon, Not quite, I have posted the complete ONS Migration Statistics Quarterly Report: Dec 2016,

Even a family of two adults/ two children generating a income of between £30,000 to £50,000 would take 6 years plus, before that family become net positive.

Averaged estimated fiscal impacts of EEA migrants are dependent on the characteristics to whether they are young, skilled and working in highly-paid jobs against the contribution made by those working in low-wage jobs or with low employment rates and high risk life-style choices. Need to read the full report and it methodology.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Another aspect to consider is population density

Islington has by far the UK's highest density at 14,500 per sq. km. Yet 75.2% in that constituency voted Remain.

which has a direct negative effect to cost and provision of social/affordable housing.

Let's conveniently forget that Thatcher sold off two million social dwellings. Subtract the 200,000 local authority houses/flats built during her reign for a net loss of 1.8m social homes.

https://fullfact.org/economy/who-built-more-council-houses-margaret-thatcher-or-new-labour/

Finally,

last thought, researching and concluding a point that any migrant reaches a point that there (sic) contributions achieve a net positive statistical effect on the UK economy is problematic/difficult to assess.

Tigers addressed this with the ONS stats (the post you acknowledged) Do pay attention.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Justifying immigration costs is indeed tricky rocknroll.

Theresa May is desperate and the Union smells it.

What I dont understand is what has happened to the increase in taxpayers income and EU subsidies?

Are we really going to accept that immigration creates more costs than income?

Nothing the Tories claim to excuse cutting public services can be believed.

Knowledgable British voters are in the minority unfortunately and the country is held to ransom by a Daily Mail tabloid-reading and slightly right wing population.

Europe is definitely in the driving position here and they do not need to give any slack to Theresa May and the British.

Right wing politics takes advantage of situations of economic loss and mass immigration and this has been highlighted in the UK and the US.

Selfish British voters will cause economic hardship on the country because of an attitude against immigration and this will be their own fault.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hi TigersTokyoDome,

Migration Statistics Quarterly Report: Dec 2016

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/migrationstatisticsquarterlyreport/dec2016

Any taxpayer irrespective of there origin or nationality is entitled to the access to benefit system. The political issue is when a taxpayers contributions achieve net positive....Another aspect to consider is population density which has a direct negative effect to cost and provision of social/affordable housing. Parts of England are amongst some of the most densely populated in Europe.

Main comparisons: Population and Migration.... 2014 assuming latest numbers

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/compendiums/compendium-of-uk-statistics/population-and-migration/index.html

last thought, researching and concluding a point that any migrant reaches a point that there contributions achieve a net positive statistical effect on the UK economy is problematic/difficult to assess.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

From the UK Office of National Statistics (ONC):-

Immigrants were claiming approximately GBP0.5 billion in benefits.

Immigrants were at the same time contributing more than GBP3 billion in income tax.

Net result of immigrants? I'm not saying that the UK doesnt need to reduce immigration but the immigrant benefit thing has always been a bit of a myth.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Clearly the worm had turned early December last year in Finland, at a conference attended by analysts from some of Europe's largest investments Banks and financial institutions. When informed that Euro-zone financial centres Paris/Frankfurt etc would not back shareholder/creditor protection that would at least match City of London flexible tax and employment regulation.

There is also questions surrounding the legal framework within the Euro-zone that protects financial investments through comprehensive creditor rights that leaves shareholders venerable to punitive political regulatory interference resulting in seizure of assets. EU clearance will probably move to a central European hub but in what context is uncertain.

Mark Carney Governor BOE gave a stark warning into the reasoning behind why the EU would need to work closely with the City of London to stave off economic and financial instability that would/could tip Euro-zone debt dynamic sustainability formulas and forecasts deeply into the red.

Mark Carney: European economies face hit if cut off from City of London.....

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/nov/30/mark-carney-european-economies-face-hit-if-cut-off-from-city-of-london

British Prime Minister Theresa May speech highlighted this fact, a warning more than a threat. Prime Minister Theresa May also presented UK parliament and the House of Lords a vote on the final deal.

To calculate the additional infrastructure, schooling, housing, hospital and healthcare requirements for up to three million EU migrants since freedom of movement through EU enlargement, was always going to be a political and financial struggle to overcome.

Looking ahead at the prospect of the EU demanding new powers proposed by the ‘Monti group’ to levy direct taxation from citizens of member states through duties to curtail significant EU revenue losses under the banner of ensuring greater fairness across the EU would be financially and politically difficult to countenance to the UK electorate.

Monti group challenges the ‘juste retour’ principle in EU budgeting

https://www.euractiv.com/section/euro-finance/news/monti-group-challenges-the-juste-retour-principle-in-eu-budgeting/

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Scrote - ditto.

Immigration and the EU have been used as excuses by successive Tory governments to kill-off the national health service, public transport, state schooling, and other publicly-funded civil services. Just excuses because despite the slashing of the state, immigration and the economic debt continued to rise.

Meanwhile Tony Blair, David Cameron, George Osborne etc continue to become millionaires on the seminar circuit putting their children through private schooling and building property portfolios. At least the Romanians had the nous to put their old dictator up against the wall.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

The 52% of Leavers really voted for a halt to immigration, mainly Muslim immigration. Leaving the EU trading block was of little consequence to their vote.

More immigrants come from outside the EU than from within it. If the British government won't control immigration now there is no reason to believe it will make any attempt to control it once the UK is out of the EU. Those who voted hoping for a halt to immigration will be sorely disappointed.

Mrs Thatcher was always in favour of the single market, arguing that free trade would be good for the UK economy, whilst the French and others were very much against it. How times change.

Successive incompetent, dogmatic British governments have managed to destroy the manufacturing base, now Mrs May will finish off the banking, insurance and legal sectors. Imagine the Conservative's surprise when tax revenues plunge, bankruptcy looms and there is no-one left to blame but themselves.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

“Instead, we seek the greatest possible access to it through a new comprehensive, bold and ambitious free trade agreement.” in other owrds the EU wont allow full free access to their market without large concessions. EU has the UK by the nads now , and they know it. While the UK forks out billions to try and keep manufacturing alive , wait for taxes to rise and social welfare healthcare to become depleted. Brexiteers wanted it , they've now got it.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Well, I guess in hindsight this was the only real option left with the UK, as no other negotiating position existed. It will be very interesting to see what happens with the financial and professional services industries seeing as they're by far the UK's strongest but rely heavily on EU access. Manufacturing looks like it might now be permanently dead

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Industrial Revolution

From Spinning Jenny to Whirling Dervish!

If the UK ups its medical programs

good job I'd finished my coffee already

plus improves its farming

it'll need to when UK farmers lose their EU subsidies. Expect increasing food inflation.

and educational systems

but didn't the university towns vote largely against Brexit?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has said that Brexit will turn out to be a great thing and other countries would follow Britain out of the European Union. He promised to strike a swift bilateral trade deal with the United Kingdom.

Feels like we are getting closer to a 'continental Europe vs Anglo-Saxon world' battle (or should I say mano a mano).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The 52% of Leavers really voted for a halt to immigration, mainly Muslim immigration. Leaving the EU trading block was of little consequence to their vote.

The 52% of Leavers believed that immigration and the open EU movement of people was responsible for the current failure of hospitals, education, doctors clinics, public transport, crime etc. Whilst immigration bears some relevance these voters are not educated enough to realise that previous governments were largely responsible for the failures and largescale cuts in the above.

This mess has been caused by David Cameron's government who spent years criticising and antagonising the EU and blasting the EU to popularise his vote. He then stood for a Remain vote and was shocked that his electorate had been brainwashed for years to head towards a Brexit??

Despite May's bold rhetoric the European Union are not going to give the UK one inch. Why should they?

With the huge influx of a European workforce and European residents boosting the tax income, along with the large subsidies the UK received from membership of the EU, the question is how on earth did the UK end up in such an economic mess with such large cuts to its public infrastructure? What happened to the money?

One fact kind of sums up this story of the UK and its relationship with the EU. Nigel Farage, who helped to lead the Brexit Leave vote, has been blasting the EU for years. However, Farage still continues to draw his significant member of the European Parliament salary...!
1 ( +5 / -4 )

The clarity will be appreciated by the markets, but it's interesting how the goal posts keep moving. It's not an encouraging sign. First we heard 'The German car makers are so dependant on the UK market that they will let Britain remain part of the single market while suspending free movement'. Now Theresa says 'The Germans are so dependant on us that they will surely give us a great trade deal after we leave'. Next we will hear, 'The Germans are so dependant on us that tariffs on UK cars will probably only be 8% rather than the full 10% allowed under WTO rules'.

There were a number of disturbing things in her speech. Here are a few that stuck out for me:

President Elect Trump has said Britain is not “at the back of the queue” for a trade deal with the United States, the world's biggest economy, but front of the line.

To come out an actually repeat this was amazing. The UK is officially doubling down on Trump and the special relationship.

And it will, I know, be debated and discussed at length. That is only right. But those who urge us to reveal more ... will not be acting in the national interest.

Because this is not a game or a time for opposition for opposition's sake. It is a crucial and sensitive negotiation that will define the interests and the success of our country for many years to come. And it is vital that we maintain our discipline.

That is why I have said before – and will continue to say – that every stray word and every hyped up media report is going to make it harder for us to get the right deal for Britain. Our opposite numbers in the European Commission know it, which is why they are keeping their discipline. And the ministers in this Government know it too, which is why we will also maintain ours.

So however frustrating some people find it, the Government will not be pressured into saying more than I believe it is in our national interest to say.

Wow. Dissent will not be tolerated. We are at war and democratic debate has been suspended until further notice.

The losers have the responsibility to respect the legitimacy of the outcome. And the country comes together.

It was amazing to hear the Prime Minister actually refer to people who participated in the advisory referendum, as they were asked to do, as 'losers'. There were no winners or losers and the fact that such incendiary language can make it into a speech like this without anyone objecting to its inclusion really shows you the type of people Theresa has surrounded herself with.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Funny how people from a bunch of do nothing little socialist wanna be countries always find fault with free thinking countries that dare to follow their own path. But,,,but you can't do that, who is going to support our welfare checks?

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

and now first in choosing an intentional path to impoverishment.

Like the Cuba model of impoverishment that shunned most forms of globalism? If the UK ups its medical programs plus improves its farming and educational systems, they could become the first former colonial power to be called the new Cuba!

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

The EU was doomed to become an out of control self fulfilling socialist gravy train from the start. The fact that unelected bureacrats were able to formulate laws which take precedent over a sovereign nation's own determined laws was immoral and unacceptable. Congratulations to the Brits for standing up to such nonsense at last. May, who voted to remain in the EU, is doing a great job by following the will of the people for a hard Brexit. Respect to her!

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

Good to have more clarity on Brexit, though I worry ultimately she will get more grief from Scotland and across the Irish Sea, than from Europe.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

You have to admire the innovativeness and bravery of the Brits. First in an Agricultural Revolution, first in an Industrial Revolution and now first in choosing an intentional path to impoverishment.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites