EU wants to undo Brexit, a little bit, for people 18 to 30
EU wants to undo Brexit, a little bit, for people 18 to 30
The European Commission argues it was Europe's students and young graduates who were most affected by Brexit's mobility restrictions. The UK has reportedly responded cooly to the proposal.
The European Commission argues it was Europe's students and young graduates who were most affected by Brexit's mobility restrictions. The UK has reportedly responded cooly to the proposal.
The European Union is trying to improve mobility between its 27 member-states and the UK, particularly for people between the ages of 18 and 30. But whether such a proposal would be welcomed by London remains to be seen.
The EU's executive arm, the European Commission, is trying to open bloc-wide talks with the UK on allowing youth from EU countries to study or work and live in Britain for up to four years, with the same arrangement for British youth.
The proposal would largely revert youth mobility to pre-Brexit times, when members of the then-28-member EU, including Britain, were allowed to work and study without visa requirements. The Commission's new plan would involve a visa, but one whose fees would not be "excessive."
Everyday we are reminded of the damage that state-sponsored misinformation can do.
The stupidest part about brexit was that it was a non-binding referendum. They could have just ignored it. But I guess sometimes you need your house to burn down before you realize why we need a publicly funded fire department.
It's was only non-binding if they lost, like they had previously. Asshats like Farrage were just going to keep trying until they got the answer they wanted.
Having a referendum then ignoring the result because it’s not what you wanted or expected might not have gone down so well. Especially when that referendum was the carrot used to get people to vote for Cameron
But I guess sometimes you need your house to burn down before you realize why we need a publicly funded fire department.
Question... were you bringing up the house out in Tennessee that burned down because the county didn't have a publicly funded fire department? Because if so, that's a hell of a deep cut.
EU, please let Canada in while you're at it. We share a border with denmark
Brazilian here, from the country that shares the largest of the borders of France...
The free movement of people have been nice, is there any chance the they would pressure Brazil into losing a bit of sovereignty and obey the EU's Constitution?
You are technically correct, the best kind of correct.
I'm all for it, but no weird extra right like the UK had. Also, would that perhaps be a problem with your monarchy?
As an American please let us in on it
Why? So we can import school shootings?
Fuck no, get rid of the guns first, you cowards
As long as it's mutual, so 18-30 year old EU citizens can live and work in the UK with little restriction, I'm all for this. I imagine there may be people in the UK who will take issue with that.
A lot of people were given false hope that Brexit would magically solve all their problems. People now regret it.
Why restrict the ages? Looks like corporate vying for cheap labor.
I see this as the EU moving pieces to influence the UK people to revert brexit in a generation (Bregret? Breback?). It benefits the demographic that was already against brexit and keeps the idea od Europe in their minds.
I doubt is for cheap labor. I work in London and in a team of 20 we have a single British, and the few in the company tend to have an easier path for leadership, so why leave? That has been similar in all my previous jobs.
Here's a revolutionary idea: don't set an age limit!
Sunak already killed this, so it doesn't matter really. If it passed, it would have been a step towards re-establishing free movement for everyone.
The UK already has its own Youth Mobility scheme, where it had already struck deals with 13 countries.
If I'm correct, the countries are:
- Australia
- Canada
- New Zealand
- South Korea
- Andorra
- Iceland
- Japan
- Monaco
- San Marino
- Uruguay
- Hong Kong
- Taiwan
- India
If this is what the UK leadership see as the better choice for British citizens, then it's up to the citizens of Great Britain to do something about it in the next election.
Surely, they are not mutually exclusive and some form of this scheme has been in place for some countries (albeit mainly white commonwealth countries) for many years, even when the UK was in the EU.
Holy shit though, I just looked up the UK's scheme and you have to pay almost a grand in fees (mostly NHS surcharge) and have over £2,500 in savings. I don't want rich a-holes coming over for an extended holiday instead of normal people from more different cultures. Let's vote for better and fairer immigration polices
I feel sorry for those who feel having £3500 makes you rich.
I get the sentiment but you’re glossing over two important things; 48.11% of people voted to remain and there hasn’t been a second referendum.
Half the country wanted to remain, the other half are racists and/or idiots that believed the outright lies peddled by the leave campaign. Latest polls suggest 60% would vote to remain today but we’re not being offered the chance to vote on that. Voting labour in general elections doesn’t mean we get to rejoin the EU.
Voting isn't the only way to get things to change. Politics doesn't start at the Parliament. It starts with you actually putting in time and effort making sure that local changes happens.
If your engagement doesn't stretch further than a like on Facebook you're actually getting what you want...
Not the same as travelling in the EU. None of those countries you mentioned are in the EU.
No one has said it's the same. The Brits are however saying they're happy with the existing agreements.
If I remember correctly, France was one of the first ones to cut them off after they left and they cut them off hard.
I wonder how willing they'll be to let them come crawling back.
And how does EU membership work?
Does it need to be a unanimous decision from the current member states to admit/readmit a country or is it a majority/supermajority decision?The EU has members elect politicians - MEPs (Members of European Parliament). These politicians vote on issues similar to how most other parliaments would. Many issues are agreed upon this way.
MEPs are grouped by political alignment not nationality.
The EU council is the other legislative body in the EU. The EU parliament can send legislation that it doesn't have the authority to pass itself here for consideration. This type of legislation is still supposed to be developed and debated in parliament. The EU council is a collections of ministers from each member state. These ministers represent their government, not the people (directly at least). This council can approve and amend legislation passed by the parliament. This is where the vetos can happen.
The council is important to maintain the sovereignty of individual nations. Despite what Brexit campaigns say, the EU parliament is and isn't going to be sovereign. The council enables each sovereign state to stop legislation they don't want. This often means the EU passes very boring and very agreeable legislation. But it legislation that makes the rules within multiple nations consistent so commerce is easier and less bureaucratic. Once you comply with the EU rules, you've complied with all the countries within it.
While this is broadly right for legislation, the question above was about admission of new member states.
Admission of new member states requires unanimity among existing member states. That is because EU membership is based on international treaties. For every member state there is a treaty like this one that regulates their entry into the EU; you can see that it's a treaty between literally all (existing and new) member states which had to agree to it.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/520954/brexit-votes-by-age/
We can just ban people over the age of 45 and give the rest some freedom that they wanted back.
Labour said no, Tories said No. So maybe it's time people consider something beyond those 2
I say no to this, they wanted out so they got it. This would be another concession made to the brits and remove an incentive for the younger generation to get involved and get their voice heard. Leave them outside until they learn.