Straw poll: Do you want to retain FOM?

bugslet

stator wrote: »

I've voted No even though I would vote "Yes with limits on overall net migration"

I voted Yes though I think there should be limits and restrictions.

Not sure what this poll is going to say at the end.

kabayiri wrote: »

If I'm being selfish then I would vote Yes.

I think FoM exposes the primary weakness of Labour, which is an inability to understand the regional issues.

If FoM effectively kills off the Labour vote then this suits me fine. We could do with a move to the right.

Not thought of that, but good reason!

Carl31

No

FOM is one of the main problems with the EU. Weaker economies become weaker, as no one wants to work where there is no work, and those that reside there initially leave, longer term there is no investment, as there are no workers

the UK and Germany would have ended up funding the rest of the countries eventually, no balance between members. Its one of the major flaws with the idea of the EU

Doshwaster

Carl31 wrote: »

No

FOM is one of the main problems with the EU. Weaker economies become weaker, as no one wants to work where there is no work, and those that reside there initially leave, longer term there is no investment, as there are no workers

Is that really true? The economies of Poland, Hungary etc have been growing better than most of western Europe. The Single Market allows eastern European countries to attract manufacturing and services companies to a location where they have full market access but with a lower operating costs and it helps retain workers. I know of several companies who are moving their offshore operations from India to Poland as the logistics are simpler.

CLAPTON

Doshwaster wrote: »

Ending FOM won't make it easier for you to get a job in Chile but it will make it harder to get one in Croatia.

I was in Malta recently and saw several businesses with staff wanted signs in the window saying "Must have EEA passport". Soon no Brits need apply.

the equivalent here would be illegal

antrobus

Carl31 wrote: »

..FOM is one of the main problems with the EU. ...

It's one of the main founding principles of the EU. It's in the Treaty of Rome, Article 48. That's the one we signed in 1972.

Carl31 wrote: »

...Weaker economies become weaker, as no one wants to work where there is no work, and those that reside there initially leave, longer term there is no investment, as there are no workers...

We've had FOM within the UK for donkeys years, as well as having a Common Travel Area with Ireland et all.

I am led to believe that there are complaints regarding the economic performance of certain parts of the UK that lie beyond the limits of civilization, but I don't think any of them having become depopulated wastelands.

Carl31 wrote: »

..the UK and Germany would have ended up funding the rest of the countries eventually, no balance between members. Its one of the major flaws with the idea of the EU

Only if you don't understand what is meant by the name European Union.

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

the equivalent here would be illegal

I don't think there is an equivalent here. "Must have EU passport?" That'd only apply for another few months.

CLAPTON

Herzlos wrote: »

I don't think there is an equivalent here. "Must have EU passport?" That'd only apply for another few months.

I didn't know we were actually leaving in a few months: so something to celebrate.

My point is that the UK doesn't discriminate between legal immigrants and people of the UK or of the EU except for special restricted jobs.

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

I didn't know we were actually leaving in a few months: so something to celebrate.

We're what, 16 months from the deadline?

My point is that the UK doesn't discriminate between legal immigrants and people of the UK or of the EU except for special restricted jobs.

It does - you can require a NI number, which means the migrant would need to get one via a work VISA or whatever.

I'm sure for some jobs requiring a lot of EU travel you can insist on someone who can travel VISA free within the EU. Just like you can insist on a driving license.

All the Maltese ads are requiring is that the applications will able to able to stay/work in Malta.

[Deleted User]

Carl31 wrote: »

No

FOM is one of the main problems with the EU. Weaker economies become weaker, as no one wants to work where there is no work, and those that reside there initially leave, longer term there is no investment, as there are no workers

the UK and Germany would have ended up funding the rest of the countries eventually, no balance between members. Its one of the major flaws with the idea of the EU

I think that's a fair point. In the UK, many are concerned about depopulation of certain areas - Highlands and Islands, etc and about the seemingly irresistible pull of the cities. That leads to overheating of house prices and the horrible situation of folks sitting (or standing,!) for hours a day on trains or buses (Southern Rail?) each way for work. Before I retired, I had a less than 20 minute journey, door to door, to work. How on Earth folk commute for hours a day, I have no Idea!

I suspect, (no evidence, so "I suspect"!) that is is mainly the young (employable or unemployable) who will move away, leaving their former homes with an aging population and fewer able to work. I'm not aware of too many grandpas and grandmas moving from islands like Mull or Lewis to Glasgow, Edinburgh or London, leaving the young behind.

If we are unwilling to do anything about that within the UK, we can hardly be surprised if there is no desire to do anything about it across Europe.

Freedom of movement is a great idea in an ideal world, and I'd be hugely in favour of it just as soon as the world becomes "ideal". Until then, IMO, unrestricted FOM (as that's what it is within the EU) is an insanely idealistic notion.

As for the notion of no trade deals without FOM, I'm sure it will come to a great shock to the population of Egypt, with whom the EU has had a free trade deal in force since 2004, that they all have the "right" to move to Germany or Italy.

WR

Graham_Devon

Freedom of Movement itself means different things to different people. Therein lies the first problem. It will mean one thing to die hard racists and it will mean another to someone who lives in an area that has seen a lot of immigration.

To see the problems of immigration on infratructure that isn't being built to cope doesn't require you to be a racist.

I'm against Freedom of Movement for 3 reasons.

1. We, in the UK don't seem to cope too well with it. It sounds grand on paper for finances. Looks fantastic for employment figures etc. However, we are not building anything to cope with the needs on the infrastructure, be that schools, hospitals, roads etc. We also don't do very well when it comes to integration. All seems very one way, i.e., the British integrate. Only the other day I got a course sent to me which seemed interesting. Alas, you can only get a place on the course if you are from certain minorities. British? Chinese? Australian? Sorry.

2. By it's very definition, FOM for people from certain countries is in itself discriminatory. If we need immigration (dubious), then why limit ourselves to such a small pool of people which we have no control over? No ability to say "ok, we have enough gardeners, but we really need some police".

3. We have a benefits system and free at the point of use NHS. Our welfare system just doesn't work well next to a free for all immigration policy. And it seems our police can't cope either.