Another gloomy Brexit forecast. If you're a Remnant.

[darmstadt]

Lichtenstein is an associate member of the Schengen agreement which means it does have freedom of movement. Now if Britain had become a member then immigration would not have played such a heavy role because:

• For stays of under three months: the only requirement for Union citizens is that they possess a valid identity document or passport. The host Member State may require the persons concerned to register their presence in the country within a reasonable and non-discriminatory period of time.
• For stays of over three months: the right of residence is subject to certain conditions. EU citizens and their family members — if not working — must have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay. Union citizens do not need residence permits, although Member States may require them to register with the authorities. Family members of Union citizens who are not nationals of a Member State must apply for a residence permit, valid for the duration of their stay or a five-year period.
• Right of permanent residence: the directive gives Union citizens the right of permanent residence in the host Member State after a five-year period of uninterrupted legal residence, provided that an expulsion decision has not been enforced against them. This right of permanent residence is no longer subject to any conditions. The same rule applies to family members who are not nationals of a Member State and who have lived with a Union citizen for five years. The right of permanent residence is lost only in the event of more than two successive years’ absence from the host Member State.
• Restrictions on the right of entry and the right of residence: Union citizens or members of their family may be expelled from the host Member State on grounds of public policy, public security or public health. Under no circumstances may an expulsion decision be taken on economic grounds. Measures affecting freedom of movement and residence must comply with the proportionality principle and be based exclusively on the personal conduct of the individual concerned. Such conduct must represent a sufficiently serious and present threat affecting the fundamental interests of the state. Previous criminal convictions do not automatically justify expulsion. The mere fact that the entry documents used by the individual concerned have expired does not constitute grounds for such a measure. Only in exceptional circumstances, for overriding considerations of public security, can expulsion orders be served on a Union citizen if he/she has resided in the host country for ten years or if he/she is a minor. Lifelong exclusion orders may not be issued under any circumstances and persons concerned by exclusion orders may apply for a review after three years. They also have access to judicial review and, where relevant, administrative review in the host Member State.

[northernladyuk]

OK. If nothing will change you won't be bothered by leaving.

Loss of freedom of movement and EU protections from the UK hard-right ruling classes.

[scooterscot]

UK employers expect to offer smaller pay rises in 2017 - BoE

Here comes the grim. Just as well inflation is in check, a weak pound makes imports cheaper right -

British employers expect to offer less generous pay deals this year compared with 2016 despite rising inflation, probably putting pressure on consumer spending as the year goes on, a Bank of England survey showed on Wednesday.

The BoE said firms expected the average pay deal would offer staff a 2.2 percent rise, down from 2.7 percent in 2016, reflecting difficulties passing on rising costs after last year's Brexit vote and a slowdown in the rate of increase in Britain's minimum wage.

"Consumer spending growth had remained resilient, but was expected to ease during the year as prices rose," the BoE said in a regular report based on meetings between its regional agents and around 700 businesses across the United Kingdom.

The central bank last week said wage growth would be a key factor in determining if it needs to lift interest rates from their current record low 0.25 percent.

source: UK employers expect to offer smaller pay rises in 2017 - BoE | Reuters

[VectraMan]

The Channel Islands (sic)

Why is that a sic?

[WTFH]

Why is that a sic?

Rough ferry crossing.

[northernladyuk]

Why is that a sic?

I was being fussy about the use of a geographical term to cover the two politically separate crown dependencies of the Bailiwick of Guernsey and the Bailiwick of Jersey.

[PurpleGorilla]

Let's have a look:



Free Movement - EU nationals - Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion - European Commission

The states and territories you listed:



Are as far as I know not EU members. They are included as micro-states and territories within the Customs Union but not within the EU.

So I guess that if the UK becomes a micro-state and leaves the EU, there is a precedent for joining the Customs Union without freedom of movement of labour, as long as the UK is content with the following co-existing condition established via the same precedent:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europea..._Customs_Union

The point you highlight is that there are many different relationships with different trade offs.

We don't want FOM, so what does that leave us in terms of relationships.

Either we get an opt out of FOM which would enable us to stay in the customs union (and manage our ow trade deals)

Or we get a Canada style tariff free trade deal with no FOM.

Or we get a bespoke new deal with the EU-UK (unlikely).

Or we just walk away and WTO it.

[PurpleGorilla]

Lichtenstein is an associate member of the Schengen agreement which means it does have freedom of movement. Now if Britain had become a member then immigration would not have played such a heavy role because:

Liechtenstein has an opt out/quota restricting FOM.

[darmstadt]

Liechtenstein has an opt out/quota restricting FOM.

That was then, this is now...

[northernladyuk]

The point you highlight is that there are many different relationships with different trade offs.

We don't want FOM, so what does that leave us in terms of relationships.

Either we get an opt out of FOM which would enable us to stay in the customs union (and manage our ow trade deals)

Or we get a Canada style tariff free trade deal with no FOM.

Or we get a bespoke new deal with the EU-UK (unlikely).

Or we just walk away and WTO it.

Hope springs eternal I guess.