|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jan 16, 2023 10:00:59 GMT
None of which are sovereign independent countries and thus cannot be compared to a Romanian national having the entitlement and right to live and work in the UK if he so chooses. Andrew Tate seemed to think it was a good idea. Seriously what if you were a super specialist space expert headhunted by Estonia, a country known for expertise in electronics and attracting the best experts in the world. (Actually, true). And they withdrew the offer because you couldn't stay more than half the year in any one year. (Also true). And these conditions apply to any Brit who wants to experience living or working at any level or job. It takes away such opportunites and remov3s personal choice. If someone was headhunted for a super-dooper job like that and couldn't be granted a working visa, then that nation whose company was headhunting has some real integral and structural issues. Not a lot of head hunting from abroad would be happening in that nation. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jan 16, 2023 10:04:55 GMT
You are missing the point.
Because the UK is not now able to live and work more than 6 months in any one year, s/he would have to leave the EU for the other half of the year because s/he does not come under EU law anymore.
There is nothing Estonia or any other country can do to change that.
|
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jan 16, 2023 10:07:50 GMT
You are missing the point. Because the UK is not now able to live and work more than 6 months in any one year, s/he would have to leave the EU for the other half of the year because s/he does not come under EU law anymore. There is nothing Estonia or any other country can do to change that. I'm not missing any point. If what you say is true about the six month in and out hop about and that EU law supersedes the law of a nation to headhunt and hand out work visas as it suits. Then it's flawed. A flaw that doesn't that doesn't happen anywhere else on the planet (nation's are able to control their own working visas for incoming migrants). The anomaly here is the EU. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jan 16, 2023 10:16:13 GMT
You are missing the point. Because the UK is not now able to live and work more than 6 months in any one year, s/he would have to leave the EU for the other half of the year because s/he does not come under EU law anymore. There is nothing Estonia or any other country can do to change that. I'm not missing any point. EU law supersedes the law of a nation to headhunt and hand out work visas as it suits. As I said, that's a flaw. It seems to work ok in other countries like America and the UK. "As an EU national you generally don't need a work permit to work anywhere in the EU. Work permits are never required for self-employed people in the EU. Liechtenstein imposes quotas that limit the number of people who can work and live there." |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jan 16, 2023 10:18:13 GMT
I'm not missing any point. EU law supersedes the law of a nation to headhunt and hand out work visas as it suits. As I said, that's a flaw. It seems to work ok in other countries like America and the UK. "As an EU national you generally don't need a work permit to work anywhere in the EU. Work permits are never required for self-employed people in the EU. Liechtenstein imposes quotas that limit the number of people who can work and live there." What's your point here exactly? That a Romanian should have an automatic entitlement to live and work in the UK? |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jan 16, 2023 10:26:52 GMT
Duplicate deleted
|
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jan 16, 2023 10:31:42 GMT
You are missing the point. Because the UK is not now able to live and work more than 6 months in any one year, s/he would have to leave the EU for the other half of the year because s/he does not come under EU law anymore. There is nothing Estonia or any other country can do to change that. I'm not missing any point. If what you say is true about the six month in and out hop about and that EU law supersedes the law of a nation to headhunt and hand out work visas as it suits. Then it's flawed. A flaw that doesn't that doesn't happen anywhere else on the planet (nation's are able to control their own working visas for incoming migrants). The anomaly here is the EU. The "anomaly " was voted on by democratically elected people. It protects and encourages growth and development within the member states, makes it far more difficult for non member states to steal intelligence or claim patent rights. And why should the EU not protect its own growth and prosperity? We used to be inside that. Now we are not included. Just another log in the road we voted for which makes our lives more difficult. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jan 16, 2023 10:38:36 GMT
It seems to work ok in other countries like America and the UK. "As an EU national you generally don't need a work permit to work anywhere in the EU. Work permits are never required for self-employed people in the EU. Liechtenstein imposes quotas that limit the number of people who can work and live there." What's your point here exactly? That a Romanian should have an automatic entitlement to live and work in the UK? No, the point is that such practices already take place within the UK. So why not in the EU? |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jan 16, 2023 11:03:28 GMT
I think the answer might be
Because they aren't British.
|
|
|
|
Post by om15 on Jan 16, 2023 11:35:37 GMT
*Securing increased trade and investment opportunities that will help the U.K. economy overcome the unprecedented challenge posed by coronavirus. Joining CPTPP would open up new opportunities for U.K. exporters in strategically important sectors and helping to support an industrial revival in the U.K.
*Helping the United Kingdom diversify trading links and supply chains, and in doing so increasing economic security at a time of heightened uncertainty and disruption in the world.
*Assisting the U.K.'s future place in the world and advancing the U.K.'s longer-term interests. CPTPP membership is an important part of our strategy to place the U.K. at the centre of a modern, progressive network of free trade agreements with dynamic economies. Doing so would turn the U.K. into a global hub for businesses and investors wanting to trade with the rest of the world.
From the link that you supplied.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 16, 2023 11:40:42 GMT
You are missing the point. Because the UK is not now able to live and work more than 6 months in any one year, s/he would have to leave the EU for the other half of the year because s/he does not come under EU law anymore. There is nothing Estonia or any other country can do to change that. No - you have that totally wrong. Anyone who wants to go and work in Estonia that is not from an EU or EEA country needs a work visa which you apply for at your local embassy. The work visa (if issued) is valid for one year and can be transferred into a temporary residence permit valid for 5 years and is renewable. Same process as used by pretty much every country around the globe. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jan 16, 2023 11:45:19 GMT
The ECHR is nothing to do with the EU and nothing to do with Brexit. 🙄 That's not quite true when membership of the EU mandates membership of the ECHR which of itself was a component of the Brexit vote. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jan 16, 2023 13:07:41 GMT
The ECHR is nothing to do with the EU and nothing to do with Brexit. 🙄 That's not quite true when membership of the EU mandates membership of the ECHR which of itself was a component of the Brexit vote. The fact that you must be a member to be in the EU is correct, but to then say that this was part of the Brexit vote isn't. As already pointed out we joined back in the 50s,so our joining both the EEC and the EU were unaffected by the requirement, so why would leaving? I don't believe that it was mentioned by vote leave either, although I could be wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jan 16, 2023 15:14:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jan 16, 2023 15:50:46 GMT
The fact that you must be a member to be in the EU is correct... Good, then you accept that your previous assertion that they have nothing to do with each other was incorrect. Progress at least. ...As already pointed out we joined back in the 50s,so our joining both the EEC and the EU were unaffected by the requirement, so why would leaving?... Don't be so naive: The ever increasing number of ridiculous "Human Rights" cases certainly played a large part in the average leavers voting decision. |
|
