CYIL vol. 7 (2016)

169 / 536

155
CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ SAVING THE EU AND ITS WELFARE STATES THROUGH DISINCENTIVES…
Key words: EU citizenship, Court of Justice of the EU, Directive 2004/38, free
movement of persons.
On the Author: doc. JUDr. Václav Šmejkal, Ph.D., is lecturer and researcher at
Charles University Law Faculty in Prague and Skoda Auto University in Mlada
Boleslav. Specialised in EU law, antitrust, consumer and social aspects of European
integration. Author of “EU Competition Policy and Law 1950–2015” monography
(in Czech).
Introduction
Mass migration into the EU from countries lying beyond its borders has
overshadowed another migratory problem in the media. In Germany it is known as
“poverty migration”, in the UK as “benefits tourism”,1 and its cause does not consist
in distant conflicts but in the exercise of the right to free movement and residence
of EU citizens pursuant to Article 21(1) TFEU. In February 2016 this problem was
given recognition at the meeting of the European Council, in whose Conclusions 2
so far unheard formulations can be read. Joint measures limiting not only the flow of
those who move to abuse the generosity of certain national social systems, or those
in a situation of job seekers were declared desirable. The EU summit recognized
the necessity of solving the problems caused by the free movement of workers and
pronounced support for limitation of its scale and for its restriction for specific
reasons, including reducing local unemployment or protecting the sustainability of
social security systems.
At the same time, it is the statistical truth that Europeans migrate between
Member States on a relatively modest scale.3 If there are problems in connection
with their free movement, they stem more from a rapid buildup of newly arrived
EU citizens to a particular destination.4 In statistical terms, EU-migrants from other
Member States represent a clear economic benefit even to the UK, i.e. to the country
1 MEGHAN BENTON, ‘Reaping the benefits? Social Security Coordination for Mobile EU Citizens’
[2013] Policy Brief series No. 3 Migration Policy Institute Europe, 5, 1.
2 European Council meeting (18-19 February 2016) – Conclusions. EUCO 1/16. ANNEX I Section D.
3 According to the Eurostat statistics, in 2013 in total 1.2 million EU citizens moved to another Member
State. In January 2014 some 17.9 million people lived in another EU Member State than was the
Member State of their origin. These numbers are rather insignificant in relation to the total population
of the EU.
4 See the Letter of Ministers of interior of Germany, Austria, UK and the Netherlands to the President of
the European Council for Justice and Home‘ (PDF n.d.)
to_presidency_final_1_2.pdf> accessed 22 April 2016. It surely can be proved that Member States
with a liberal regulation of hiring and firing plus with a social system financed predominantly from
the general taxation are in reality more attractive for jobseekers thanks to an easier access there to
both employment and social assistance. For details see MARTIN RUHS, ‘Is unrestricted immigration
compatible with inclusive welfare states? The (un)sustainability of EU exceptionalism.’ [2015] WP
No. 125 Centre on Migration, Policy and Society, University of Oxford, 2.