It is simply wrong of Peter Lilley to state that the European commission is seeking to extend its competence (UK faces court action over EU migrant benefits, 30 May). EU competence on social security law has existed for more than half a century and was within the original treaty signed by the UK when it joined the then EEC. Extensive EU regulations on the matter have sat alongside the treaty provisions for a similar period. The same co-ordination rules also provide us with access to medical treatment through the European health insurance card and its predecessor, the E111.
This infringement action is not something the commission has rushed into, or of its own initiative. I raised a complaint in 2008 because, in my view, the UK right-to-reside test was in conflict with the rights of EU nationals under the co-ordination rules. Many others from the UK have also raised complaints and the commission is responding. I made the complaint because while working as a welfare rights adviser I witnessed significant numbers of EU nationals faced with the stark choice of working when clearly unable to do so or facing destitution. Many of the cases I advised on involved pregnant women who continued working until days before giving birth, or who had been dismissed in the late stages of pregnancy. Unable to get benefit because of the right-to-reside test, they often had no choice but to return to work only days after giving birth. It was my view that the rules exist specifically to provide protection for migrants in such situations.
Taking infringement proceedings some six years after complaints were made would indicate that the European commission has actually been overly cautious in dealing with those complaints, taking legal action only as an absolutely last resort.
Pamela Fitzpatrick
Director, Harrow Law Centre