Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

Oh yeah definitely there's a bigger question of just how attractive the UK is for various reasons, costs, wages etc.

But the flaws with the whole 'time-limited visa for specific roles' system is just something I'm always drawn to.

Here's your Times article with a share token by the way, if anyone wants to read it.

How European baristas and au pairs could return to Britain under government scheme (thetimes.co.uk)

There's echoes of David Davis's famous 'first post of call will be Berlin, not Brussels' late in the article. Seems the Home Office wants to strike these reciprocal au-pair deals with just Spain, Germany and France. But the European Commission is suggesting that 'youth mobility' falls within it's remit and it may insist on an EU-wide deal. The UK is then pointing out that some EU countries have previously done individual deals with non-EU countries, and why can't the same be done for the UK. They really have no concept of the amount of bridges they burned.

Another open goal that Labour are going to opt to pass back to midfield. Rather than trumpet from the hills that the Tories have lied and lied and lied and lied they're going to sit back and say nothing and play for another **** 1-0 - they'll get their 5 or 10 years in government and absolutely nothing will change. And then the Tories will beat them 1-0 and we'll be back in the same nonsense for another decade

The sickening bit is they were told by the hospitality industry that this would happen and we needed a visa scheme.

Only to be told hospitality staff are too poor for glorious Brexit Britain.

You will get young people taking up the visas to go do a year of drinkin and ridin same as we do in Australia and Canada but that kind of transient stuff will only fill certain gaps and no matter what it will still be a worse set up than the pre Brexit one.

A big question here is why would the EU bother.

This is a deal as usual is totally one sided.

As long as they don't contravene EU law as regards, e.g., the Schengen rules or labour market regulation, EU member states can enter into youth mobility agreements with third countries allowing entry and working rights. We know this because several EU countries have already done this with a variety of third countries. So in principle an EU member state could make a youth mobility agreement with the UK.

But the scope of that agreement would be limited by EU law. What that means in practice is probably quite technical. Whether this limitation would mean that the agreement couldn't cover something the UK wanted it to cover, I can't say.

There are the other factors already pointed to — just because member states can do this doesn't mean they want to. Apart from the obvious consideration of whether Germany, Spain, etc has any interest in attracting young temporary workers from the UK, there's the fact that EU member states have spend the last seven years resisting UK attempts at cherry-picking, and they might be more cautious about making a bilateral agreement with the UK than they would with a less politically charged third country. The member states, as well as the Commission, might prefer that any youth mobility agreement with the UK should be an EU-wide one. Recognising the sensitivities here, the European Affairs Committee of the House of Lords has recommended that the UK government should pursue a youth mobility scheme with the Commission, rather than with individual member states.

The main advantage for the EU countries is not so much the opportunity to hire temporary workers from the UK as the opportunity for their own citizens to work temporarily in the UK

It's true that there are 27 other countries in which their own citizens can work temporarily (or permanently), but many people want to work in an English-speaking country, because their own second or third language is English and (a) they are more employable in an Anglophone country here than they would be in a country where they do not speak the language, plus (b) they want to improve their English by living and working in an Anglophone environment. Ireland and Malta can only accommodate so many of them. So, if the UK were more open to them, that would be a benefit.

But its probably a bigger deal for the UK, where many businesses are crying out for young, transient workers, than it is for any EU country. This is a situation in which the UK needs the EU or its members states more than they need it.

But how affordable/practical would it be if you can only work as a barista/waiter/shop assistant?

For a temp working holiday visa in an english language setting Australia and New Zealand are still more appealing to that young adventurer type you describe.

Temp wages are too grindingly low everywhere in England to make it an adventure.

I'm not understanding it either. I went to Australia on the working holiday visa and could work at whatever I wanted. So earned decent money and had a great time. Would have been way more restrictive if I was on barista wages (admittedly I don't know how much baristas make, maybe it's loads).

Climate was a bit better too. Maybe the UK is more attractive a working holiday destination for Europeans than it would be to us in Ireland but if given the choice of UK vs Australia (considering the temporary nature of both visas) I'd spend the extra few quid and go further south.

Proportional Representation has its problems too. A voting system must be seen as fair, but it must also ensure a working government of some stability can be formed and the elected parliament can and will pass good and relevant laws.

It is a large and complicated job to make a PV system that works. A well designed PV system can be hugely better than the FPTP system, but it must be well designed.

The German PV system with a party minimum of 5% of the votes to get any MP's elected is quite extreme antu small parties, but it works as there is a long tradition of coalition governments and working across party lines in Germany.

The Italian system has created far too many elections and governments.

More countries have had problems with very small groups of MPs with 'one subject special views' only literally blackmailing the political system to forward their extreme views not otherwise supported in the population.

Lars 😀

There are already visas for people wanting bank executive jobs. The post Brexit immigration rules had exemptions for high paid workers because the stupid racists who voted for Brexit only wanted to stop a certain kind of foreigner and the fat lazy unemployed Daily Mail reader had absolutely no clue as to the background of the average hospitality worker.

Contraceptives and beer? no food then? 😄

How do you mean?

The people who use that reason for being anti immigration are always talking about someone else. Other English people will now sweep roads and serve pints not the person in question.

There is a fallacy about hospitality that it's easy. Yes it's easy to teach someone to pull pints but you can't teach them to be good at it. For cultural reasons outside of UK citizens the pub trade is overwhelmingly UK citizens and you can't just cut that cord because you feel like it.