Send Dutch applicants … no. 2

13 Friday Mar 2015

Posted by ZJShen-PSimon in education, foreign language teaching, Netherlands, work in Dutch education

Tags

education in the netherlands, European Union, Teaching English as a foreign language

I’ve just received a very derogatory message to my earlier post which may or may not be right. However, this coincided with a few calls I also received these days from a few job agencies and schools enquiring about my availability, although I stopped applying or advertising myself as a teacher of English more than a year ago. I’ve amassed perhaps 250 refusals over the six years I’ve been living here, how could I go on living on teaching without teaching? Yet, this remark bills my earlier post as judgemental, probably meaning biassed, and based on stereotypes.

As to judging the Dutch education system as a whole, I can’t have anything to say. I have no overall picture. It seems to work and do its job. As to working for me as a teacher, it clearly is judgemental, i.e., biassed against anyone not yet having experience working in it. I have worked in it once for a small project. However, when I told the job agency person that my experience was with a military facility, she clearly changed her mind and didn’t come back to me about the open post she may have had for me. That wouldn’t count for a school job was the meaning.

So, after teaching English in two other countries for 30 years counts nothing in this country. If it doesn’t, if being a top professional means nothing in the Netherlands, I can only say the system is biassed against everybody from outside here. They say, “Have you experience in the Dutch education system? No? Then you won’t ever have it. Bye-bye!”

It’s not my stereotype, not my judgement. If the Chinese can accept that an expert teacher may not be from an English-speaking country, but this country can’t, that’s a judgement against foreigners, based on the stereotype: only English people can teach English! Right? Then which English people? A poor under-educated chap from Detroit? Or Glasgow? Someone who couldn’t even get his or her GCSE? So: wrong!

The other part of my criticism in the above-mentioned post was to claim that if this is the opinion of the system about foreign experts, then they should not advise anyone to employ Dutch people abroad. How dare they? They aren’t willing to employ anyone here without Dutch experience, so how could Dutch work abroad without having any experience working abroad? It’s simply the other side of the same coin. Nonsense. Their practice is against EU laws about free movement of workers claiming a possible exemption in educational matters. They should be exempted in the same way when trying to get employed outside. They should let others with experience there work there. Or even those without it. Or allow others to work here as they are meant to instead of wasting the talent they have to offer them.

by P. S.

Eastern-European views on the Netherlands

23 Sunday Nov 2014

Posted by ZJShen-PSimon in European Union, Hungary, Netherlands

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Dutch people, European Union, Netherlands, Western Europe, work in the Netherlands

When I registered myself and moved to this country, it was a personal matter. But after I had lived in China for three years, I definitely felt it may be a lot better option than staying in Hungary. At the time, Hungary had a Socialist government whose prime minister admitted to lying all the time to their people, but he didn’t resign. After a few years, Hungary got into the grips of a leftist government who built up a two-thirds majority from 53% of the votes of 53% of the voting-age population, which they managed to strengthen with changes to the constituencies. Now they have a two-thirds majority with 44.8% of the votes of about 52% of voters (detailed results in Hungarian here).

Since then, the country has been receiving a lot of criticism from the EU and the US for actions and declarations from mostly the Prime Minister about building a non-liberal democracy. The government seems to have changed not only the constituencies to its advantage, but has changed almost all institutions of importance, like the central bank, the media, courts of justice, the national tax office and its supervising agency, has syphoned the billions of pension reserves of future pensioners and is replicating the action with the last remaining reserves of those who were not involved in the first round, has been driving public education and the health system almost into the ground with fully taking their administration into the (rather inexpert) hands of the government. Now, after a lot of negative experience with my original country, it’s time to take stock of where my choice of leaving Hungary has led me to, and whether a similar action of fellow Hungarians would be worth it.

Emigration has been escalating ever since former members of the Warsaw Pact have been admitted to the EU and the area of the Schengen Agreement. The main targets of movements have been Germany and the UK, but besides Austria, a lot of other Hungarians have moved to the Netherlands as well, so it’s important to look at the situation and chances in this country for East-Europeans.

Most of my friends here have pointed it out as a fact that circumstances in the Netherlands have been deteriorating for about 15 to 20 years. Younger people have been complaining about too many rules, but to my mind, they should look at Hungary with its ever-changing regulations for solace. The most important factor is then security. Regulations don’t keep changing, people are more-or-less reliable with a number of them to be certain to let you down without a word if you’re not chosen for a position, but life in general is just as secure here as anywhere in the developed world (or in China, for that matter). Institutions take care of you, most matters can be securely and quickly handled, or at least registered for handing, over the internet, there’s not much waiting time for almost anything. Systems work well, charges and prices are on a level which are not above reasonable limits.

Prices are nowadays just as high (of low, if you like) as in Hungary, except for housing prices. You have to be aware that by selling a property in Hungary, you get nowhere here, but renting is reasonable – while there’s a 1-to-5 ratio for buying a flat, renting one may not cost you a lot more than in Budapest. There is a system of help for poorer people too. You can get help for the compulsory and comparably very high rate of health security insurance, like for renting. However, you have to avoid a trap here. Possibilities are that you can get a part of your renting fees and health insurance fees covered by the government/national tax office.

However, they reckon you are a member of the family where you rent a room if your address is the same. All of this year, I’ve been demanded to repay the amount I was paid in 2011, and although I’ve pointed out that I, as a 56-year-old Hungarian man, didn’t marry a 64-year-old Dutchman a year after his wife had died of cancer, such things, as I’ve found out, do not matter: one is considered to be living together with another if the address is the same, and one hasn’t got access to a separate kitchen and bathroom. I did, still, my case is still pending and I can’t be sure I can avoid paying back nearly a thousand Euros I was given three years ago.

Thankfully, no such problems with health insurance, which is about 60% covered by the health subsidy if your earnings are low. Just be aware that insurance costs and the amount you have to pay before you get paid by the insurer (your own risk) keeps climbing, your subsidy decreases as you earn more, but all these are expected and not dramatic changes like in Hungary. If you have a profession, you may or may not get a job, circumstances depending. As you can get informed from my earlier posts here, a teacher with a foreign degree has next to no chance, except if he has a British degree. If you have good expertise and documents about it in a special area of industry, you can get a job for a year or two, but, like Polish people, you may come in for a lot of criticism and problems. Some leaders in industry may even directly cheat you.

The situation hasn’t been helped by a large number of Romanians who had come here to take up the support and then disappeared. I could have done that if I had moved back to Hungary one or two years after I had taken the support. As a large number of temporary workers come into the industrial sector from Poland, I have to add a few words about them too. A couple of years ago statistics indicated that they had already become the largest minority group in the Netherlands. As a result, the xenophobic, anti-Islam, anti-foreigner right-wing Freedom party made a lot of noise and came in for a lot of criticism after they tried to temper with the situation over the internet and over working rights. This weakened their position in the Parliament at the elections in 2012, so since then, politics has been looking relatively quiet here. As it is, Polish people do not stay in the country, rather, they help the industry a lot by offering cheap work that locals couldn’t or wouldn’t do, stay for a year in shacks and then take the remains of their wages back home. They aren’t a burden for the security system so they are a lot more useful than some of the other foreigners who stay, scarcely get work and live on subsidies.

On the streets, the huge variety of people you can see seems like a security against anti-foreigner sentiments, but while security is very good, crime rates are low, your bicycle may still be stolen or damaged, small miscalculations in the supermarket could happen and groups of youngsters may shout at you in the street on the way home from school. But when you get into trouble in the street, even young guys will help you instantly.

If one stays here for good, one has to live on something. If you have incomes not exceeding ten thousand Euros per year, you don’t have to register anywhere other than with the local government and get a bank account, then you get your social security number and can fill in your tax return on-line. To perform many kinds of economic activities, you have to ask for a “VAR”, which is a declaration to perform your activities as an individual normally under licenses asked of a company. Above that sum, you have to register yourself as a small company, or a “ZZP’er”, and with that you’re asked to register for VAT (“BTW” in Dutch). This VAT is only slightly less than in Hungary, it stands at 21% now, so don’t underestimate it. Business charges burdened on businesses here is not a real reason for anyone to escape the Hungarian system.

Accountability and help from the system is. If you have any questions, you can make an appointment with relevant institutions within a few days, and if they can’t answer you well enough (probably because your question is outside their competency), they will still refer you to information or organizations that can. If you don’t have high skills, or can’t use them, or just want to try something new on the job market, the most usual way to do it is walk into a temporary job agency, or “uitzendbureau”, and you may get a small job for minimum wages at a factory, store, or the post office centre. In such a case, all administration, security deductions etc. are done by the agency and you can do your tax return the following year copying stuff from their year-end declaration.

What you can’t avoid for long is payment for health security, which is high and rates keep crawling upwards. You can try to use the European Health Insurance Card, but it’s intended for travellers, not for people settled at an address within the EU, so you have to get insured by the compulsory local system. Sooner or later, you’ll be demanded to do so anyway as all systems are linked together. Even your bank has to declare your basic data to the tax system once a year, only the details are secret. But one can live with this small matter.

On the whole, the Netherlands, with all its cultural void compared to Hungary, with all its quiet and efficiency and relative coldness of the population, is a good choice for those who want to start again on a calculable basis.

by P.S.

Bending immigration statistics – English version

15 Friday Mar 2013

Posted by ZJShen-PSimon in European Union, immigration, language learning, Netherlands

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Bulgarian, Eastern Europe, European Union, German, Immigration, Netherlands, Romanians

As I promised yesterday, I am adding my English version of my criticism of a Dutch article from yesterday here. The original of the article,

Immigratie steeds meer uit Oost- en Zuid-Europa

or “Immigration grows again from East- and South-Europe”, published by NRC Handelsblad on 8th March, can only be accessed digitally by registered users of the NRC Handelsblad. Sorry about that.

The bending of statistics

We already know that demagogy knows no borders. Communism spread from Germans in London on to Russians, Cubans, Indians and North-Koreans, Nazism spread from Germany through Italy and Austria to Finland and Japan. It’s well-known that statistics are an important and good way of describing the world, but also that, in the wrong hands, it can lead to demagogy. I am quite used to it in Hungary, but it surprised me here in the Netherlands the other day.

I always thought NRC a high-quality newspaper, until now. This opinion changed when I read their article of 8th March about immigration. In this article, they distort statistics, not very seriously, but enough so that people do not give it a second thought. If someone seriously distorts the truth, people may also react strongly and fast and think that a refusal is necessary. But a little clouding over easily remains unobserved. Easily creeps into the mind as the truth. And I find that dangerous.

NRC Handelsblad (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

What do the writers state? First of all, it is not clear from the article if they use the statistical figures they quote on yearly basis, or as the sum total of immigrants. In most cases it can be said that it is not likely that a country with 17 million inhabitants receives close to 600 thousand people from the EU each year (the population of the Netherlands is still growing, but not that much), but who knows, it may be possible in the case of Bulgarians, whose numbers grew from 6 thousand in 2007 to 18 thousand in 2012. The article does not say at all that that means the whole number of Bulgarians that live in the country. But the article starts by saying that “Most migrants (!?) who come to the Netherlands, … from within the European Union.” (!? is my addition, because I also find it conspicuous that immigrants are usually called migrants in the article, as if they were just shifting like nomads; and the word, in the headline of the attached chart, can be understood as people migrating from the EU, to other countries, that is.) So is it first about the number of migrants who are coming at the moment (in Dutch, the normal present tense is used for general, momentary and even future meaning, so ‘komen’ allows for all interpretations)? Afterwards, the article only uses full data sums of people living here. It becomes thus shifty. Why? Because otherwise, people could clearly see that there are only 18.000 Bulgarians in their country of 17 million, which only means 0.1% of the whole population. People could simply ask, “What’s the problem?”

European Union (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The second problem with this piece is that it is highly unclear what they mean by East- and Middle-Europe. Added to this, this dubious idea is washed together with East- and South-Europe, which shouts out of the headline as if it were an entity. Completely wrong. What is this article actually about? But it seems to be alright for the masses of Dutch, they should not worry about such small matters, and that is good enough for the editors.

Furthermore, from the chart it seems that about 580 thousand people live in the Netherlands from the EU (and the number is rising). Here, South-, and East- and Middle-Europe are separated. But where do Bulgarians, or Rumanians belong? Alright, it does not matter. According to the text, “the number of migrants from the previously communist (my problem: all those countries were ‘socialist’, not ‘communist’ – we knew our definitions better) EU-countries has risen … to 237 thousand,” and that seems represented in the chart by the ‘Middle- and East-Europe‘ line. Besides that problem of where Bulgaria and Romania belong (politically perhaps East, geographically South!), we have the problem of who are most of the immigrants.

EU and candidates (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

From the text, we have the following, “Most migrants from inside the EU come from Poland.” Same problem as above: do they mean ‘are coming’? This is important because we get only the percentage of Polish people. What does their 28% really mean (if it means 28% of those now coming, then we have a problem of who constitute the 237 thousand)? If it means the percentage of all present inhabitants from the EU, then it gives 165 thousand Poles who live in the Netherlands. Whether only short-term, or long-term, it does not seem to matter. Well, from the chart we see that the number of EU citizens living here from the EU is 580 thousand. Out of this number, and from the number of Bulgarians and Romanians (only 18.000 and 14.000 respectively) at fourth and fifth place, we can find that the group of Germans and Belgians at second and third place should be really large, but the article does not say anything. Otherwise, however, where do men between 200 thousand (all Poles, Romanians and Bulgarians) and the full 580 thousand from the EU come from? Each other country can send only fewer than 14.000 people, the number of Romanians at fifth place. We can thus only guess that there are also relatively many English (who come to do translation or language teaching), Spanish, Greeks, perhaps also Portuguese and Italians living here. There can’t be many from other countries, so we can guess that there are about 50 thousand from those five countries. Add a number of thousand Hungarians, Czechs and Slovaks. After that, it is not likely that many people emigrate from dynamic and very small countries like Estonia, Slovenia, Cyprus or Malta, and French and Nordic people also do not do so. This leads me to deduce that we still miss about 300 thousand to make up the 580 thousand. That number can only belong to the Germans and Belgians, who account for the second and third largest group, although not given in numbers.

What does this mean? It means that more Germans and Belgians together live here than those from all other countries of the EU. However, this is not a problem at all in the article. It tells us nothing about the 300 thousand. Also no word about South-Europeans. Only in the headline, further nothing. It tells us only about the 0.1% Bulgarians and Romanians, and of course the Polish people.

Why is it a problem, according to the article? Because “last year there were a good 4 (four!) thousand EU people receiving social security provisions, and that number … is rising.” That is 0.068% of all ‘migrants’. It says nothing about the 17 million (my addition, based on the opinion of friends and facts: for example about the thousands and thousands of Dutch who rarely worked in their lives and receive regular social security support). So what a problem that that number of 4 thousand is rising! Where is it going to lead? “We still don’t know exactly how much of those don’t have a right to those provisions,” they admit, but we should think that a few hundred more illegal receivers of social support will cause a really big problem.

So, “There is fear of a social security migration.” Indeed. According to the newspaper, there is no such problem with the two and a half million people from countries outside the EU, or the 300 thousand Germans and Belgians, only with those 4 thousand on social support. Or with the 165 thousand Polish people, most of whom, by the way, are provisional guest workers and busy working hard in industry. Or with the Rumanians and Bulgarians, who may be more professionally able to work in industry or in language education than some Dutch, but may not get work on account of never being able to speak the language well enough. That is a problem, but not in the article. East- and Middle-Europe is complaining of ‘brain drain’, but at the moment, thousands of people with high levels of education from there have to work as cleaning personnel, postmen, or storage personnel. About which the Dutch do not know. That is a problem. Yet, the writer-editors, and as they say, some ministers do as if the country should quickly stop the influx of East-Europeans.

I think that if that is the message, Western Europe had not thought over the effects of widening the community well enough. And then the Netherlands could shut down their borders in front of all immigrants. Just like some professions are shut down by law.

But then, to lay all fault on the shoulders of “East-Europeans” is demagogy from the cold war.

by P.S.

Only after I added the links below did I realize that such a problem and debate is raging in the UK as well now. My readers are kindly asked to contribute their opinion about it all below in the ‘Reply’ space. Thank you.

Benefit plans target new EU migrants (bbc.co.uk)
Outrage at new migrant flood: Public force MPs to debate block on benefit tourists (express.co.uk)
UK attracts most immigrants in whole of EU (telegraph.co.uk)
Outrage at new migrant flood (express.co.uk)
UK citizens WILL have to abide by the same benefits rules as EU immigrants (express.co.uk)
Why has Romania got such a bad public image? (bbc.co.uk)
Romanian Campaign Hits Back At Negative British Ads (rferl.org)
Rhetoric ‘could lead to racist abuse’ of EU immigrants (morningstaronline.co.uk)
British National Party Leader, MEP Nick Griffin: UK Press Targets Bulgarians, Romanians Because They Are White Europeans, Not Muslims (novinite.com)

Bending immigration statistics

14 Thursday Mar 2013

Posted by ZJShen-PSimon in European Union, immigration, language learning, Netherlands

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

European Union, Netherlands, NRC Handelsblad

Dear reader,

I feel I have to turn my attention over to subjects that have little to do with language learning. As I am also a geographer by education, so statistics and politics are not far from me. The topic of migration is also to some extent to do with language knowledge, at least here in the Netherlands I have to find that to my own disadvantage. So what I’m writing about also relates to languages. Or politics. Please don’t be too much taken aback.

Over the last few weeks nothing much has been happening to me, no news on the job front, still lingering health problems, no new experience except at the language course, where we were given an article from NRC Handelsblad of 8th March which discusses immigration from some countries within the EU. It is called

Immigratie steeds meer uit Oost- en Zuid-Europa.

As in my opinion this article distorts truth, I want to react to the editors of the newspaper, so my text is still in Dutch. I still have to work on it to make it shorter so that it falls within their limits, but here I can publish it as it came to me. It’s in Dutch, but for the benefit of those who don’t understand that language, I’ll soon translate it to English. Now it goes like the following.

Het verdraaien van statistiek

We weten al dat demagogie geen grenzen kent. Communisme verspreidde zich van Germanen in London naar de Russen, de Cubanen, de Indiërs en de Noord Koreanen, Nazisme verspreidde zich van Duitsland door Italië en Oostenrijk naar Finland en Japan. Dat statistiek een belangrijke en goeie mannier van het omschrijving van de wereld is, is bekend, maar ook, dat het in slechte handen tot demagogie kan verworden. Ik ben eraan gewend, dat het vaak op zo’n mannier in Hongarije gaat, maar het verbaast me in Nederland.

NRC Handelsblad (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Ik dacht altijd, dat NRC een dagblad met kwaliteit is, tot nu toe. Dit is veranderd toen ik hun artikel op 8 maart over immigratie heb gelezen. Ze verdraaien statistiek, niet serieus, maar genoeg, zodat mensen er eigenlijk niet veel over zouden moeten nadenken. Als iemand de waarheid sterk vervalst, zouden mensen snel reageren en hun afkeuring kenbaar maken. Maar een kleine onduidelijkheid kan niet makkelijk ontdekt geworden. En dat vind ik gevaarlijk.

Wat zeggen de redacteuren? Ten eerste is het in het artikel niet duidelijk of het aantal migranten er eigenlijk per jaar of als het hele aantal gebruikt is. Met de meeste getallen is het niet waarschijnlijk dat in een land van 17 miljoen mensen elk jaar bijna 6oo duizend immigranten uit de EU krijgt, maar wie weet het met het aantal Bulgaren, het aantal waarvan steeg tussen 2007 en 2012 van 6.000 tot 18.000? Het artikel zegt het nergens duidelijk, dat dat het volle aantal is, hoewel het artikel begint met te zeggen, dat “De meeste migranten die naar Nederland komen, … van binnen de Europese Unie.” Dus is het eerst over het aantal migranten die nu aan het komen zijn? Daarna gebruikt het artikel alleen volle bedragen. Dus wordt het niet duidelijk. Waarom niet? Omdat de mensen dan wel zouden zien dat er alleen maar 18.000 Bulgaren in hun land van 17 miljoen blijven, die alleen maar 0.1% van de bevolking uitmaken. Mensen zouden dan makkelijk kunnen vragen, ‘Wat is het probleem?’

European Union (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Ten tweede is het helemaal niet duidelijk, wat de krant bedoelt met Oost- en Midden-Europa. Bovendien is die onduidelijk idee “samengespoeld” met Oost- en Zuid-Europa, die in de krantenkop staat alsof het een eenheid zou zijn. Helemaal fout. Waarover gaat het artikel eigenlijk? Maar het blijkt goed voor de meeste Nederlanders, ze kunnen zich over zo’n kleine probleem helemaal niet schelen, en dat is goed voor de redactie.

Verder blijkt uit de grafiek, dat er nu ongeveer 580 duizend mensen uit de EU in Nederland blijven. Hier is Zuid-EU en Midden- en Oost-Europa verschillend. Maar waar horen Bulgaren of Roemenen bij? OK, het maakt niet uit. Volgens de tekst, “het aantal migranten uit de voormalig communistische EU-landen steeg … naar 237 duizend”, en dat blijkt de lijn ‘Midden- en Oost-Europa’ in de grafiek te zijn. Behalve het probleem waar Bulgarije bij hoort (politiek Oost, geografisch Zuid!), krijgen wij het probleem wie het meeste immigranten zijn.

Uit de tekst blijkt het volgende: “De meeste migranten van binnen de EU komen uit Polen”. Bedoelt de redacteuren dat de meeste NU komen uit Polen? Het is belangrijk, omdat wij alleen een procent bij de Polen krijgen. Wat betekent hun 28% eigenlijk? Als het de % van alle hedendaagse bewoners uit EU betekent, dat maakt het 165 duizend Polen uit die in Nederland wonen. Tijdelijk, of lange termijn, dat doet er niet toe. Nou, uit de grafiek blijkt het aantal EU-immigranten 580 duizend te zijn. Uit dit cijfer en het aantal van Bulgaren en Roemenen (alleen 18.000 en 14.000) op de vierde en vijfde plaats lijkt dat de groep mensen uit Duitsland en België op tweede en derde plaats heel groot moet zijn, hoewel het artikel dat niet zegt. Maar anders, waar komen mensen tussen het aantal 200 duizend (alle Polen, Roemenen en Bulgaren) en de EU-totaal van 580 duizend vandaan? Enkele andere landen sturen minder dan 14 duizend, het aantal Roemenen op vijfde plaats. Dus kunnen wij alleen raden, dat er nog veel Engelsen (hier om te vertalen of les te geven), Spanjaarden, Grieken, misschien Portugezen en Italianen hier wonen. Uit andere landen waarschijnlijk niet veel, dus kunnen wij raden dat er hier ongeveer 50 duizend meer uit die vijf landen wonen. Wij kunnen nog een paar duizend uit Hongarije, Tsjechië of Slovakië toevoegen. Verder is het helemaal niet waarschijnlijk dat vele duizenden uit de dynamische een heel kleine landen als Estonië, Slovenië, Cyprus of Malta emigreren, ook doen Fransen en Noordelijke mensen dat niet. Dat lijdt tot een aantal van ruim 300 duizend die wij tot 580 duizend nog missen. Dat aantal kan alleen uit Duitsland en België komen, die op de tweede en derde plaats staan, zonder cijfers.

Wat betekent het? Het betekent dat er nog meer Duitsers en Belgen in het land wonen dan alle andere mensen uit de hele EU. Maar, volgens dit artikel is het helemaal geen probleem. Het praat over 300 duizend met geen woord. Ook geen woord over Zuid-Europeanen. Alleen in de kop, daarna niks. Het praat alleen over de 0.1% Bulgaren en Roemenen, en natuurlijk over de Polen.

Waarom is het een probleem, volgens het artikel? Omdat “er in Nederland vorig jaar ruim vierduizend EU-burgers waren die een bijstandsuitkering kregen en het aantal neemt … toe.” Dat is 0.068% van alle migranten. Die zegt niks over de 17 miljoen bewoners. Jammer dat het aantal stijgt. Waar leidt dat toe? “We weten nog niet precies hoeveel van hen daar geen recht op hebben”, maar wij moeten denken, dat een paar honderd onrechtelijke bijstandsuitkeringtrekkers meer een heel erg groot probleem kunnen veroorzaken.

Description unavailable (Photo credit: bogers)

Dus, “Er is vrees voor ‘uitkeringsmigratie’.” Inderdaad. Volgens de krant is er geen probleem met de ruim twee en half miljoen mensen uit andere landen buiten de EU, alleen maar met de ruim 4 duizend mensen met een bijstandsuitkering. Of met de 165 duizend Polen, de meeste waarvan bezig zijn met het hard werken in de industrie. Of met de Roemenen en Bulgaren, die ook in de industrie of in het onderwijs meer professioneel kunnen zijn dan Nederlanders, maar ze kunnen misschien geen banen krijgen omdat ze nooit goed genoeg Nederlands kunnen praten. Dat is een probleem. Oost- en Midden-Europa klaagt over ‘brain drain’, maar tegelijkertijd moeten duizenden daarvan met hoge opleidingsniveau als schoonmakers, postbezorgers, of magazijn medewerkers werken. Nederland weet niks erover. Dat is een probleem. Toch geeft de schrijvers en sommige ministers in, dat het land snel de instroom van duizenden Oost-Europeanen moet stoppen.

Ik denk, dat als het de bedoeling is, hadden er mensen in West-Europa niet goed nagedacht over de gevolgen van de uitbreiding van de EU. Maar dan kan Nederland alle zijn grenzen voor alle immigranten ook sluiten. Net als dat soort banen die nu al rechtelijk gesloten zijn.

Maar van alles de schuld aan de “Oost-Europeanen” geven is demagogie uit de koude oorlog.

Followed by the translation in the following post.

(After writing the above, I shortened my Dutch text to the requirements and sent it to the paper, but they answered that, due to a huge number of new articles, they cannot publish mine. I have to face it: it would be inconvenient.)

by P.S.