Arts in the UK post-Brexit

[french frank]

The UK being tied to EU immigration rules means that white people benefit disproportionately compared to non-white people. .

I'm not sure that that is factually to do with the EU, since more than half the migrants to the UK are from non-EU countries. As far as I can see (quick look E&OE), India has topped the list recently, with Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Kenya, Nigeria also being high on the list.

[MrGongGong]

I'm not sure that that is factually to do with the EU, since more than half the migrants to the UK are from non-EU countries. As far as I can see (quick look E&OE), India has topped the list recently, with Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Kenya, Nigeria also being high on the list.

Stick to the script

ALL injustices are to do with the EU
haven't you been paying attention ?

[teamsaint]

I'm not sure that that is factually to do with the EU, since more than half the migrants to the UK are from non-EU countries. As far as I can see (quick look E&OE), India has topped the list recently, with Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Kenya, Nigeria also being high on the list.

The position of India on that list is presumably to do with its vast population, (1. 3 bn compared to about 450 m for the EU excluding UK) and close historic links with the UK.

If India had EU style FoM with the UK, it would be fair to assume that many more Indians would come here, I think.

[Pabmusic]

...If India had EU style FoM with the UK, it would be fair to assume that many more Indians would come here, I think.

"India" did have something like that. But at the time of independence it was mainly Muslims (now Pakistanis) and Sikhs who came here to escape the Hindu majority.

[Beef Oven!]

I'm not sure that that is factually to do with the EU, since more than half the migrants to the UK are from non-EU countries. As far as I can see (quick look E&OE), India has topped the list recently, with Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Kenya, Nigeria also being high on the list.

The immigration regs for EU people are pretty much 'come if you want to come, it's up to you, just walk in to the UK'. Non-EU people must go through a stiff set of tests and have no automatic right to come here. Most European immigrants are white and most non EU are black. Therefore the UK's immigration regs are discriminatory, indirectly on racial grounds as black people will experience a disproportinate detriment compared to their white counterparts. The answer is to have a non-discriminatory policy that doesn't treat people differently. The non-EU regs make sense and could be rolled out across the board. It couldn't be the other way around, as offering the entire globe the right to come and live in England (or the other bits) would be utterly perverse. So the fact is, it's the EU regs that are the cause of this problem.

[ahinton]

The immigration rules for EU people are pretty much 'come if you want to come, it's up to you, just walk in to the UK'. Non-EU people must go through a stiff set of tests and have no automatic right to come here. Most European immigrants are white and most non EU are black. Therefore the UK's immigration is discriminatory, indirectly on ravial grounds as black people will be experience a disproportinate detriment. The answer is to have a non-discriminatory policy that doesn't treat people differently. The non-EU regs make sense and could be rolled out across the board. It couldn't be the other way around, as offering the entire globe the right to come and live in England (or the other bits) would be utterly perverse. So the fact is, it's the EU regs that are the cause of this problem.

Oh, I don't know so much; why not the other way around? There's no guarantee that everyone would want to come to UK (and why only England?). Indeed, a Japanese person that I know said that he wouldn't want to come because the place is so full of immigrants (he was joking, of course). When one considers Libya, Iraq, Syria, Venezuela and other places where a large scale refugee crisis abounds, dispossessed people have to go somewhere; if people wanted en masse to escape the human rights abuses in China, the ensuing ppulation movment would make big differences in every are to which those citizens might go. But refugee crises are not, of course, the only reason to want to move from one country to another - and let's not forget that non-UK citizens currently resident in UK will almost certainly want to up sticks and go elsewhere if Brexit occurs and turns out to be the disaster that some predict it would be.

[MrGongGong]

The proposed "answer" will exclude the vast majority of those who work in Arts, Culture, Education and Science.

But never mind

[ahinton]

The proposed "answer" will exclude the vast majority of those who work in Arts, Culture, Education and Science.

But never mind

Yes, never mind, in the sense that Brexit might yet be thwarted (and the increasing internecine squabbling over it seems to me to be as good a single reason as any for it to be so).

[Beef Oven!]

Oh, I don't know so much; why not the other way around? There's no guarantee that everyone would want to come to UK (and why only England?). Indeed, a Japanese person that I know said that he wouldn't want to come because the place is so full of immigrants (he was joking, of course).

I don't think you are being entirely serious, and for the UK to be the only country on the planet with no border controls whatsoever is too silly to even contemplate.

When one considers Libya, Iraq, Syria, Venezuela and other places where a large-scale refugee crisis abounds, dispossessed people have to go somewhere; if people wanted en masse to escape the human rights abuses in China, the ensuing population movement would make big differences in every are to which those citizens might go.

It might be that leaving their country is an option for 'dispossessed' people, but why do they have to come to Europe in such numbers? Wouldn't it make sense to consider other destinations?

But refugee crises are not, of course, the only reason to want to move from one country to another - and let's not forget that non-UK citizens currently resident in UK will almost certainly want to up sticks and go elsewhere if Brexit occurs and turns out to be the disaster that some predict it would be.

It's almost 100% likely that non-UK citizens will NOT want to up sticks and leave the UK. This sort of idea is pedalled by project-fear people and does nothing to help non-UK residents at a time of uncertainty.

[DracoM]

Is it just me, or is anyone else reminded of Groundhog Day?

This is the one and only notice - keep the tone civil, or this Thread will be closed.

My decision - my "Delete" button.

[ahinton]

I don't think you are being entirely serious, and for the UK to be the only country on the planet with no border controls whatsoever is too silly to even contemplate.

It would indeed, but then I am not advocating any such thing!

It might be that leaving their country is an option for 'dispossessed' people, but why do they have to come to Europe in such numbers? Wouldn't it make sense to consider other destinations?

But some of them do, US and Canada, for example. That said, Venezuelans apart, most such people are on the same land mass as Europe, so that might be one reason.

It's almost 100% likely that non-UK citizens will NOT want to up sticks and leave the UK. This sort of idea is pedalled by project-fear people and does nothing to help non-UK residents at a time of uncertainty.

Some are already leaving and some have already left. Some of those whose employers relocate their operations (or part thereof) to other parts of Europe might well feel obliged to leave anyway.

[Pulcinella]

It's almost 100% likely that non-UK citizens will NOT want to up sticks and leave the UK.

I think you'll find that many already have.

This sort of idea is pedalled by project-fear people and does nothing to help non-UK residents at a time of uncertainty.

And just who/what caused the uncertainty, I wonder.
Would the project-fear people be those releasing the government's own proposals (which to me endorse some of those fears) by any chance?

Trying to remain civil: just asking.

[Beef Oven!]

Pretty much like most of the threads in here. But why is that a problem? It's a great place for people to chat and exchange ideas on things that interest them. I'm not crazy about Elgar or Brahms' violin concerto, for example so I tend not to look on thoise threads. I don't go onto them and start posting about how boring or samey they are. Can't you just please have the same respect for those of us who quite enjoy discussing these things?

[Beef Oven!]

It would indeed, but then i am not advocating any such thing!

Phew! I'm relieved!

But some of them do, US and Canada, for example. That said, Venezuelans apart, most such people are on the same land mass as Europe, so that might be one reason.

I'm not sure that's true. The people in crisese areas are not in Europe.

Some are already leaving and some have already left. Some of those whose employers relocate their operations (or part thereof) to other parts of Europe might well feel obliged to leave anyway.

It's a highly marginal phenomenon. And if people have already left, they can't have placed much value on being here in the first place.

[ahinton]

Pretty much like most of the threads in here. But why is that a problem? It's a great place for people to chat and exchange ideas on things that interest them. I'm not crazy about Elgar or Brahms' violin concerto, for example so I tend not to look on thoise threads. I don't go onto them and start posting about how boring or samey they are. Can't you just please have the same respect for those of us who quite enjoy discussing these things?

I don't think that anyone is objecting to such discussion in principle; the issue seems to be one of ensuring that they remain civil at all times irrespective of the extent of disagreement that they might reveal.