ShipOfTheseus
Clint Dempsey
Certainly lots of that going on in Liverpool today!
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
Certainly lots of that going on in Liverpool today!
parklane1
Tony Galvin
About time:
UK immigration: No preference for EU workers after Brexit, cabinet agrees
People from the EU should face the same immigration rules as those from elsewhere, once the UK has completely left the bloc, the cabinet has agreed.
The agreement in principle follows a recommendation of the independent Migration Advisory Committee (MAC), which was also backed by Labour.
The cabinet unanimously supported a system based on skills rather than nationality, a source told the BBC.
But some fear that a bar on low-skilled EU migrants may damage business.
The prime minister has repeatedly vowed to end unlimited immigration from Europe after Brexit.
BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg said: "Ending freedom of movement as it stands has become a rhetorical non-negotiable for Theresa May."
Labour's shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer said a "fair" system was needed to prevent discrimination.
But speaking on BBC One's Breakfast, he also urged caution, saying there might need to be a "discussion around the rules of EU nationals... if we want a close economic relationship with the European Union".
The cabinet agreement came after a presentation from the MAC chairman, Prof Alan Manning, at a lengthy meeting on Monday.
According to one source, the principle was agreed that the UK would not show bias towards immigrants from any one part of the world over another when granting access to work.
However, one cabinet source told the BBC the agreement did not constitute a firm decision and a government source said there could be "light touch migration" rules for EU nationals as part of any wider Brexit trade deal.
The government does not call this "preferential" treatment because a similar arrangement could be struck with, for example, the US as part of a UK-US trade deal.
The EU's principle of freedom of movement currently allows people from the European Economic Area - all EU countries, as well as Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein - plus Switzerland, to travel and work within the area without visas, regardless of skills.
What are the current rules for non-EU citizens?
Anyone wanting to move to the UK from outside the EU, as well as Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland, to work or study needs to apply for one of a number of visas.
These range from Tier 1, preserved for investors and "exceptional talent", to Tier 5 visas for short-term voluntary and educational programmes.
The two most common are the Tier 2 skilled worker visas and Tier 4 student visas. Currently, no Tier 3 - unskilled labour - visas are being given out.
Some of these visas allow people to apply to bring dependants such as children and partners.
Visas work on a points-based system and the criteria have got tougher in recent years.
For example, for a Tier 2 "experienced skilled worker" visa, people now need to be paid at least £30,000 to apply, up almost £10,000 from 2011. People get more points for higher salaries or if their job is on the list of shortage occupations.
Most visas come with other conditions, including knowledge of English, the need for a sponsor and agreeing not to claim benefits for a period of time.
The UK is due to withdraw from the European Union on 29 March next year, although an "implementation period" lasting until 31 December 2020 has been agreed as part of the proposed Brexit deal being negotiated between the UK and the EU.
In that transition period, EU citizens arriving in the UK would enjoy the same rights and guarantees as those who arrive beforehand. The same would apply to UK expats on the continent.
It remains unclear what would happen in the event of a "no-deal" Brexit, as the transition period would not then happen and the new migration system would, government sources say, have to be "tapered in" because it would not be ready by March.
Last week, the Migration Advisory Committee, an independent public body which advises ministers on migration issues, called for the annual limit on the number of high-skilled workers from outside the EU granted permission to work to be scrapped.
Currently set at 20,700 a year, the cap - imposed by Mrs May when at the Home Office - has resulted in thousands of IT specialists and NHS candidates being denied visas.
A change in the rules for NHS workers was announced in June after pressure from health bosses.
Lobby groups such as the Campaign for Science and Engineering have argued that job offers in other areas, such as science and engineering, should also be exempt from the rules.
Home Secretary Sajid Javid has previously said he was taking a "fresh look" at the Tier 2 cap.
Some business groups, particularly in industries such as agriculture and hospitality, have warned that any future arrangement barring low-skilled migrants could cause huge disruption.
It is understood that at Monday's cabinet meeting Business Secretary Greg Clark raised the concerns of businesses at a sudden change, arguing that there could be pressure for a gradual, rather than immediate shake up after Brexit.
The Chancellor Philip Hammond agreed that was likely but sources say there was a unanimous decision to move to a new system based on the principle of equal access, albeit with the acceptance that some sectors would need low skilled migrants from the EU.
It about time that is fair on everyone.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
I dont have any alliance, I think on balance Im a Tory/Labour hybrid, which should rightly make me a Lib Dem but who can take them seriously?
I simply couldnt vote for Corbyn. As much as theres a lot I like about their last manifesto, there are just too many red flags for me.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
How does Canada meet the four pillars? It doesnt. The point of noting which was simply that the EU has and does compromise, never that the Canada deal was precisely what we need.
To agree a free trade deal, with a nation that has already perfectly aligned standards, and pre-existing business/goods routes etc, is that really so "out there" as to be a ridiculous point?
Im aware the Canada deal isnt all inclusive etc - but is it really that far away?
And this is the essence with my issue with this whole point. I dont actually think we are asking for too much, and I still dont believe what we are asking for amounts to the imminent implosion of the whole bloc as the EU suggests.
A straight trading relationship, from their POV with one of the biggest economies in the world, where regulations are already aligned and trade routes/relationships already established - I mean, yeah - pie in the sky stuff.
They have compromised before on the pillars, but choose not to with us. Its a choice, not a necessity.
We are turning the Canada deal down so we think its too far away.
A trade deal is a long term thing so the fact that we have "already perfectly aligned standards, and pre-existing business/goods routes etc" is moot as we both expect them to diverge. If we commit to keeping them the same then how does this align with Brexit?
How does the Canada deal break the four freedoms? Its a trade deal one that the EU are willing to replicate, the EU have many trade deals - they are not getting freedom of movement of goods, services, capital or persons.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Long term, as with any trading relationship, there would be a commitment to maintaining those standards.
IE - whatever we sell to them meets whatever requirements.
Im unsure as to why this is a big deal, as it would be exactly the case with anything we send anywhere else.
Its not like we have to make sure everything we produce meets the EU standard. Only - everything we sell to the EU.
That is not the same as "staying in" or betraying Brexit somehow, it is the reality of trading.
We are turning the Canada deal down because the EU has offered it as a cookie-cutter copy, so clearly it doesnt suit us.
The point is, and remains, the EU has shown a capacity to compromise many times - and yet approached these talks with an absolute refusal to do so.
IE - whatever we sell to them meets whatever requirements.
Im unsure as to why this is a big deal, as it would be exactly the case with anything we send anywhere else.
Its not like we have to make sure everything we produce meets the EU standard. Only - everything we sell to the EU.
That is not the same as "staying in" or betraying Brexit somehow, it is the reality of trading.
We are turning the Canada deal down because the EU has offered it as a cookie-cutter copy, so clearly it doesnt suit us.
The point is, and remains, the EU has shown a capacity to compromise many times - and yet approached these talks with an absolute refusal to do so.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
They have a free trade deal, with no free movement of people - including, I believe, services (at least some).
I know it is not all inclusive, but its a fair way toward what we would require.
The point remains, they have made offers knowing they dont suit us, offering no compromise at all.
They made compromise in all the deals they signed to date. For us? "Here are the templates, pick one". Hardly the same.
And the further thing that bugs me (and not directed at you, but in general), is the idea that doing a free trade deal with us is some sort of charity on their part. It is a two way relationship, they buy from us, and sell to us, a great deal - its hardly like its doing us a favour to have a trade agreement.
I know it is not all inclusive, but its a fair way toward what we would require.
The point remains, they have made offers knowing they dont suit us, offering no compromise at all.
They made compromise in all the deals they signed to date. For us? "Here are the templates, pick one". Hardly the same.
And the further thing that bugs me (and not directed at you, but in general), is the idea that doing a free trade deal with us is some sort of charity on their part. It is a two way relationship, they buy from us, and sell to us, a great deal - its hardly like its doing us a favour to have a trade agreement.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
For me this is quite indicative of Labour now. Proposing twentieth century solutions (buses) and inconsequential restraints on last days of Rome neo-liberalism, while not really managing to grasp the bigger/modern issues (deconsumerisation)
They have a zero Tariff deal not freedom of movement of goods this is a different thing. The Canada deal remains constant with their statement they wont break the four Freedoms.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-a-downgrade-for-brexit-britain-quicktake-q-a
We don't want a free Tariff deal we want freedom of movement of goods.
Last edited:
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
Or services. Canada is not a ready made fit for the uk by any means.
Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Are we not looking at having to have customs checks now anyway? Does that not put a Canada-like deal back on the table?
Ultimately - as said infinitum - strictly "THE Canada deal" was never the desired intent. It serves only as an example of the EU being willing to deal.
Canada +, as was mentioned, would be more sensible - and IMO not impossible - save for the fact the EU will simply not entertain any compromise with us at all.
And therin lays the rub, and my point all along. They simply dont want to deal, unless it puts us in a significantly weaker position than we are now.
And that, quite simply, I do not understand.
The Canada deal shows they are willing to negotiate as long as the four freedoms were not broken, a message they have maintained with us. They are willing to negotiate and be flexible within these constrictions, the same with us. This was the same message they said when we were a member of the EU and now we are not.
We do not want customs checks under Chequers with good that enter the EU, if we did want to have customs checks then Canada would be back on the table - it is us who are rejecting this not the EU.
What is the Canada+ that the Government wants? Chequers is not Canada+ it involves freedom of movement of goods with a yet to be invented frictionless technological solution that would mean no need for customs checks.
apologies for the source https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Chequers-plan-compare-Canada-style-model.html
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
That’s all part of the Brexit delusion. No trade deals are ever simple. History tells us that. Pre vote people outlined this, post vote, while we are experiencing this reality, the delusion continues.
If it’s so easy to put in place a free trade agreement, why does it take years for the US, EU etc to achieve them?
Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Yes, mostly but not 100%, and yes.
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
In many ways I don’t mind Corbyn. I respect anyone who has a vision and I share some of his views on socialism.
But...!
The nation is ready to boot out the Tories and a centrist like Tony Blair would attract conservative voters and get into power. Someone who is seen as reasonable, who has a plan to navigate the UK out of Brexit, and invest in social services would win. Corbyn can’t even attract all the loyal Labour voters let alone Conservatives. It’s a crying shame as the Tories and their Brexit shambles are there for the taking.
Sadly Corbyn will have to fight the press, and doesn’t have the skill to capture the centre.
Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
As an aside I am making no judgement on the wiseness of the EU position just that it's a consistent, valid position to take and is done for the belief its their least worst option (when compared to the alternative hard brexit) they have rather than to punish the UK.
I actually think the UK position is a decent one however given its not consistent the EUs we now have to decide what is our least worst option back down or hard brexit.
I actually think the UK position is a decent one however given its not consistent the EUs we now have to decide what is our least worst option back down or hard brexit.
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
Least bad option is to focus on what the UK can and needs to do (while staying in the EU). Put the emphasis on our parliament and sorting it out. Making it more effective and being ambitious trying to deliver some of the underlying sentiment of Brexit.
What would you say is the best option for the UK?
Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Me I am very much second referendum now we know the actual (probable) options, transferable vote with clear outcomes for a direct mandate.
I can understand those that will disagree due to the fact it goes against the original one but knowing what we do now would be cutting off our nose to spite our face. It's surely more democratic to have a vote based on facts over multiple possibilities some of which were pie in the sky.
I don't think that will happen, it will be Canada with a few differences or hard... I think its probable that there will be a customs boarder in the Irish sea, I can't see any other option.
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
I agree apart from the last sentence. How could anyone welcome a future where the UK has so many challanges with so few potential oppotunies (at least oppotunities outlined to us). We lose everything from phone roaming, pollution control, new satalie programmes, free trade and export jobs, a seat at the top table helping to control global trade etc etc. and on the otherside we get an option to negotiate trade deals with our 50m consumers and start from scratch. It is bonkers to me why anyone who can reason thinks Brexit offers anything. It doesn't. It is a myth. The answers lie closer to home - sorting the failings in our own government and nation.