Brexit thread - what happens next

[estebanrey]

This.

If we stop free movement from the EU much of the difference will be taken up by an increase in immigration through the tier system for non EU migrants. Ergo a gross migration figure not much lower than we have now. Net may be compounded by a reduction in Brits leaving due to new restrictions imposed on working in the EU.

So all in all I wouldn't be surprised if net migration went up if we pulled out of free movement. (That's not me saying it will, just it wouldn't be surprising).

Obviously of there was a recession migration may go down, but then I'm not really sure what you are trying to argue there.

Eh? Are you suggesting that non-EU migrants are somehow holding off despite being able to pass current criteria because they feel bad about coming when others have free movement?

In other words, why would non-EU migration go up if we restricted free movement for EU nationals?

 

[phil675]

Because their partner is a British citizen and British citizens should be allowed to live with the people they love in Britain.

Why should that be a right? Yes we all want to live with our families. But why does that mean I can bring them over to another country even if they don't otherwise qualify?

 

[Amp34]

Why does a family tie trump anything else? The person who moved here wasn't forced to do so. What makes them deserving other than they won the marriage lottery?

I guess if that were a policy and was enacted it's made the question of whether I come back to the uk a lot easier. Big fat no. Along with probably a million other ex pats.

Also how far does this policy go. Do you also ban the families of skilled workers coming over as well? If so that severely cuts down the number of people wanting to immigrate to Britain. It would probably mean the vast majority of people with any experience would not apply because they would usually have families in tow.

 

[Mr Jack]

Why should that be a right? Yes we all want to live with our families. But why does that mean I can bring them over to another country even if they don't otherwise qualify?

Because you're British and this is Britain?

I find yours an utterly baffling position. You want to vigorously protect Britain for British people but you don't even want British people to be able to live here with their families. That's bizarre.

 

[phil675]

It's not banning anybody, it's asking for more criteria than 'I married the right person'.

 

[Amp34]

Eh? Are you suggesting that non-EU migrants are somehow holding off despite being able to pass current criteria because they feel bad about coming when others have free movement?

In other words, why would non-EU migration go up if we restricted free movement for EU nationals?

Considering one of the main aspects of the current non EU immigration system (for skilled workers at least) is having a job offer I'd suggest companies will be far more willing to sponsor someone if they don't have 500 million people to choose from prior to that.

Unless you have a very specific skill an EU citizen is likely to be picked over a non EU citizen (all other things being equal) for a job application at the moment. Why spend thousands bringing someone over to work for you when you can employ a similarly skilled person from the EU for no cost?

Sponsorship is also a fairly major barrier for smaller companies when employing. It's not as big a hinders few for large multinationals used to moving people all over the place.

It's not like there are thousands of British doctors and engineers unemployed right now (excluding the oil industry ones due to recent layoffs...) ready to fill in the gap that is going to be created by not allowing EU citizens to work here without a visa. The vacancies will have to be filled somehow, and that will be through a visa system.

 

[Amp34]

It's not banning anybody, it's asking for more criteria than 'I married the right person'.

What criteria would that be?

 

[phil675]

What criteria would that be?

Skills, income, the same things as anybody else.

 

[delta0]

So yeah, it's not really same day then is it (in that you can apply and then get the visa in a day or two).

I know when the Canadian immigration service looked at my file it only took them a couple of days to decide. But it had been sat with all the other applications in their office for months prior to that. I wouldn't say my application took a couple of days though, it took 8 months (non work related visa).

Edit: yes, I am nitpicking. It's nice to see it go that quickly, that said they a re pretty restrictive visas as they basically chain you to a specific job, which isn't great for the employee.



More people should. Space makes such a difference and most other countries have it. It's also sunnier, which makes a massive difference.

You're right though, unfortunately it's likely to get much harder to do that. I'm going to guess numbers leaving the UK will drop significantly after we leave the EU, unless we have freedom of movement, so it may actually make net immigration look worse.

You get it well within the notice period of your current job through priority (10 days). If you need it faster than pay for premium or super premium.

 

[Tefal]

Because their partner is a British citizen and British citizens should be allowed to live with the people they love in Britain.

It is widley abused though


Especialy the whole Pakistanis marrying thier cousins thing

 

[Amp34]

Skills, income, the same things as anybody else.

So the non working mother of your children should not be able to come back home with you because they decided to quit their job and look after their kids instead?

 

[phil675]

So the non working mother of your children should not be able to come back home with you because they decided to quit their job and look after their kids instead?

Back home, you mean to another country? Yes a non-working person with dependents shouldn't be allowed in unless the bloke is earning enough to offset the costs to the state.

Edit: Or the mother has savings/is wealthy.

 

[datalol-jack]

It is widley abused though


Especialy the whole Pakistanis marrying thier cousins thing

Well, marrying your cousin is legal in the UK. And unless the law changes, it should apply fairly to everyone, regardless of origin.

 

[Tefal]

Well, marrying your cousin is legal in the UK. And unless the law changes, it should apply fairly to everyone, regardless of origin.

Needs changing really with the massive spikes in genetic diseases from all the inbreeding

 

[Simon]

I guess you guys have no idea about the visa process for non EU family members. Have a look before making out it is easy

 

[Simon]

Back home, you mean to another country? Yes a non-working person with dependents shouldn't be allowed in unless the bloke is earning enough to offset the costs to the state.

Edit: Or the mother has savings/is wealthy.

What costs the the state? Anyone earning over £50k gets nothing from the state. The child,if born to a British citizen, is British and entitled to as much as any child.

 

[datalol-jack]

Needs changing really with the massive spikes in genetic diseases from all the inbreeding

On taboo grounds? A primer from '08: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...s-getting-married-scientists-say-1210072.html.

The research is still out on whether British Pakistani communities are at any greater risk compared to other people marrying their first-cousins from other demographics. Basic genetics make the risks tolerable. The current government, before May admittedly, has received evidence on the matter and no changes are on the horizon as a result.

But as I said and happy to expand: if the law changes, making the practice illegal, then a further legal change will apply to our immigration rules. For as long as the law stands, I see no reason to discriminate specifically against a particular case of marriage that's recognised by the state.

 

[Mr Jack]

It is widley abused though

I assume you have evidence for that?

 

[Amp34]

Back home, you mean to another country? Yes a non-working person with dependents shouldn't be allowed in unless the bloke is earning enough to offset the costs to the state.

Edit: Or the mother has savings/is wealthy.

As in a British expat moving back to the uk with their spous and children (or a British citizen bringing their family over from another country, both should be treated the same).

We appear to have gone round in circles now though, because you are now agreeing with the original post. As long as the British partner can support their family then they should be able to enter the UK to live.

The funding issue is contentious, for example read the threads on here where a couple of people have had issues bringing their spouses over because of it. But we are both in agreement that the spouse should not have to adhere to the requirements for other visas, they just have to be the legitimate spouse of the British citizen.

Which leads back to the point I made earlier. If we have a cap do we prioritize family or skilled workers?

 

[Mr Jack]

I guess you guys have no idea about the visa process for non EU family members. Have a look before making out it is easy

I'm quite familiar with the way that Theresa May chose to make it so that British citizens have less rights to bring their spouses here than EU citizens from other countries. I continue to be amazed that she gets away with it.

It's monstrous and is one of the primary reasons I believe she will prove to be a terrible PM.