Tag Archives: Brexit

Britain, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

UK firms alarmed over Government crackdown on migrants

IMMIGRATION/BREXIT

BUSINESS leaders have clashed with the Government over Brexit following the pledge by Theresa May to curb the flow of cheap, low-skilled labour from Europe.

Business lobby groups reacted with fury to leaked Government proposals outlining a tough new immigration system after Britain leaves the EU.

Downing Street hit back, saying business needs to end its reliance on cheap migrant labour and do more to train British workers. Mrs May said ministers had a duty to curb immigration after last year’s EU referendum, and restated her pledge to slash net immigration to the “tens of thousands”.

But the Government was in disarray as Cabinet ministers, including Home Secretary Amber Rudd, Chancellor Philip Hammond and Business Secretary Greg Clark are understood to have concerns about slashing immigration from the EU too quickly.

Damian Green, the First Secretary of State and one of Mrs May’s closest allies, is also thought to have misgivings, and believes the plan can be toned down.

It has also emerged that FTSE 100 leaders have refused to sign a letter backing the Government’s Brexit strategy. Downing Street quietly asked executives to sign an open letter saying they wanted to “make a success of Brexit”, and welcoming the Government’s push for a transitional deal.

But this was not welcomed by some, with one executive reportedly saying: “There is no way we could sign this given the current state of chaos surrounding the talks.”

It is understood the letter, drafted by No. 10, was due to be made public as Mrs May tries to create support for the legislation going through Parliament about our EU withdrawal.

The row followed the leak of a Home Office document setting out plans to curb immigration from the EU after Brexit.

The Prime Minister said: “Immigration has been good for the UK, but people want to see it controlled as a result of our leaving the EU.

“The Government continues to believe it is important to have net migration at sustainable levels, particularly given the impact it has on people at the lower end of the income scale in depressing their wages.”

Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon said: “We have always welcomed to this country those who can make a contribution to our economy, people with high skills.

“On the other hand, we want British companies to do more to train up British workers, to do more to improve skills of those who leave our colleges. So, there’s always a balance to be struck. We’re not closing the door on all future immigration but it has to be managed properly and people do expect to see the numbers coming down.”

The document, which has caused uneasiness among some ministers, suggests low-skilled workers from the EU would only be allowed to stay for a year or two, and EU citizens would be barred from moving to the UK to look for a job. Ministers are also considering a ‘direct numerical cap’ on the numbers who come here from Europe after the UK leaves in March 2019.

Big businesses reacted angrily to the proposals. The chief executive of the British Hospitality Association said the proposals would be “catastrophic” for the industry, one which relies heavily on cheap EU labour.

The executive said: “We understand the wish to reduce immigration but we need to tread carefully and be aware of the unintended consequences – some businesses will fail, taking UK jobs with them.”

A spokesperson for the Confederation of British Industry, said: “An open approach to our closest trading partners is vital for business, as it attracts investment to the UK. It also helps keep our economy moving by addressing key labour shortages.”

The Institute of Directors said business leaders would not welcome the proposals and its members would be hoping for changes in the Government’s final position.

The National Farmers’ Union said a cut in migrant workers could cause “massive disruption” for the industry. Its deputy president said 80,000 seasonal workers a year are needed “to plant, pick, grade and pack over 9 million tonnes of fruit, vegetable and flower crops”.

But Migration Watch, a think-tank, said ministers were right to pressure businesses to wean themselves off cheap foreign labour.

In a statement, it said: “We want to encourage employers to train local people and make more of an effort to prepare for a time when there won’t be all these people coming in with readymade skills prepared to work for lower wages.”

The leaked document was a draft of proposals due to be published this autumn.

Sources said a further six drafts have since been produced and it has not yet gone to ministers for approval. Senior figures in Brussels raised concerns about the document.

Gianni Pittella, leader of a large group within the European Parliament, said it revealed the “nasty side of Theresa May’s Government”, adding: “Should the British Government follow the position outlined, it will certainly not help the negotiations. It adds uncertainty and confusion.”

German MEP Elmar Brok, an ally of Angela Merkel, said he was “shocked by the language and content of this paper”, adding: “I think we are in a situation that EU citizens are seen as an enemy for the UK. This is not an atmosphere where you can find solutions.”

. How other countries control their borders

In the United States immigration law provides for an annual worldwide limit of 675,000 newcomers, with certain exceptions for close family members.

The Immigration and Naturalisation Act allows a foreign national to work and live lawfully and permanently in the States.

Each year it admits foreign citizens on a temporary basis. Annually, Congress and the president also determine a separate number for admitting refugees.

Immigration to the States is based upon the following principles: the reunification of families, admitting immigrants with skills that are valuable to the US economy, protecting refugees and promoting diversity. In Australia, a tough immigration points system is credited with keeping numbers under control while ensuring the economy has the skills it needs.

Extra points are given for factors such as experience, qualifications and age. But critics argue there is no guarantee it would bring numbers down, pointing out that Australia has proportionately higher immigration than the UK.

Since 1967, most immigrants to Canada have been admitted on purely economic grounds. Each applicant is evaluated on a nine-point system that ignores their race, religion and ethnicity and instead looks at age, education, skills, language ability and other attributes.

Standard
Britain, European Court, European Parliament, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

EU law may have precedence over UK courts for years after Brexit

BREXIT

The position paper was released by David Davis’s Department for Exiting the EU.

The UK Government has denied watering down its Brexit plans as officials have admitted EU judges could have jurisdiction over Britain for years after it leaves the bloc.

The Prime Minister, Theresa May, insisted the UK would ‘take back control’ of its laws, saying: ‘When we leave the EU we will be leaving the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice.’

But a position paper published by the Government suggested the ECJ could continue to have control over Scots and English law for up to three years after Britain leaves at the end of March 2019.

That could mean EU judges will continue to pass down rulings on key issues until an independent new body is established to adjudicate on post-Brexit rows over trade or immigration.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Tory MP for North East Somerset, said: ‘If the ECJ has jurisdiction, you are part of a European superstate. Once you leave, it cannot have jurisdiction – that is the simple test.’

Officials have not been able to rule out the possibility that European judges could still have some influence even after the end of the three-year transition period. They highlighted the fact that trade deals that the EU has reached with other countries including Moldova force them to take account of European law.

Justice minister Dominic Raab admitted the Government would continue to keep ‘half an eye’ on EU laws after Brexit.

The prime minister said that after leaving the EU, ‘Parliament will make our laws – it is British judges who will interpret those laws and it will be the British Supreme Court that will be the arbiter of those laws’.

Mr Rees-Mogg welcomed the fact that the position paper made it clear the UK will eventually leave the influence of the ECJ.

But he added: ‘I would oppose the continuation of ECJ jurisdiction from the moment we leave the EU. If it continues beyond that, it is a problem. Once the European Communities Act is repealed, there will be no legal basis for ECJ jurisdiction.’

The position paper released by David Davis’s Department for Exiting the EU ruled out any ‘direct’ ECJ jurisdiction over Scots and English law after Brexit. It said legal disputes involving individuals and businesses should in future be decided in the UK judicial system, with the Supreme Court as the final arbiter.

It added a new dispute resolution mechanism – which could involve a joint committee or arbitration panel – will have to be created to deal with disagreements over the interpretation and application of the Brexit deal.

But it did not rule out the ECJ maintaining its authority during the transitional period, expected to last a number of years after the March 2019 deadline for Brexit, saying only that Britain will ‘work with the EU’ on the design of interim judicial arrangements.

It set out a range of existing arrangements involving the ECJ that could act as possible models for the new mechanism. These include the EU’s agreement with European Free Trade Association states such as Norway and Iceland and a treaty with Moldova.

Norway has its own EFTA Court to rule on disputes with the EU but it has to ‘pay due account’ to all relevant ECJ decisions.

The EU-Moldova agreement requires that, where a trade dispute concerns an interpretation of EU law, an arbitration panel must refer the question to the ECJ and be ‘bound by its interpretation’.

The Government document makes it clear that Britain is not committed to following any of the existing models, but it does not explicitly rule out any scenario other than direct ECJ jurisdiction.

The main job of a resolution body would be to adjudicate on disputes between the EU and the UK on how a trade deal will operate. It could also have to pass judgment on immigration matters.

Remain-backing groups accused the Government of a climbdown for saying there would be no ‘direct’ jurisdiction of the ECJ compared with its previous position of no jurisdiction whatsoever.

UK officials said that Britain would seek ‘legal autonomy’ but that the remaining power of the ECJ to rule on UK matters depended on the ‘scope’ of the transition period, which could last until 2022.

. More on Brexit UK Government threatens to get tough if Brussels bars trade deal

Standard
Britain, European Parliament, European Union, Government, Politics

UK Government threatens to get tough if Brussels bars trade deal

BREXIT

BRITAIN has threatened to impose customs duties and VAT on all goods coming from Europe if the EU blocks a trade deal.

Brexit Secretary David Davis warned Brussels it would suffer if trade is disrupted as EU countries sell 60billion euros more in goods and services to us than we do to them.

Ministers set out post-Brexit plans that would allow lorries to clear customs checks at Channel ports within seconds thanks to an online border system and number-plate recognition technology.

However, they said MPs and peers will legislate to impose new customs duties and VAT tariffs on trade with the EU, in case no Brexit deal can be agreed by March 2019.

In the first of 12 documents setting out its negotiating position, the Government said that if there is no deal, ‘the UK would treat trade with the EU as it currently treats trade with non-EU countries’.

‘Customs duty and import VAT would be due on EU imports,’ it said. ‘Traders would need to be registered. Traders exporting to the EU would have to submit an exploration declaration, and certain goods may require an export licence.’

But the document said it hoped for a deal with the EU and set out two customs options – a streamlined customs arrangement or a new customs partnership.

Under the first proposal, Britain and the EU would use technology to help goods pass speedily through ports.

Mr Davis said they would replicate techniques used for products coming from outside the EU, which ‘get 90 per cent of containers through in a matter of seconds’.

Companies would fill out customs declarations using an online system in advance, with number-plate recognition allowing vehicles to be waved straight through. Spot checks would affect only a small proportion of lorries. The second proposal, for a new customs partnership, would see the EU’s customs rules mirrored by the UK so that ‘all goods entering the EU via the UK have paid the correct EU duties’.

‘This would remove the need for the UK and the EU to introduce customs processes between us, so that goods moving between the UK and the EU would be treated as they are now for customs purposes,’ the document said.

Holidaymakers would face no extra checks under either option, the Government said, and people on so-called ‘booze cruises’ to France would not be affected.

Brussels said it would not begin discussing the UK’s proposals for customs until more progress is made in negotiations on the Brexit divorce bill.

However, Mr Davis reminded EU countries it was in their interest to reach a mutually beneficial arrangement.

‘We sell about 230billion euros of goods and services to the EU each year, they sell 290billion to us. I was in Bavaria only two or three weeks ago. They sell BMWs, they sell agricultural produce, they sell electronic goods.

‘They have got an incredibly strong interest in something like this, so there is an interest on both sides of not doing each other harm.’

Michel Barnier, The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, tweeted: ‘The quicker the UK and EU27 agree on citizens, settling accounts and Ireland, the quicker we can discuss customs and the future relationship.’

A European Commission spokesman said: ‘We take note of the UK’s request for an implementing period and its preferences as regards the future relationship, but we will only address them once we have made sufficient progress on the terms of the orderly withdrawal.

‘An agreement on a future relationship between the EU and the UK can only be finalised once the UK has become a third country … frictionless trade is not possible outside the single market and customs union.’

Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament’s chief Brexit co-ordinator, also took to Twitter and wrote: ‘To be in and out of the customs union and [have] “invisible borders” is a fantasy. First need to secure citizens’ rights and a financial settlement.’

Mr Davis said he did not expect the Brexit divorce bill to be agreed this year.

. Britain to demand no barriers at Irish border

The British Government has said that no check points or CCTV cameras should be put on the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic after Brexit.

Ministers have said their top priority is keeping the frontier free of border posts and have made clear there will be ‘no return to the hard borders of the past’.

In a paper, the Government said that Brussels could agree to there being no checks on goods crossing the border.

Under one proposal put forward, small businesses that make up 80 per cent of cross-border trade would be exempted from customs rules.

Larger companies would be trusted to declare what goods they are carrying between the two countries, with spot checks taking place away from the border.

Another option would see the Government work with Brussels on a special customs agreement that would eliminate checks on goods moving between any EU country and the UK.

The Government paper dismisses any suggestion a customs border could be shifted to the Irish Sea with checks and tariffs only at entry and exit points between the island and Great Britain.

Creating such a barrier between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK is ‘not constitutionally or economically viable’, it says.

It also makes clear that the UK plans to protect the Common Travel Area – the open borders agreement predating our EU membership – that allows British and Irish citizens to move freely around the two countries. A Government source said: ‘Both sides need to show flexibility and imagination when it comes to the border issue in Northern Ireland and that is exactly what our latest position paper will do.

‘As [the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator] Michel Barnier himself has said, the solution cannot be based on a precedent so we’re looking forward to seeing the EU’s position paper on Ireland.

‘But it’s right that as we shape the unprecedented models, we have some very clear principles.

‘Top of our list is to agree upfront no physical border infrastructure – that would mean a return to the border posts of the past and is completely unacceptable.

‘Our paper sets out some creative options on customs … Protecting trade is vital for the UK and Ireland … so we’re prioritising finding a solution that protects businesses’ ability to access these important markets.’

The Irish government has welcomed the UK’s position paper. A spokesperson said: ‘Protecting the peace process is crucial and it must not become a bargaining chip in the negotiations.

The spokesperson added that the publication of the position paper was ‘timely and helpful’ as it offers more clarity.

. Ancillary: 

Brexit Timeline

Standard