The UK still has half a system in place for none EU people. The EU law won't let us use the visa system on EU people.
That wasn't the question: Why didn't May revert to the 'very simple system' that 'worked' for the non-EU people to test it? The Tories have had the control of the Home Office for over five years to date. Why continue with the points based system from Labour, which is nothing like the American visa system you bang on about? It's more Aussie if anything. There's nothing from the EU stopping her going ahead on this count. She could trial anything she wants.
Anyhow, to reiterate and summarise:
- Your American dream would require scrapping a working system, and rolling out a new visa regime for all immigration post-Brexit, or at least rewriting the old rules to fit today's market
- Expanding the PBS we have already post-Brexit would still require more money up-front from the government; running this larger PBS may or may not be offset over the years by the higher processing fees and greater business contributions (or more government spending)
Which is it for you? Both have administrative and practical issues you wish to ignore.
It was a very simple system and worked. But this time round those who want to come here will have to pay.
According to your anecdotal nostalgia? You still haven't said at what levels you envisage them paying? Further, why should they pay extra anyway, if it's our businesses, research centres and institutions that need their skills? Why add extra costs and red-tape on everyone? What would it do to the affordability of the sponsorship process, with a bigger system to pay for? What would it achieve?
Sounds like you don't know the difference between a working visa and one for permanent residence.
Here's what the system that's likely to get expanded post-Brexit is going to keep doing:
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7337/CBP-7337.pdf -- linked sources in the document take you to the concerns raised by the stakeholders
It's not great. One point, temporarily reversed in the case of nurses for now, is related to settlement. The other two apply to everyone.
Now if the system causes this much chaos at lower volumes, needs interventions from several institutions and at least two government departments to patch it up to meet real needs in-flight -- what would it do in full swing, should it be applied to all migrants? Should we also get rid of the PBS in favour of the antique visa regime we had, it'd cause an even greater bureaucratic log-jam.
In fact, doing something like this to cut numbers and meet all the shortages may become a mutually exclusive process, and an embarrassing, shambolic mess. Particularly if it's rushed in at the eleventh hour as our 2-year transitional period for negotiations comes to a close.
Thanks but no thanks, deuse.