Post-exit immigration policy - what should it be?
- Thread starter ska invita
- Start date
1%er
Well-Known Member
Wouldn't it be the case that if the UK joins in the same manor as Norway or Switzerland they would have to sign up to the Schengen Agreement and also still have to pay around 94% of their current contribution, so all the UK would have done is loose its vote on single market laws and rules?Negotiate a Norway/Swiss model to allow full EU free trade access which is probably the only avenue open to us. This would of course include free movement of labour so as you were, no change. As pointed out what would help is good employment law to level the playing field. Forward with Corbyn.
What would the UK gain from that?
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
We weren't in the Schengen Agreement were we ?
1%er
Well-Known Member
I assume you mean the UK when you say "we" (I don't live in Europe).
Both Norway and Switzerland are in Schengen, so if the UK joins using their model (which was the question I was answering) I would have thought the UK would have to sign up to it, hence my question. If they joined and didn't have to sign up to Schengen it would be a different model.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Yes and I don't either btw . wasnt there an agreement re refugees within Schengen ? If there was then that's a no no .
SaskiaJayne
Rural Guerrilla
We could probably avoid signing up for Schengen but we would certainly have to pay to be in the single market so at the end of it we would be about where we are at the moment. One could argue that mostly at the top table we wern't listened to anyway so no loss there perhaps? After that it would be just politics. I think we would have to be in the single market to be as about as we are now because if the economy tanked then the government would probably lose the next election.
The reason we have so much immigration from eastern Europe is because of our almost non existent employment laws & nothing to do with the EU. Holland for example does not have our levels of unskilled migrant workers because they cannot be exploited by employers, if they are then there are prosecutions of those employers. Maybe the UK government after this shock result will see strengthening employment law as a way of slowing immigration but it would have to be the right government, ie Labour probably.
1%er
Well-Known Member
There was a change by a number of countries earlier this year where they added some form of boarder control with their Schengen neighbors (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Norway, and Sweden are the countries I believe).
The problem for the other 27 countries in agreeing to the UK having full access to the free market but not free movement is other countries citizens may want the same deal. As some other countries citizens are calling for them to be given a referendum, the 27 can't really been seen to be giving the UK a "good/better" deal.
Ideally the best deal for the UK (if they want to satisfy the leave voters, no free movement, no EU laws and no payments to the EU) would be a free trade agreement along the lines of the new agreement with Canada, elimination of about 98% of all EU tariff from day one and the last 2% shortly after, but that would be sending the wrong message to other EU countries.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Last point is spot on.
1%er
Well-Known Member
Does the UK have some sort of opt-out of EU employment law (I thought that was an area that Cameron wanted an opt-out in his renegotiation prior to the referendum), I read a lot about the UK workers loosing lots of rights if they left the EU.
Can you point me to something that shows how UK employment law differs from EU laws? (Googling seems to show they are very similar, maybe I'm missing something)
Edit to add, it seems that when the UK signed the Maastricht Treaty they lost there employment law opt-out and that the European court of human rights has ruled they accept others.
Last edited:
It is the key point, freedom of movement and the single market.
It is the big split in the Brexit camp.
So...the Tories, Johnson, May etc, can negotiate to leave the EU, but in the end they accept single market, freedom of movement, and they can do this because they will be able to turn on Ukip?BNP/Farage - paint them as anti-business bigots - but still say to their supporters, `we left the EU, red tape, freedom to set laws etc`.
If I could put money on that I would.
What should happen? Freedom of movement, increased minimum wage, stronger representation for Unions, inc on company boards, mass training schemes for any long term unemployed, raise school leaving age to 18, abolish university/technical college fees, invest heavily in education in non-urban UK as happened in London in early 2000s, allow the state to take shares in private companies to influence direction (a la Norway), targeted funds for towns/villages with high levels of immigration...and so much more...we can drop a fucking laser guided bomb on a sixpence but we can't help integrate newcomers? Fuck off.
It is the big split in the Brexit camp.
So...the Tories, Johnson, May etc, can negotiate to leave the EU, but in the end they accept single market, freedom of movement, and they can do this because they will be able to turn on Ukip?BNP/Farage - paint them as anti-business bigots - but still say to their supporters, `we left the EU, red tape, freedom to set laws etc`.
If I could put money on that I would.
What should happen? Freedom of movement, increased minimum wage, stronger representation for Unions, inc on company boards, mass training schemes for any long term unemployed, raise school leaving age to 18, abolish university/technical college fees, invest heavily in education in non-urban UK as happened in London in early 2000s, allow the state to take shares in private companies to influence direction (a la Norway), targeted funds for towns/villages with high levels of immigration...and so much more...we can drop a fucking laser guided bomb on a sixpence but we can't help integrate newcomers? Fuck off.
SaskiaJayne
Rural Guerrilla
It's all in the implementation of those laws in the individual countries & of course countries can & do have their own employment laws that exceed EU law. France for example has it's 35hr week. EU law is 48hr working week but in the UK workers can 'voluntarily' opt out of this 48hr week & work longer. Holland for example enforces exact equality of employment ie no difference of pay & conditions between local & migrant workers & offending companies are prosecuted. Read this. In the UK the laws are not enforced because priority is not given to enforcing them. The biggest exploiters of migrant labour in the UK are of course companies that contribute to Tory party funds. This is the irony. This unwanted referendum & the unwanted result has been brought about not by the actions of the EU but by the actions of successive UK governments.
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
So Norway is outside the EU proper because of oil and gas ? And Britain because of the City ?
Apparently there's going to be a brian drain 
Migrant labour isn't responsible for low wages, if it has negative effects it is tiny, industry specific and time constrained. 40 yrs of neo-liberalism, "structural/natural" levels of unemployment (spare capacity in markets to keep them fluid), self-employment as a cover for under employment, poor enforcement of existing laws, this is what drives down wages.
In Spain wages fell ~20pc after fin crisis simultaneously as 250,000 migrants left the country (and a similar load of Spanish).
Other EU states are looking at UK GDP and licking their lips. That could be big stuff like service industries (~80pc of UK economy iirc) or it could be SMEs or it could be individuals...Apparently there's going to be a brian drain
(((Brian)))
ska invita
back on the other side
The Oracle has spoken once again:
"Jeremy Corbyn is like the captain of a ship locking himself in the cabin as his vessel heads for the iceberg. His passengers are all those in the party, but also all those who need Labour to undo the damage of austerity.
The resignation of most of his shadow cabinet at least offers hope of revival, with a new leader to seize the day. Who and how we don’t yet know, but the party can’t go on denying their heartlands’ demand for migration curbs."
The wonderful Polly Toynbee
Like I said, I think it was to inva..a vote for Leave is a vote for an Australian-style points immigration: the Tories have made that clear that will be their policy and Labour are now pathetically following the way the political momentum is rolling.
The worrying thing is when trade negotiations begin with the EU my understanding is that 'free movement of labour' is a central condition.* If both parties propose it and the EU effectively stops it from happening I think this risks lynchings in the streets of 'foreigners' by the angriest Leavers.
Does anyone understand for sure how it works in regards accessing the EU market and having a point based migration system <how possible is that to even achieve?
"Jeremy Corbyn is like the captain of a ship locking himself in the cabin as his vessel heads for the iceberg. His passengers are all those in the party, but also all those who need Labour to undo the damage of austerity.
The resignation of most of his shadow cabinet at least offers hope of revival, with a new leader to seize the day. Who and how we don’t yet know, but the party can’t go on denying their heartlands’ demand for migration curbs."
The wonderful Polly Toynbee
Like I said, I think it was to inva..a vote for Leave is a vote for an Australian-style points immigration: the Tories have made that clear that will be their policy and Labour are now pathetically following the way the political momentum is rolling.
The worrying thing is when trade negotiations begin with the EU my understanding is that 'free movement of labour' is a central condition.* If both parties propose it and the EU effectively stops it from happening I think this risks lynchings in the streets of 'foreigners' by the angriest Leavers.
Does anyone understand for sure how it works in regards accessing the EU market and having a point based migration system <how possible is that to even achieve?
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
As a whole (ie points 1-11), this seemed like a good idea to me, bar (major bar) the points-based part set by an 'independent' body based on the 'needs of the economy'(the first part of point 5); a good idea as a whole apart from putting employers before local communities, as though they are independent of each other, and as though employers should take precedence.
Would there be any useful/workable/helpful way of saying that (for a given time period and region of whatever pre-defined size is workable and useful) each region must be prepared to take some minimum number of new residents from abroad depending on local housing capacity, local employment levels, number of job opportunities and state of local service provision, and cannot take any more than some maximum (greater) number based on the same? All in conjunction with employment laws that guarantee a minimum wage and outlaws zero hours contracts (and whatever else I've forgotten about that constitutes shitty employment practice). Assuming Labour winning a general election with JC as PM. And with the intended result that there was no overall fixed cap on immigration, but that it would be flexible, according to capacity not desired growth-rate, and giving full rights to everyone who comes.
I'm a bit rubbish at extrapolating consequences for this kind of thing (I can do science logic but economics doesn't seem to be at all logical to me, not helped by me being pretty ignorant of the parameters of negotiation with the EU). So I might sound like a fool, but if anyone has the patience to point out what the problems might be and/or suggest alternatives, I'd be very interested to hear.
Edited for grammar and clarity of meaning.
Last edited:
sheothebudworths
Up the bum - no babies!!!
I'm interested too, Mation
The annual parliamentary review by an independent body doesn't sound so worrying to me, if it couldn't be manipulated (
) - given all the caveats about funding for services in areas where an increase in the population may have/has had an impact - but I did immediately bristle at the mention of a points based system and of course, as has been pointed out, having employers defining their own needs before any of the rest of it, looks like a shot in the foot, too, when the aim ought to be to allow immigration to continue at the highest rate it can, without people feeling it's to the detriment of their own lives and without it being driven by fucking pounds for business.
I'm shit at explaining what I feel/think, tbf - and along with everything being in such a state of flux - it's really difficult to grasp what's right and what's wrong and all of the in-betweens.
The annual parliamentary review by an independent body doesn't sound so worrying to me, if it couldn't be manipulated (
) - given all the caveats about funding for services in areas where an increase in the population may have/has had an impact - but I did immediately bristle at the mention of a points based system and of course, as has been pointed out, having employers defining their own needs before any of the rest of it, looks like a shot in the foot, too, when the aim ought to be to allow immigration to continue at the highest rate it can, without people feeling it's to the detriment of their own lives and without it being driven by fucking pounds for business.I'm shit at explaining what I feel/think, tbf - and along with everything being in such a state of flux - it's really difficult to grasp what's right and what's wrong and all of the in-betweens.
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
I'd be fine with a genuinely independent body, I just wasn't sure what that might mean. I tend to trust 'equations' built to deal with nuance, that have parameters agreed in advance based on agreed priorities and desired outcomes. So to me, an independent body would be one who implemented that, rather than one whose members thought about it and decided based on their opinions of the current situation, without having to say what they thought of the pre-defined priorities and outcomes as indicated by A WELL-DEFINED NUMERIC SCALE.I'm interested too, Mation
The annual parliamentary review by an independent body doesn't sound so worrying to me, if it couldn't be manipulated (
I'm shit at explaining what I feel/think, tbf - and along with everything being in such a state of flux - it's really difficult to grasp what's right and what's wrong and all of the in-betweens.
So you would know in advance what was meant by 'having sufficient capacity' based on agreed criteria.And putting the needs of business first can fuck the fuck off!!
sheothebudworths
Up the bum - no babies!!!
It's alright - I barely understand any of them(And thank you for making me feel I didn't ask a totally daft question.)
Thinking on, I'm *imagining*
that the regions where there are currently more available homes - certainly social and/or affordable ones - are most likely also the regions where there are the biggest problems with lack of employment/funding for local services.I don't doubt there are some *in between* places but then they'd probably kick off.
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
I'm at the very limit of my ability. (read: flounderingIt's alright - I barely understand any of them
)So in my scenario, the equation used to determine how many can come to the specific local area (of whatever size, as mentioned) would take into account the difference between available housing and employment opportunity; they wouldn't be considered separately. But, a discernible difference between the two might point out the need for more investment in one or the other.Thinking on, I'm *imagining*
I don't doubt there are some *in between* places but then they'd probably kick off.
Somewhere that had lots of affordable homes but no work would not be able to take lots of overseas residents, but it would flag up that money/attention/services are needed there such that there are more work opportunities plus a possible reduction in housing costs such that the work that's available is enough to find housing. But are there places where there is genuinely too much affordable housing for the local population?
collectordave
Active Member
Several I know have allready left
collectordave
Active Member
Why do we not adopt the european model for immigration.
One simple question are you going to be a burden on the state? Answer yes and it is goodbye and back to your country of origin.
Obviously this is for immigrants not refugees. Need to point that out as there does seem to be some confusion and merging of the two groups. So we need a policy for refugees as well.
Confused by Theresa May interview. Immigration is going to be the priority? Why two years later eu has no say.
One simple question are you going to be a burden on the state? Answer yes and it is goodbye and back to your country of origin.
Obviously this is for immigrants not refugees. Need to point that out as there does seem to be some confusion and merging of the two groups. So we need a policy for refugees as well.
Confused by Theresa May interview. Immigration is going to be the priority? Why two years later eu has no say.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
That's not the European model for immigration is it dave ?
collectordave
Active Member
Actually it does appear to be so.
Emmigrate to Portugal. Not entitled to health care etc and until you are registered as a citizen, which can take five or more years no benefits etc. You are counted as a tourist that can be removed back to place of origin at a moments notice even if you bought property etc.
It just appears that the British government forgot to use it.
Emmigrate to Portugal. Not entitled to health care etc and until you are registered as a citizen, which can take five or more years no benefits etc. You are counted as a tourist that can be removed back to place of origin at a moments notice even if you bought property etc.
It just appears that the British government forgot to use it.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
No it's not the eu model for immigration at all.
Similar threads
- Poll
