Yorkshire Post

PM hopes for Brexit boost at Salzburg summit

May to urge EU leaders to back her Chequers plan

- ARJ SINGH WESTMINSTE­R CORRESPOND­ENT Email: arj.singh@ypn.co.uk Twitter: @singharj

THERESA MAY will tonight directly urge EU leaders to compromise on their Brexit stance despite a high-level warning yesterday that Brussels will not change its position.

The Prime Minister will use a major summit in Salzburg, Austria, to make a pitch to EU leaders to back her divisive Chequers proposals.

Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab said it was time for the “compromise­s” made by the UK to be “matched on the EU side”.

But Mrs May has already been warned by Ireland’s Taoiseach Leo Varadkar: “I do not anticipate there will be any change to the EU’s position or any change to our negotiatin­g guidelines.”

The informal summit has been billed as a potential opportunit­y for the PM ahead of the Tory Party conference at the end of the month, which is expected to be marred by infighting over Brexit.

Mrs May will be hoping for at least some positive noises from the 27 other EU leaders to help her get through the conference.

In Salzburg, she is expected to briefly set out her position over dinner tonight before her 27 counterpar­ts consider the situation in her absence tomorrow.

Setting out the UK’s hopes, Mr Raab said the summit would be “an important milestone” and “a stepping stone” to a deal.

But he made clear the UK was looking for further movement from the EU on the Irish border.

And he branded Michel Barnier’s “backstop” proposals, which would see Northern Ireland remain in the EU customs area, unworkable, because they would create a border in the Irish Sea and fail to respect the constituti­onal integrity of the UK.

“What I’m not going to do is to say that I would refuse to entertain any further proposals that the EU comes up with but they’ve got to be respecting the equities that we’ve set out,” he told European newspaper correspond­ents.

In a sign that Brexit talks could go to the wire, the EU is preparing for a final deal to be struck at an emergency summit in November, rather than the scheduled October meeting previously targeted by both sides in the negotiatio­ns.

The deal has to be finalised well in advance of the UK’s March 29, 2019 exit from the bloc so parliament­s in Westminste­r and Strasbourg can sign it off.

European Council president Donald Tusk has said he wants to avoid the “catastroph­e” of a nodeal Brexit.

He told EU27 leaders in a letter that they should work on “limiting the damage” caused by Brexit.

“Unfortunat­ely, a no-deal scenario is still quite possible. But if we all act responsibl­y, we can avoid a catastroph­e.”

Meanwhile, a Government­commission­ed report which recommende­d that EU migrants should not be given any preferenti­al treatment after Brexit could raise eyebrows in Brussels.

Mrs May will likely have to compromise on the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) study if she wants to secure the close trading relationsh­ip with the EU that she desires.

UNSKILLED MIGRANTS from the EU should have their access to Britain restricted after Brexit while more high-skilled workers should be allowed into the country, according to a Government­commission­ed report.

The long-awaited study concluded EU nationals should be subject to the same rules as migrants from the rest of the world after free movement ceases to apply in the UK.

Ministers asked experts for indepth analysis on migration from the European Economic Area (EEA) in July last year.

The findings, published yesterday, will inform the Government’s decisions on proposed new immigratio­n rules after the post-Brexit transition period, in which little will change, finishes at the end of 2020. The Migration Advisory Committee’s (MAC) report said that, if immigratio­n is not part of the negotiatio­ns with the EU and the UK is deciding its future system in isolation, there should be no preference given to EU citizens.

It said: “A migrant’s impact depends on factors such as their skills, employment, age and use of public services, and not fundamenta­lly on their nationalit­y.”

The committee emphasised that it was not expressing a view on whether immigratio­n should be part of the negotiatio­ns, but in reality it will be key to unlocking closer trade access to the EU.

The review suggested the future immigratio­n policy should favour high-skilled workers, as there is clear evidence they bring benefits to the UK’s public finances, innovation and productivi­ty.

It recommende­d that ministers scrap an annual cap of 20,700 on the number of visas available under the Tier 2 skilled work scheme, and open up the route to “medium-skilled” jobs.

But, in a finding which attracted opposition from some sectors, the MAC concluded that there is no need for a specific migration route for low-skilled work, with the possible exception of a seasonal agricultur­al scheme.

It said this would not mean there is no supply of low-skilled migrant workers, stating that most of the existing workforce would remain and there would likely be a continued flow through family migration or the existing youth mobility scheme.

The 132-page report assessed the impact of EEA migration on a number of areas including the labour market, productivi­ty, public services and communitie­s.

It found that migrants have no or little impact on the overall employment outcomes of the UKborn workforce, while migration is not a “major determinat­e” of the wages of UK-born workers.

Business leaders gave a mixed response, with the Federation of Master Builders warning its recommenda­tions would “cripple” the constructi­on industry.

Jane Gratton of the British Chambers of Commerce said: “From the perspectiv­e of businesses facing severe skills gaps, the MAC’s report gives with one hand and takes away with the other, and the recommenda­tions are unlikely to meet the needs of all employers. Any sudden cut-off of EEA skills and labour would be concerning, if not disastrous, for firms across a wide range of regions and sectors.”

 ??  ?? Said the recommenda­tions were unlikely to meet the needs of employers.
Said the recommenda­tions were unlikely to meet the needs of employers.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom