Arts in the UK post-Brexit

[Lat-Literal]

Once again (and I know who she is) I haven't the faintest idea what you are on about

10 accross: "Piece of equipment I can change inside cooker, say"

I'm puzzled......is there any relevance in the two c's in accross?

I do think we should build our own equivalent to the FloraHolland cooperative/stock exchange just outside Boston and strike a better deal with Kenya etc. Sadly the Liam Foxes of this world don't appear to have the planning capabilities or the imagination. Then I reckon on turning the shires into cropland so that we can send stronger people out to conquer the globe:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-netherlands-flowers/african-growers-threaten-dutch-flower-power-idUSKCN0Z21RW

(You'll appreciate that Holland is secretly the proxy American state on EU soil - has been for years, and it's so un-obvious, that's the clever bit, especially in regard to Russia/Ukraine)

[Richard Barrett]

What is unclear is whether we will need visas to travel and work.
Sure it's fine to go on holiday but ?

You don't need visas to work in Norway, Switzerland or Serbia either. I would say the likelihood of work visas being needed for EU countries is close to zero.

[Bryn]

Bryn, your lot voted to leave and shut the door.

Wrong again. The only 'lot' I was ever 'with' commisioned me and another to research and develop their referendum policy back in 1975. The result was that they/we became one of the very few 'lots' on the left who promoted and voted remain. My opposition to quitting the EU now is on a similar basis, the need for a potential block to conterpose to that of USA, Russian and Chinese multi-national politico-economic formatons. The difference today is that China has joined the other two.

[MrGongGong]

You don't need visas to work in Norway, Switzerland or Serbia either. I would say the likelihood of work visas being needed for EU countries is close to zero.

I suspect that is true.
But that means that the UK has to embrace free movement with the EU which seems to go against what the "government" say.
What I hear from our so callled "leaders" is a fanatical opposition to the idea that we can move freely and work. The proposed financial thresholds (or whatever they call them today?) will exclude more or less everyone involved in arts and culture and massive numbers of scientists.
I'm more than happy being like Norway, paying into the EU and taking part (and having things like NOTAM) but that's not on the cards.

[Richard Barrett]

might not be too problematic

"Might not be too problematic" isn't exactly a message of hope, though, is it?

I think there have been many wild exaggerations on both sides with regard to the supposed benefits of Leave/Remain when the truth is that at the time of the referendum people knew even less about the eventual pros and cons than they do now, which is next to nothing. Under those circumstances it would have been a much more sensible idea for the government to have accepted the referendum result as advisory (which it indeed was) and then start to look more deeply into the various sides of the argument in order eventually to put a legally binding choice to the people, preferably in the form of a general election. But they decided to try to force the issue, so as to have the matter decided one way or the other, while (predictably) what has actually happened is the opposite. I'm not in favour of the EU, but I find it impossible to align myself with self-serving fanatics like Farage, Johnson and Mogg.

[Beef Oven!]

I suspect that is true.

Good that you acknowledge that.

But that means that the UK has to embrace free movement with the EU which seems to go against what the "government" say.

No it doesn't. Touring ensembles do not have to have the right to take up permanent residence, take permanent employment, have school places provided for their children, claim housing benefit, disability allowance, job-seekers allowance, social security etc. That's what current EU freedom of movement means.

[Beef Oven!]

"Might not be too problematic" isn't exactly a message of hope, though, is it?

I think there have been many wild exaggerations on both sides with regard to the supposed benefits of Leave/Remain when the truth is that at the time of the referendum people knew even less about the eventual pros and cons than they do now, which is next to nothing. Under those circumstances it would have been a much more sensible idea for the government to have accepted the referendum result as advisory (which it indeed was) and then start to look more deeply into the various sides of the argument in order eventually to put a legally binding choice to the people, preferably in the form of a general election. But they decided to try to force the issue, so as to have the matter decided one way or the other, while (predictably) what has actually happened is the opposite. I'm not in favour of the EU, but I find it impossible to align myself with self-serving fanatics like Farage, Johnson and Mogg.

No, nor was it intended as a message of hope. The reality is that Brexit poses problems for many benefits that we have taken for granted over the last couple of decades, particularly. But these problems may well have solutions.

I'm confident that people like me will be saying "I told you so" in the future.

[french frank]

UK citizens don't need visas to travel to Switzerland or Norway, for example, or for that matter Serbia (although Serbian citizens do require one for the UK).

Switzerland, Norway and Serbia all have differing agreements with the EU. It will presumably depend what kind of agreement the UK is willing to accept (or the EU offer). Norway and Switzerland both have free movement, for example, and pay in to the EU. Don't know about Serbia.

[teamsaint]

Ok, quick question with probably an obvious answer, and not directly arts related.

If a shambolic no deal exit is looking likely next March, and the EU was very concerned about this, is there anything they could do unilaterally , in order to stop the extreme outcomes of no deal, at least in the short term, in order to protect their own interests ?

[french frank]

is there anything they could do unilaterally , in order to stop the extreme outcomes of no deal, at least in the short term, in order to protect their own interests ?

Good question. I'm sure there is something they could do, but it will be a question of balance: whether the 'no deal' outcome will be more damaging to their interests than giving in on some of the fundamental tenets of the union, which seems to be the UK's demand. The narrative that they're panicking and begging the UK to extend the transition implementation period is hardly the case. They have offered to extend it, if the UK wants it. I'd say they do prefer a deal, but not at any price.

[Lat-Literal]

Deleted.

[Richard Barrett]

The reality is that Brexit poses problems for many benefits that we have taken for granted over the last couple of decades, particularly. But these problems may well have solutions.

To which the obvious question is why create the problems at all?

[Beef Oven!]

To which the obvious question is why create the problems at all?

The problems aren't being created. They are a consequnce leaving the EU.

[Richard Barrett]

The problems aren't being created. They are a consequnce leaving the EU.

Exactly, the problems are being created by leaving the EU.

[DracoM]