EurActiv Logo
EU news & policy debates
- across languages -
Click here for EU news »
EurActiv.com Network

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

Cameron wants ‘restrictions’ put on EU freedom of movement

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 07 January 2013

UK Prime Minister David Cameron said yesterday (6 January) that he would “look at arguments” to make it harder for nationals from EU countries to settle in Britain and claim social security benefits.

In a televised appearance on the BBC's Andrew Marr Show, Cameron was asked if the free movement of people inside the European Union could be limited in order to give Britain more control over its borders as part of a renegotiated relationship.

“One of the key reasons to be a member of the European Union are the key freedoms, the movement of services, the movement of goods, the movement of people," Cameron replied. "And there are restrictions already on the movement of people, if you have for instance an emergency”.

The UK Prime Minister was referring to the new Schengen rules that allow countries to reintroduce border controls, if one state persistently fails to stop illegal migrants from entering Europe's border-free zone. The measure has been severely criticised by the European Parliament.

>> Read: Parliament boycotts EU justice talks in protest over Schengen

The Prime Minister continued: “Should we look at arguments about should it be harder for people to come and live in Britain and claim benefits: yes, frankly, we should. So there are areas even in the free movement of people where we may want to make changes”.

The British press has also linked the British Prime Minister’s comments on reforming freedom of movement to the lifting of work restrictions on Bulgarians and Romanians from 31 December 2013.

Bulgarian and Romanian nationals may not be the only one targeted. Reports say that immigrants from ‘older’ EU members, such as Italy, Spain and Portugal may also be setting their sights on the UK.

>> Read: Southern Europeans flee to London to find work

When Bulgaria and Romania joined the EU in January 2007, a maximum period for work restrictions of seven years was agreed in their joint Accession Treaty. Most EU countries have since lifted the restrictions, but the UK is one of those still requiring work permits of Bulgarian and Romanian citizens. The others are Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Malta and the Netherlands.

Some of the UK's eurosceptic press have claimed that a high percentage of  impoverished Bulgarian and Romanian youths would seek to emigrate to the UK for a better life. A similar campaign in 2006, before the two countries' EU accession treaty, evoked fears of a massive exodus, which didn’t take place.

Cameron said the UK government was conducting a “proper process” to assess the need for reform, calling a “balance of competences review” between Britain and the EU. He invited the public to review “competence after competence, area after area”, and express views on “what is right at the European level and what is right at national level”.

Cameron also made it clear he planned to win the next election and stay as Prime Minister until 2020. He also said it was “perfectly acceptable” for Britain to make demands, in exchange for other countries negotiating a closer union.

Asked whether the UK should leave Europe, he said: “I don’t think it would be right for Britain. My policy, my approach is determined absolutely, purely, and simply by the national interest. What is right for Britain? What is right for people in work? What’s right for British business? What’s right for the future of our country?”

“Fifty per cent of our trade is with the European Union. At the moment, because we’re in this single market, we have a seat at the table in the single market, we help write those rules. If we were outside the EU altogether, we’d still be trading with these European countries but we’d have no say,” Cameron said.

The UK Prime Minister said he would explain his ideas in more detail in a major speech later this month.

EurActiv.com

COMMENTS

  • Didn't Ireland already lift the restrictions? http://www.djei.ie/labour/workpermits/bulgariaromania.htm

    By :
    Gabriela
    - Posted on :
    07/01/2013
  • As long as there is not a Treaty of THE European Union and only a Treaty ON European Union, Cameron has all the rights to vow for exceptions.

    By :
    Willem, a Dutchman
    - Posted on :
    07/01/2013
  • Cameron just continues to demonstrate what an untrustful waste of space he is. Like his predecessors before him, of any and all political colours, he talks big and walks small. Like the others he is gutless.I am sure he knows full well what is and isn't possible. I cannot see how he can negotiate change in any reasonable timescale without invoking Article 50 which would mean leaving the EU and then negotiating some kind of "associate" membership, as Delors suggested. We do not have to have a Norway or Swiss model of relationship. We should have a UK model i.e. one that suits us. We would not be leaving the single market but simply re-negotiating our access to it as well as concentrating on where the (small) majority of exports now go to which is the Rest of The World. The EU market place is stagnant and will remain so for some time. And yes, there will still be cost in having to observe some EU regulation but I understand it would be considerably less than now. A good example is that all UK companies need to observe EU legislation, regardless of whetehr they trade in other EU countries. This is a nightmare for small companies in the UK which comprise a significant part of the work force.

    By :
    Don Latuske
    - Posted on :
    07/01/2013
  • Thank you Gabriela, I am now removing Ireland from the list of countries still keeping the restriction. Georgi

    By :
    Georgi Gotev
    - Posted on :
    07/01/2013
  • What about the influx of Arab/Indian/African nationals, why should movement be restricted to EU nationals that are living in the European Union when there is a Treaty between the States and then you wonder why there are so many people draining benefits? Look at how many people claim amnesty to come to the UK and how many people come to drain UK benefits as a result of previously being a colony of the UK such as in Africa and India?!! Give me a break. I have a bigger problem with an Arab family (not being racist but it's a fact that there is a large popuplation) taking up a 5 room House --Council Housing Benefit-- in Zone 1 of London with the property being worth 500,000 pounds or more and then trashing it and getting another house (it was in the news) to live in and receiving other assistance than a Bulgarian family trying to improve their qaulity of life.

    By :
    Pat
    - Posted on :
    07/01/2013
  • I accept that I am in a small minority in this country, being against separation of Scotland from the rest of the UK and being in favour of the development of a European Federation. The idea of restricting our fellow Europeans from coming here is therefore unwelcome to me. This country (UK) owes so much to peoples who have come here in the past and to those who continue to arrive that even if one ignores my position of principle, there is much to be lost by persisting with this cagey anti-European talk. We are all the product of migrations and we are only temporary custodians of the square metre upon which we plant ourselves.

    By :
    McGregor
    - Posted on :
    07/01/2013
  • What a good starting point for Cameron's campaign regarding foreign policy: Britain should stay in the EU but leave at the same time. We'll see what kind of arguments he comes up with for such a big idea, and if it manages to satisfy any british europhiles or europhobes (not mentioning other Eu-member's negociators).

    By :
    uk-skeptic
    - Posted on :
    08/01/2013
  • Dog whistle stuff from the head of the Tory Vermin party.

    Questions.
    1. How many EU nationals work in the UK
    2. How many EU nationals are without work in the UK
    3. How many and what amount do EU nationals claim from the UK public purse.
    4. What percentage of overall claimants for "welfare" are EU nationals
    5. Are EU Nationals net contributors or net claimants with respect to UK resources.

    Camoron comes out with assertions driven by a the hysterical UK adult porno press (The Sun, The Mail etc - I hesitate to call them "newspapers"). I doubt if the head of the Tory-Vermin could answer any one of the questions posed. A truly pathetic man leading a truly pathetic party. Sic transit gloria mundi.

    By :
    Mike Parr
    - Posted on :
    08/01/2013
  • It is really sad to see that Cameron only focuses on narrow national interests. There seems to be no notion of being "European" involved - it is just a matter of money (business, social benefits etc) in the short term. People seem to have forgotten that apart from contributing heavily to building up the post-war economy and prosperity in Europe, the EC, now the EU, is, even more importantly, a main factor for ensuring peace in Europe. If all Member States of the EU would behave like the UK, the EU would fall apart, with extremely serious consequences for all Member States and for the world economy. Other Member States are not going to let that happen. The EU will continue, with or without the UK. The UK should not believe that it can get through with an egoist "participation a la carte" approach to the extent outlined by some. The UK wants to benefit without paying. It might be the ones paying would have objections.

    By :
    Jan
    - Posted on :
    08/01/2013
  • Britain, LEAVE the EU!!!

    By :
    david tarbuck
    - Posted on :
    08/01/2013
  • Jan,
    I'mnot sure I could agree with you re EEC/EC/EU entity was responsible for post-war economy revival.Could you please cite your sources/evidence for sucn ah assertion. I do know that West Germany, as it was then, benefited from the Marshal Plan and,given the destruction of their overall infrastructure/industry, managed to start again investing in up-to-date technology for their industry - the irony of being a defeated nation resulted inthem outpacing all and every country in Europe (I don't just mean the EU). Britain as we know stagnated/declined due to subversive trade union activity, weak management and even weaker political leaders such as Ted Heath, in the early 70s. I am amused that yiou think all other EU states think EU first and then national interests second. The recent bailouts, especially in Greece, were devised to give primarily German banks time to assess their liabilities wuith regards to foreign banks and Merkel fought successfully to buy time to avoid Greece defaulting and persuading the EU to go down a formerly forbidden path, namely, no EU state could take on the debt of another EU state.

    Finally and my apologies for such a long posting. I fully agree with comments here about Cameron but I think everybody seems to forget that the alternatives are no better. If you think Labour will meekly suggest jioining in with the EU'd deeper integration, you are mistaken. Miliband and Balls (aka Wallace and Gromit) will offer no better a strategy, because acceptance of further integration is not acceptable to the electorate.

    By :
    Don Latuske
    - Posted on :
    08/01/2013
  • Don, I said "contributed heavily". Of course, we first got te Marchal plan, and the EC only started by 1957. But that lead to the internal market with teh four freedoms, free movement of labour, capital, services and goods. That to my mind opened up for unprecedented growth in Europe, which is now the largest trading block in the world. I did not say national interests are put aside by other Member States. My point is that in other countries, for example Germany or Belgium, there is a consensus that a number of issues need to be regulated at supranational level in order to protect and further develop what has already been achieved. That serves both national and wider European interests. Not just in terms of strictly economy, but also regarding a range of other matters, such as external relations, social, cultural, educational and political issues, competition law, bank legislation etc. Regarding financial reguilation, it would by teh way be good if the UK could regulate better the activitiesd of City in London to avoid teh situation where big international business like Starbuck with the help of big international consultance companies like Price waterhouse commits legally possible but morally totally undefendable tax evasion.

    By :
    Jan
    - Posted on :
    08/01/2013
  • Of course the Marshall plan was the first step for the European Union. Americans said they were ready to lend the money, only if europeans would make sure not to destroy themselves once more. London could then have set the terms, becoming a sort of european capital but the british as usual thought they didn't need to, and got actually much less helped by the US compared to France or Germany who recovered much quicker, while the UK was struggling in splendid isolation, trading with Australia and New Zealand, as well as the crumbs of their collapsing empire. That strategy led them to the IMF after years spent in the wilderness with lower growth begging continental politicians to let them into the club...

    Anyway, why isn't Cameron or the Sun ever mentioning all the foreign companies who come to Britain just to shut down UK busnesses, going then to Monaco or Singapore with all the money and leaving the british jobless. There is so much more money escaping the UK because of tax dodging than the few EU citizens who might claim benefits in Britain. How much are they worth compared to the UK's whole budget deficit? (anyway there shouldn't be many europeans claiming benefits in Britain, as they'd be stupid to go there instead of much more generous France, Germany, Scandinavia, Benelux...).

    I guess reciprocial measures will also be taken to prevent the British who live, work or have holidays in the EU (or their children) from accessing hospitals, schools, or fire brigades.

    By :
    uk-skeptic
    - Posted on :
    08/01/2013
Background: 

Prime Minister David Cameron, who has been an outspoken critic of the EU, entered an uneasy government coalition with the pro-European Liberal Democrat party in 2010.

But as the eurozone eyes greater fiscal, banking and possibly even political integration to solve its sovereign debt crisis, Cameron has come under growing pressure from the rebellious right wing of his party to give Britons a vote on whether they wish to remain inside the EU, or downgrade their relationship with Brussels.

Senior politicians from the Labour party have sought to gain advantage from Cameron's difficult position, calling for Britain to clarify its relations with the EU by holding a referendum.

William Hague, British foreign secretary, promised that his government would conduct a full "audit" of the impact of EU law on Britain by 2014.

More on this topic

More in this section

Advertising

Videos

Video General News

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Video General Promoted 4

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising