< p>I have to say that I am a little light on interesting financial news this week (if there really is such a thing as interesting financial news), so I thought I would have a look through the related world of politics, where the main story on the Today Show was the comments from Angela Merkel regarding the UK and the free movement of labour. The basic comment was that as much as she wanted the UK to remain part of the European Union (EU), any restrictions on the free movement of labour by the UK Government would lead her to say that the UK should leave the EU.

This is a particularly thorny issue and I think it is one on which everyone has an opinion. I classify myself as socially liberal and economically conservative, so my view is that there is no problem with any immigrant that wants to come to the UK, to work, pay taxes and contribute the benefit of society.

Now, I appreciate that I am in a relatively privileged position and that my job and / or earnings are not directly affected by immigrants from other EU countries, and if my employment, wages or housing was directly affected, I would probably have an altogether view. I don’t want to stereotype people, but my assumption is that this is the demographic being targeted by UKIP so effectively, and the reason why the Conservatives and, to a lesser degree, Labour and are now making noises over the issue.

It is at this point that matters can become very muddy, and trying to pick out fact from fiction becomes increasingly difficult, and objective views tend to disappear. It is a commonly held belief that arriving EU migrants can immediately apply for benefits in the UK, but according to an article on the BBC News website, arriving immigrants from the EU must meet certain conditions. Specifically, the article states:

“EU immigrants can stay for three months, but to stay longer after that they have to be: in work; or actively seeking work with a genuine chance of being hired; or be able to show they have enough money not to be a burden on public services. Apart from that, evidence of benefit abuse or fraud is grounds to exclude or expel a person”

I consider myself a fairly intelligent person, but I have read and re-read this quote above and still don’t really have a clear idea of what or how migrants can claim in terms of benefits. With this lack of clarity, it is easy to see how politicians can spin statistics to fit whatever argument they are promoting.

On a completely different level, I know, but I have been an immigrant twice – once into New Zealand and once into Australia. On both occasions, the access to benefits was very clear. You could not claim anything until you have been in the country for at least two years and you and your family had to declare that you could support yourselves without recourse to the public purse. So, am I being too simplistic to say that the same should happen here, regardless of where you are from?