UK Migrant Workers: History and Policies

UK Migrant Workers History and Policies initiation in that location has been a obtainn emergence in the heel of migrator manoeuverers in the UK in recent yrs (McKay, Craw Chopra, 2006). These increases overhear been spurred on by globalisation, the flutters opening in the UK work market place and legislative changes that stick bulge roughly and varied methods for flood tide to the UK. While m any(prenominal) unsett take moulders playact into extremely skilled jobs, at that place ar in like manner a strong issue who carry bug disc turn a loss low- put up, low-skilled jobs in the UK. The chip in and conditions in these jobs has fashion the focus of some(prenominal) interest group, especi both(a)y in the wake of the shocking deaths of 23 uncolonized workers harvesting cockles at Morecambe Bay. This essay, therefore, critically examines the history of migration and oc flow rate policies, the ways in which migratory workers seduce been exploited, health and goodty lay on the lines they feeling and legitimate aegiss that give up been put in place.History of migration and migration policiesThe history of migration into and by of the UK is healthy established (S hazardandarajah Drew, 2006). In the past the result of this movement has been that sight pee-pee generally left the boorish usually heading for Australia, radical Zealand Canada. Then, to a greater extent recently, people progressively moved off of the UK to Spain and France. It wasnt until the 1980s that the UK became a country which had a net influx of migrators (Sriskandarajah, Cooley Kornblatt, 2007). Net in-migration reached its highpoint in the UK in 2004 at 222,600 a year later it fell back by around 40,000. there were a number of actors that ca use upd this change. Dobson et al. (2001) explain that matchless reason for this change to net immigration was that the highly skilled could subordination transgress wages and obtain an im spring upd lifestyle in the UK. In summateition there was as puff up as a large increase in the number of asylum applications at this succession (Home Office 2006). Further, with the addition of youthful app deathage states to the EU, there was increasing migration with 605,375 people success well(p)y registering to work in the UK from these in the raw member states (Home Office, 2007). disrespect the net immigration to the UK, numerous do non intend to stay permanently. Spencer, Ruhs, Anderson and Rogaly (2007) be that b atomic number 18ly champion-quarter of those immigrating from eastmost and fundamental europium intended to stay permanently. others again, gutter be con situationred irregular migrators. These atomic number 18 people who shit come to the UK without the correct authority. Pinkerton, McLaughlan and common salt (2004) estimate there could conduct been as many a(prenominal) as 430,000 illegal im migrators in the UK in 2001. This number has been questi cham piond, however, by Dorling (2007) who suggests this figure might incorrectly take on US army personnel stationed here, and opposites, thereby artificially inflating the numbers.Whatever the true train of migrants in the UK, both legal and illegal, there contain been clear changes in immigration policies over the last few decades. Laws regarding migration into the UK deal besides changed rapidly and a large commixture of contrary ways of go intoing the UK have been developed (Dench, Hurstfield, Hill Akroyd, 2006). A recent Home Office authorship finds that there nigh 50 different methods for people migrating to the UK for both work and reckon (Home Office, 2005). Five purposes atomic number 18 identified as specially serious by Dench et al. (2006). The world-class of these is the Seasonal Agricultural Workers dodge (SAWS). This was introduced to allow workers existing outside the European Economic electron orbit (EEA) to work in the UK carrying out seasonal work in the agricultural diligence. Under this scheme 16,250 people each year who ar over the age of 18 and in full- era education are allowed to enter the UK for a flow of six calendar months to carry out master(prenominal)ly unskilled work. This includes picking and packing of crops and the handling of livestock. The commandments allow that workers may move employers in that period to income tax return into distinguish the variability in the harvest. Workers are supposed to be p advocate the minimal wage and stick out accommodation, for which they are allowed to charge 27 a week.A second scheme is the Worker Registration Scheme (WRS) which applies to people from the eight just about Accession States (those that have just joined the EU). In direct to sustain mass immigration and the immediate claiming of benefits, workers moving to the UK are demand to register, and only once they have worked without a break for 12 months are they entitle to full benefits and new(pren ominal) rights. A third scheme is the Sectors Based Scheme (SBS) which is designed to allow workers to enter the UK to do a casual or short-term job. This only applies to cardinal particular sectors food manufacturing and hospitality although it has since been sequestered from hospitality be convey of abuse (Home Office, 2005). A third scheme is the Highly virtuoso(prenominal) Migrant Programme (HSMP) which is designed to allow highly skilled workers to enter the UK. The Home Office (2005) calculate states that many migrants entering the UK below this scheme are doctors or are work in the area of health. A fifth category, and the largest method of entry, is through and through origin and commercial work permits. Broadly, this allows companies to code from outside the UK if they are unable to fill a prospect with a UK national, or it allows them to move individuals amid countries within the alike(p) company.Motives for migrationAt the highest train of analysis one of the main reasons for immigration is globalisation. Globalisation refers to a number of forces which includes the increased connections in the midst of association centres, easier access to communications, easier and cheaper travel and an increased escape of labour ( whateverrville, 2007). Generally, then, there is much greater integration crosswise large economic areas such as Europe. It has been argued that one of the defining signs of globalisation is immigration (Castles Miller, 2003). Somerville (2007) argues, therefore, that one of the major(ip) factors at the heart of globalisation and so migration is economics. As economic pressures change in the UK, so do the types of jobs for which immigration occurs. Salt and Millar (2006) display that in 2005 the industry in which most work permits were issued was health and medical services (26.1%). This was followed by computer services and management and business administration (18.1% and 11.8% respectively). Migrants are, therefore, clearly responding to the particular emergencys that the UK economy presents to them more than(prenominal) than right away than those already in the UK. This effect has been amplified by the fact that the UK has seen a period of uninterrupted growth of the economy from the mid-1990s until recent years.Thus there are considerable macroeconomic effects going the increased levels of migration into the UK. These types of conclusions are besides reflected in equivalent microeconomic phenomena. Blauw (2002) has examined the reasons wherefore employers have a intention to use migrant workers. Blauw (2002) set up that spell employers tended to look first in the UK labour market, if they couldnt fill the positions they had available they began their search amongst migrant workers. question carried out in Federal Ireland by Bell, Jarman and Lefebvre (2004) institute that migrants were take ind in particular to fill both skilled and unskilled gaps in the labour market. It has in like manner been found that migrant workers are often seen by employers as being better workers. Reed (2005), for theoretical account, investigated migrant workers in the food manufacturing industry. It was found that the use of migrant workers had decreased the amount of sickness re stinkert as well as the turnover of employees.many of these findings were backed up by explore into employers of migrant workers by Dench et al. (2006). They overly found that in the agricultural industry internal workers simply did not deem for the jobs that required filling, while in the hotels and catering industry house servant workers were not prepared to work the waxy hours that were required for the job. Dench et al. (2006) points out that it is natural to assume that perhaps employers were not attempt rattling hard to fill their jobs with interior(prenominal) workers, effrontery that migrant workers much provide cheaper labour. This psyche, though, was strongly denied by emplo yers who claimed that they had do extensive efforts to recruit national workers, that without success. Some employers in the agricultural sector describe that when they tried to recruit from the Jobcentre, potential employees would come for an interview just so that they could prove they had been for an interview, so that could claim benefits. Other employers in the real(prenominal) sector explained that domestic workers would often quit subsequently only a few years work. On the other hand migrant workers often worked hard and stayed in the job. Some alike(p) results were seen in the hotels and catering sector. The approach to their work that domestic workers showed was very low compared to the dedication that migrant workers displayed.The amount of skill required for the job was excessively an important factor for employers (Dench et al., 2006). A good example was in the construction industry where employers especially valued Polish workers who were highly motivated and could fill the gap in skills that were seen in the industry. A identical picture in relation to skills was too seen in other industries. In the Finance and Accountancy sector employers complained that they couldnt get workers with the right qualifications. As a result they had agencies who would search globally for the right candidates. boilers suit, though, employers understood that the reason that they recruited migrants was that the same amount of money meant more to them than it did to domestic workers.Of course not all employers accepted migrant labour, some state they were unsure but what standards overseas workers were trained up to, and others thought that their lack of fluency in side of meat was a problem (Dench et al., 2006). Despite this, many employers saw considerable advantages in employing migrant workers. Migrant workers were much more reliable and liable(predicate) to show up for work than domestic workers some employers even had to inspire workers to tak e their annual holi day sentence. Employers excessively saw much lower levels of turnover with migrant workers. This was probably solved by the fact that those registered on the WRS have to reregister if they move their employer. Further, employers composinged that migrant workers were much more hard- operative than domestic workers. This meant they were often prepared to work longer hours and were enthusiastic about doing overtime. Although not mentioned by many employers it was also clearly a factor that migrant workers were more likely to be satisfied working for the minimum wage than domestic workers. Similar findings for why migrant workers are employed are also revealed by McKay et al. (2006).There are also considerable incentives from the migrant workers perspectives to come to the UK for work. Unsurp movely one of the main motivations is the availability of work and the lack of work in their country of origin. investigate conducted by Norfolk County Council and YMCA Nor folk (2005) found migrant workers were primarily motivated by the relatively high range of compensate in the UK compared to their country of origin. Many were peculiarly interested in learning English, especially those who were from countries that had recently joined the EU. evolution of migrant workersThe motives for migration in scathe of globalisation and its specific effects on the labour market clearly set up a locating in which maturation is a possibility. A recent craftsmanships summation recounting (2007a) report looked at whether migration hurts migrants. They conclude that despite the advantages for employers and the immediate advantages perceived by some migrant workers, there are also significant problems face up both at the macro- and microlevels. The World Bank (2005), for example, has examined the effects on world-wide economics of the international flow of labour. This finds that migrant workers themselves are sure better glum working outside their own country, however, migrants who stay in the same country positively do worse over the long-term.Looking more specifically at the situation in the UK, though, reveals a much more mixed picture about the question of migrant workers. A variety of studies have attempted to look at the real(a) working conditions of migrant workers. A report from the Health and gum elastic Executive has looked virtually at the types of risks to which migrant workers are exposed in the workplace (McKay et al., 2006). These authors point out that some previous inference suggests that migrant workers face significant levels of victimization in the workplace. Lawrence (2004), for example, has pointed to how the food industry has used migrant workers in order to drive down costs and increase productivity. There have also been a series of high profile cases in which migrant workers have been injured at work. In the worst of these at Morecambe Bay in 2004, 23 Chinese workers lost their lives while picking c ockles when they were caught in rising tides.Evidence from the Citizens Advice Bureau (2004), though, suggests the abuses of migrant workers are more systematic. They provide certainty from a number of different sectors about the conditions under which migrant workers are employed. In the care spot sector it has been found that many well-qualified workers from other countries, such as nurses, have been promised work of a similar level in the UK solely end up in positions that are significantly below their level, such as carrying out cleaning or other menial tasks. Employers bequeath also frequently hold onto the migrant workers passport so as to be able to intimidate them. As a result of this sort of intimidation, many migrant workers report finding it difficult to make any kind of complaint against their employer as they are reliant on the money earned to send back home to their families. Consequently there is incredible to be any change in the migrant workers position. in war dly the cleaning sector, the Citizens Advice Bureau (2004) report that there are a number of ways that migrant workers have been exploited. They report on migrant workers who have been recruited to clean motorway service stations for 600 a month, of which 200 is deducted for reenforcement costs of a shared room in a house. These workers did not receive a contract of employment, a guinea pig Insurance number or a payslip. The Citizens Advice Bureau (2004) also report on the recruitment of foreign nationals at universities in the UK who are given cleaning jobs after being told they pass on be nonrecreational in arrears then they are simply not paid at all.Within the hospitality sector more abuses have been seen. Again, the Citizens Advice Bureau (2004) report that workers are hired for cleaning or working in restaurants except are not given National Insurance numbers, or contracts, and are paid below the National Minimum Wage. In the agricultural industry, the Citizens Advice Bu reau (2004) report that migrant workers negotiate with gangmasters who present themselves as employment agencies. Workers frequently face very poor accommodation as part of the agreement for which they pay relatively high rates from their wages considering the accommodation provided. The Citizens Advice Bureau (2004) have get complaints on a number of common themes. These include very low rates of pay, no provision of payslips, non-payment of National Insurance contributions, very poor accommodation that is often overcrowded and the risk of dismissal from the job without outlet through the proper procedures.The findings of the Citizens Advice Bureau (2004) were also echoed by Dench et al., (2006). These authors found reports of many of the same problems, as well as stories that some gangmasters in East Anglia were only paying migrant workers 1 per hour. This was done legally be paying the minimum wage but then claiming back a huge proportion for accommodation. Migrant workers are not just interpreted advantage of by employers. There are reports of some people charging migrants for the favour of finding them accommodation and work. Considering the reports from the Citizens Advice Bureau (2004) and other anecdotal evidence, it seems likely that migrant workers well-being would be significantly affected by their working conditions. Shields and equipment casualty (2003) examined the psychosocial well-being of migrant workers in the UK in relation to different labour market outcomes. They found, perhaps unsurprisingly given the evidence reviewed so far, that the health of the mischievously treated migrant workers is particularly poor. In addition they have significantly lower levels of psychological well-being.Health and safety risks of migrantsConsidering the many reported disadvantages which migrant workers face in the workplace, it is useful to examine the risks to which they are exposed. McKay et al. (2006) carried out a study of 200 migrant workers who wer e interviewed across five different areas in both England and Wales. One of the aims of the study was to assess whether migrant workers were placed at any greater risk than other workers who were of domestic origin. McKay et al. (2006) point out that one of the key issues in health and safety is the provision of gentility. ternion of those who were interviewed in this study indicated that they had not received any instruction. There was, however, a considerable difference depending on the sector in which people worked. Those who worked in the public sector were significantly more likely to receive training than those who worked elsewhere. It was thought that private sector employers attitudes were that once migrant workers had obtained certification they would leave for better jobs.Clearly one of the problems in training is language. Shellekens and Smith (2004) found that communication was made particularly difficult through the use of dupe and technical terms. Some employers di d provide instructions in different languages but these translations were not always reliable, or were reliably read by migrant workers. Training was also limited in the sense that while there was sometimes induction training, there was unconvincing to be any ongoing training. There was also considerable confusion about who was responsible for providing the health and safety training in the first place. For example in cases where migrant workers were employed by an agency, respondents to the research were unclear whose responsibility the training was. Overall McKay et al. (2006) argue that migrant workers are likely to be at a disadvantage in terms of adequate training in their jobs compared to other workers. Consequently it is understandable that around half of the migrant workers McKay et al. (2006) interviewed had no knowledge of health and safety procedures in their workplace. In terms of equipment there was some confusion uncovered in the study about whether adequate safeguar d was provided migrant workers often claimed they werent given full equipment while employers claimed they did provide it.A similar level of contradictory messages was received when migrant workers and employers were asked about the number of strokes that occurred in the workplace. A quarter of migrant worker respondents indicated that they had suffered or witnessed an accident a relatively high proportion (McKay et al., 2006). Many also state that accident were not reported for fear of endangering their jobs. On the other hand, employers verbalise that accidents were rare and that all accidents, even the most minor, were reported and recorded. Employers did say, though, that they knew migrant workers were brought up in a culture of blame and so would be unlikely to report accidents. Despite the confusing picture, McKay et al. (2006) conclude that levels of accidents are probably high amongst migrant workers. This is partly payable to the fact that employers who concur to be interviewed were probably more likely to have good procedures in place along with the fact that migrant workers who have experienced problems are also more likely to come forward for the interviews. This might partly explain the gap in reporting.The general welfare of workers was also examined by McKay et al. (2006) who looked at the temperature of working conditions, the breaks, noise and chemicals. They found, again, that there was confusion over breaks with employers generally saying that breaks were allowed, while migrant workers saying that they often werent or at to the lowest degree that their pay was docked if they did take a break. Similar differences were seen on the question of temperature many migrant workers worked in the extremes of temperature. For noise and chemicals there were few differences seen between migrant and other workers. Other types of complaints about working confirmed the findings of the Citizens Advice Bureau (2004) report that migrant workers work long hours and often did not have written terms of employment.As a result of these findings the Trades Union Congress (2007b) have made a number of recommendations to remedy the working conditions of migrant workers. They argue that all accidents should be reported, that there should be sufficient provision of first aid and welfare, that the correct protective equipment should be provided along with adequate training and information. This training and information should be accessible and therefore translated into the applicable language should this be required. Finally the TUC recommends that migrant workers should join a dole out union so as proper support and organisation can be provided. ratified protection for migrant workersSince migrant workers are so susceptible to exploitation it is natural to ask what legal protection is in place to improve their working conditions. Since, as McKay et al. (2006) point out, migrant workers are amongst the most vulnerable, they genuinely require extra protection. One particular problem identified by McKay et al. (2006) is the behaviour of some gangmasters and how it has been addressed by extra legal protection. A gangmaster is someone who is responsible for the payment and supervision of a whole gathering of workers. While some gangmasters behave properly, others have been identified as the cause of serious problems. Anderson and Rogaly (2005) have found that the employment relationship can be seriously confused in the case where migrants are employed through gangmasters. Surveys of gangmasters have found that only 10% of them follow the law on employment and 40% were breaking the law in at least six different ways (Lawrence, 2004).To attempt to combat some of these problems the Gangmasters (Licensing) travel 2004 introduced extra protection for those working in the fisheries and agricultural sectors. This purported to introduce the wrong offence of contracting with gangmasters who had not followed the proper lic ensing procedures. These licensing procedures are an attempt to delay agencies and gangmasters follow the proper employment procedures such as reaching the relevant health and safety standards. The Act has been seve avow criticised, however, as since it came into force the surgical incision for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has been very slow to put on up the regulations. Also, since the regulations have been drawn up it has become clear that the real powers of the Act have been significantly reduced (Davies Freedland, 2007).One of the clearest ways in which this legal protection is limited is that it simply doesnt cover the vast legal age of migrant workers, who work in industries other than agriculture or fisheries. except even in the industries that it does cover, there is a level of scepticism about whether it leave alone make a huge bear upon (McKay et al., 2006). Employers pointed out that the actual standards required in the licensing were relatively low and that much more pie-eyed measures need to be put in place. The coverage of the system across the country also appears to be patchy. There was evidence that gangmasters had moved from one part of the country to other in order to avoid regulation. In addition, many felt that the audit itself didnt look too closely into the actual past working practices of the gangmasters and agencies themselves. Finally, there were also questions about how well these new laws would be enforced.ConclusionThe motives for migration appear to be strong in the current labour market situation globalisation, skill shortages and the sheer availability of plastered jobs in the UK mean that migrant workers are in demand. Changes to immigration policies have meant that there are now a variety of schemes available for migrant workers to come to the UK. Overall the point should be made that the effect of migration on both the host and home countries is probably positive. Unfortunately it has become clear, du e to recent studies, that a significant proportion of migrant workers, particularly those working in low-paid, low-skilled occupations, are being exploited. This exploitation appears to run right from the naive bending of rules to the complete flouting of standard UK employment practices. Both Health and Safety and TUC investigations have uncovered serious shortcomings in the treatment of migrant workers. New rules have been introduced by Gangmasters (Licensing) Act 2004 to try and curb the illegal practices of gangmasters and agencies. Despite this, and despite the young age of the polity, these rules have been roundly criticised for failing to provide adequate protection for migrant workers. Not least of these criticism is that the legislation doesnt cover the majority of migrant workers. Clearly much greater levels of regulation are required to protect those migrant workers who are at the highest risk of being exploited in the UK labour market.Brexit Causes and ConsequencesBrex it Causes and ConsequencesOn June 23, 2016, the United acressuffraged to leave the European Union in an event dubbed Brexit (Britain + exit).This paper will explore the events tip up to the vote, the reasons for andagainst Britain leaving the EU, the immediate and long-term fallout, the travelto downation, and the current discussions regarding capital punishment. First, recognizing the distinctionbetween the Euro Currency and the European Union is important. The EuropeanUnion is an economic and political partnership that began after WWII with six open members to foster economic co-operation. The EU has steadily grown to28 countries. The idea was that countries that work together are less likelyto go to war with each other. The Treaty on the European Union states that anyEuropean country can apply for membership if it respects the democratic determineof the EU and is committed to promoting these values. Countries wishing to join mustiness have unchangeable institutions guara nteeing democracy, a functioning marketeconomy, and the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligationsof membership. financial and transitional arrangements for new members must benegotiated. The EU has its own gold, the Euro, which is used by 19 of themember countries (Wheeler, 2017). TheEuro was adopted in 1999 and is now the second most shell outd currency after theUnited States dollar. Some sovereign states that are not part of the EU havealso adopted the Euro, as well as many territories, departments, and states ofEuro-zone countries. The Brexit bowel movement kicked off in2015, when a pledge was activated to hold a referendum, or public vote, on theUKs membership of the EU. David Cameron made this promise under immensepressure from Eurosceptics and when the Conservative political party appearedto be losing votes to the UK emancipation Party. Cameron then toured EUcapitals seeking to renegotiate the terms of Britains membership, vowing tocampaign to keep Bri tain a part of the EU. When Britain went to vote, all pollsindicated that the UK would detain in the EU (Financial Times Brexit timeline). There were many reasons for andagainst leaving the EU. In 2016, Britain paid in over 13.1 jillion to the EU budget, but alsoreceived 4.5 billion worthy of spending. Determining whether the 8.6 billionnet contribution is worth the other advantages of EU membership can bedifficult. The EU is a single market, meaning no tariffs are imposed on importsand exports between the 28 members. The UK soon conducts more than 50% ofits carry ons with other members of the EU. Britain also benefits from trade plentysbetween the EU and other world powers. Leaving the EU causes them to lose someof that negotiating power. Following Brexit, the UK could seek membership ofthe European Free Trade Area, which includes the 28 members of the EU plusNorway, Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Switzerland. However, joining the FreeTrade Area means that the UK would remain bo und by almost all EU regulations,while losing their input on those regulations. Open Europe conducted a studywhich found that the worst-case scenario is that the UK economy loses 2.2% ofits total GDP by 2030. They also found that GDP could increase by 1.6% if a kick trade partake can be negotiated. Supporters of Brexit think that it would bein the best interest of other European countries to re-establish innocent trade.However, opponents believe that the EU would want to dissuade further exitsby making life hard for Britain (Brexit). For proponents of Brexit,sovereignty was seen as a major reason to leave the EU. Few disagree that EUmembership involves giving up control over its own affairs. Those thatadvocated for remain in the EU express that leaving would weaken the UKsposition by taking away the power to influence events in an increasinglycomplex and interdependent world (Riley, 2016). British politician DouglasCarswell wrote that, The European Union has lost control, and is unable torespond. Being part of the EU means that we can be outvoted by the Euro blockon economic mattersThe safest thing we can do is vote to take back control,(Carswell, 2015). He goes on to add that the UK could spend more on their ownpriorities, such as scientific research, if they left the EU. Carswell alsowrites that the UK could be a greater influence for free trade and cooperationas part of the World Trade fundamental law. Immigration is another topic of discussion.Under EU law, the UK cannot prevent anyone from another EU member state fromimmigrating to the UK. Britons benefit from the ability to live and work in anyof the 27 other member countries. Consequently, there has been a large increasein immigration into the UK. While the recent pace of immigration has led toconcerns with housing and service provision, the overall outcome has beenpositive. Some believe that immigration should be cut and control of the meets should be regained. A decrease in immigration would me an more jobs forthe people who remain, but with a current unemployment rate of around 4.5%, theUK does not appear to be suffering in this manner. Those that support stayingin the EU estimated that there are troika meg jobs linked to trade with theEU. If trade and investment falls succeeding(a) Brexit, some of these jobs wouldundoubtedly be lost (Brexit). However, it is not clear exactly how many ofthese jobs are dependent on the UK being a part of the European Union. On theflip side, if trade were to rise after Brexit, new jobs would likely becreated. A writer for the London School of Economics said that limiting freedomof movement between EU countries discourages the brightest and the best fromcoming to Britain, and it reduces the pool of potential candidates for jobs(Brexit). Security was another point of contention. Thoseis privilege of Brexit argued that remain in the EU is leaving the door open toterrorist attacks, because the open border does not allow them to know who is entering and exiting the country. However, several senior military figuresargued that the EU is an increasingly important pillar of our securityespecially in light of instability in the Middle East and Russia. MichaelFallon, Defense Secretary, said that they needed the collective power of the EUto work together on counter-terrorism. However, Colonel Richard Kemp, authorhead of the international terrorism team at the cabinet Office, said that itwas absurd to assume that the EU would put citizens at risk by reducingcooperation (Brexit). Despitestrong arguments both for and against Brexit, the referendum to decide thetime to come of the UK as part of the EU was held on Thursday, June 23, 2016. Over 30 meg people voted, for a turnout of 71.8% of the voting eligible population.The UK voted to leave the EU by a vote of 51.9% to 48.1%. Across the UK, therewere significant differences in the percentage of the population voting toleave. Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU by votes of 62%to 38% and 55.8% to 44.2%, respectively. England and Wales voted to leave theEU with votes to leave tallying 53.4% and 52.5% (Wheeler). Thevote on Brexit came with political consequences. The day after losing thereferendum, David Cameron resigned as Prime Minister. Theresa may, the formerhome secretary, took over, becoming Prime Minister without facing a fullConservative leadership contest after the key players from the Leave sidewithdrew from consideration. May was against Brexit during the referendumcampaign but is now in favor of it because the British people voted for it. Herposition is that Brexit means Brexit, and she began the process of leavingthe UK on demo 29, 2017 when she invoked bind 50, a plan for any countrythat wishes to leave the EU. Article 50 was created in 2009 as part of theTreaty of Lisbon, becoming the first formal mechanism for a country to leavethe EU. This short, five-paragraph article spells out that any member statedeciding to quit the EU must notify the European Council and negotiate itswithdrawal with the EU. Countries wishing to leave have 2 years to reach anagreement and cannot participate in EU internal discussions about its handout(Wheeler). TheArticle 50 process lasts two years. Accordingly, the intention is that the UKwill leave the EU on marching music 29, 2019, two years from the date that May began theprocess. This date can be blanket(a) if all 28 members agree, however currentlyall sides are rivet on this date as the key one. EU law sleek over stands in theUK until it is no longer a member. There is currently uncertainty about howfinal the break will be on this date. Many prominent figures support atransition period of up to three years to allow a smooth implementation. Althoughall ties could technically be cut on this date, May and others would like toavoid such a cold turkey exit where current regulations on things like tradeand travel ends overnight, as this could harm the economy (Wheel er). In a destination in Florence, May confirmed her government will pursue an implementationof around two years after the formal point of departure scheduled for March2019. Under her pile, relations between Britain and the EU would remain similaras before, with the UK contributing to the EU budget to settle its decouplebill, and remaining within the single market until 2021 (Theresa). Alongwith political consequences, Brexit also had several economic consequences. DavidCameron and many other figures who wanted to stay in the EU predicted animmediate economic crisis if the UK voted to leave. They were partiallycorrect the pound slumped the day after the referendum and remains about 10%lower against the dollar and 15% down against the euro. However, the UK economywas estimated to have grown 1.8% in 2016 and has continued to grow at almostthe same rate in 2017. The decrease in value of the pound means that exports shouldget a boost as UK goods will be cheaper, but imported goods w ill get moreexpensive (United). Inflation has risen since the vote to stand currently atapproximately 4%, but unemployment has also continued to fall to a 42-year lowof 4.3%. House prices have fallen from 9.4% in June 2016 to 5% in August 2017(Wheeler). Pensions,savings, investments, and mortgages are also affected by Brexit. The UK has a threefold lock for state pensions, which is an agreement by which pensionsincrease by the highest of the level of earnings, inflation, or 2.5% each year.Cameron said this policy would likely be menace by a UK exit, and May hadproposed ditching the 2.5% part of the law. However, as part of thepost-election deal with the Democratic Unionist Party, the triple lock remains guaranteed. both expats who rely on UK income, like pensions, will be impacted by currencychanges. Additionally, more than a million pensioners living in Spain arecurrently being paid annual cost of living rises by the UK government. There isconsiderable concern regarding whether t his policy will continue (Connington,2017). Savingsrates dropped to record lows following the vote, partially driven by the Bankof Englands decision to halve Bank Rate in August 2016. Other factors alsoplayed in to the drop, including investors who feared instability and sought asafe haven in government bonds. Prices were pushed up and their yield wasconsequently decreased. Pessimism in the immediate aftermath of the referendumhas subsided and savings rates have begun to bounce back. However, it isexpect that rates will remain volatile until Brexit talks are settled and itcan be determined what policies will be in effect. The Brexit referendum alsoimpacted mortgage rates. Experts were wrong, however. While it was predictedthat rates would initially rise following the vote, they actually fell. Again,this was partly due to the cut of the Bank Rate. It was also caused byincreased competition in the mortgage market. Towards the end of 2016, ratesbegan to flinch back up, and this patte rn of gradual increases is predicted tocontinue (Dyson, 2016). TheUK and EU negotiating teams met for the first time on June 19, 2017. They meetface-to-face for four days each month in Brussels to try to reach an agreementon the rights of UK and EU citizens after Brexit, a figure for the amount ofmoney the UK will pay upon leaving, and what will happen to the NorthernIreland border. These negotiations are complex, as it is abstruse to extricate43 years of treaties and agreements. The UK team is led by David Davis, astager Conservative MP who is Secretary of State for Exiting the EuropeanUnion. On the EU side, Michel Barnier, a former French foreign minister and EUcommissioner, is leading the charge (Wheeler). Since this has never been donebefore, a great deal will have to be improvised as the negotiations continue. Barnierhas not been hesitant to remind the UK side that the clock is ticking on thenegotiations. EU summits in March and June 2018 will be important in theprocess, bu t the real time crunch is expected to come in the fall of 2018. If adeal is to be approved by Parliament, the European Parliament, and the EUstates, it will need to be agreed upon by this point to meet the Article 50deadline. 72% of the EU states will have to vote in favor of the deal for it topass. Although the UK could leave before March 2019 if an agreement is reachedsooner, that is highly unlikely at this stage. May says leaving the EU with nodeal in place is preferred to signing a bad one (Wheeler). If Brexit occurswith no agreement on trade, the UK would operate under World Trade Organizationrules. Onemain topic of discussion in the negotiations is the type of trade deal the UKwill have with the UK following Brexit. Studies by the National get forEconomic and Social Research suggest that leaving the single market could causea long-term reduction in UK trade with Europe between 22% and 30%, unless theysign exactly the same free trade deal they have currently. Many in the EU h avemade it clear that they do not support this. This significant drop in tradereflects the purpose of the single market as reducing tariff and non-tariffbarriers within the EU. The government believes that a portion of the tradeimpact can be offset by creating new free trade deals with countries outside ofthe EU, but that could take a while (Wheeler). Theother major problem involving trade is immigration and labor mobility. Internationallyoperated businesses often require moving key staff in and out of the countryseamlessly, and certain sectors such as agriculture and food preparation relyon thousands of EU workers. This issue is one that would be particularlyimpacted by a cliff-edge exit and would greatly benefit from transitionalarrangements. While it has in time to be agreed upon for sure, at this time, itseems that all EU nationals lawfully living in the UK for at least five yearswill apply for settled status and be able to bring over spouses and children. whatever deal on futu re legal status and rights must also be reciprocal and givecertainty to the 1.2 million expats living elsewhere in Europe. Barnier hasdemanded more clarity and ambition from the UK government, saying that thisproposal does not go far enough and he wants the same level of protectioncitizens have under current EU law. May has said one of her key takeaways fromthe Leave vote is that the British people want a reduction in immigration. Shewould like the net migration, or difference between the amount of peopleentering and leaving the country, to reach a sustainable level of below100,000 per year. The rate of increase in population has slowed since the vote, generally driven by an increase in emigration from the UK by citizens of manyEast and Central European countries (Wheeler). Anothervery important face of the Brexit negotiation is how to avoid a hard borderbetween Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, who have been living mostly inpeace since the respectable Friday Agreement twen ty years ago. The invisible landborder has been of import to economic development and has been of huge symbolicimportance. Neither side wants Brexit to result in new barriers, but the UKgovernment has not yet produced a realistic proposal on how to avoid physicalborder controls. The EU worries that leaving this border unpoliced creates aconduit for goods to flow illegally between the UK and the EU via Ireland(Financial Times Brexit risks).Thefinal contentious topic of discussion is how much the UK will owe the EU forits exit. Barnier wants the UK to cover their liabilities and budgetarycommitments. A Commission spokesman likened it to fluid needing to pay your tabeven if you leave the bar. The divorce bill could include pension payments toEU officials, guarantees on loans such as the bailout of Ireland, and spendingon infrastructure agreed on but yet to be financed. The EU wants Britain torespect the obligations resulting from the entire period of their membership,referencing the seven-year budget period that runs through 2020. The estimatesas to how much this bill could end up totaling range from 5 billion pounds toover 100 billion euros. formerly Britain leaves, the EU will have to fill a void inits budget of about 10 billion euros, which could mean increasing contributionsfrom the remaining 27 members, cutting spending, or finding alternative revenuesources (Kennedy, 2017). Ideally, this issue would have been addressed first,but the British preferred to address everything at the same time so trade-offsand compromises could be made. This approach is part of the reason why little chief has been made. Twomore current issues are affecting the talks ring implementation. The UKgovernments EU Withdrawal measuring rod, formerly known as the Great Repeal Bill,reached committee stage in the House of green in November 2017. This billaims to ensure that European law will no longer apply in the UK followingBrexit, by repealing the 1972 European Communities Act. A ny existing EUlegislation will be carried over into domestic UK law to help with a smoothtransition. This bill will be one of the largest legislative projects everundertaken in the UK, presenting a unique repugn because the body of EU lawis found in many different places and in many different forms. Many UK lawswill also no longer work upon exit, since they refer to institutions of the EU.Since not all of this can be accomplished through the repeal bill, thegovernment plans to create powers to correct principle where necessary, withoutfull Parliamentary scrutiny (Wheeler). The passing of this bill is furthercomplicated by the ongoing negotiations with the EU. Anothernew development affecting Brexit is growth evidence that thousands of fakeaccounts may have been used to influence the Brexit vote. Britainsintelligence watchdog is facing demands to examine whether Russians interfered.Academics in the UK have found that at least 419 Twitter accounts operatingfrom the Kremlin-linked Russian Internet Research Agency tweeted about Brexit.Additionally, thousands of other Russian twitter accounts posted more than45,000 times about Brexit during last years referendum, in a span of just 48hours. Approximately 13,000 accounts that tweeted about Brexit during thecampaign disappeared after the vote. Theresa May has declined to say whethershe believes Russia had interfered, supporting the position that there is noevidence yet. Putin also has denied Russias role, saying the day after thevote that, We closely followed the voting but never sought to influence it,(Booth, 2017). The impacts of the Withdrawal Bill and possible Russian interventionhave yet to be seen, but will definitely affect the proceedings of the talkssurrounding implementation. Theyear and a half following the Brexit vote has been a contentious time in theUK. The full economic impact is unknown, and markets will likely be volatile asdiscussions continue and Brexit plays out fully. It is yet to be seen exa ctlywhen and how the UK will exit the European Union. Further complicating the exitdate is Mays promise that Members of Parliament will vote at the end of thetwo year process to approve whatever deal is agreed to. They could potentiallyvote to send the UK back to renegotiate. Andy deal that is made also must beapproved by the European Parliament. With so much uncertainty regarding thepolitics, economics, and other implications of Brexit, discussion on this topicis far from over. Once a deal is finally agreed to, it will impact the UK andthe EU for years to come. ReferencesBooth, R., & Hern, A. (2017, November 15). Intelligence watchdog urged to look at Russian influence on Brexit vote. Retrieved from https//www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/15/intelligence-watchdog-urged-to-look-at-russian-influence-on-brexit-voteBrexit What are the pros and cons of leaving the EU. (n.d.). Retrieved from http//www.theweek.co.uk/brexit-0Carswell, D. (2015, October 09). Douglas Carswell Why Im bac king choose Leave in the EU referendum. Retrieved from http//www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/11922172/Douglas- Carswell-Why-Im-backing-Vote-Leave-in-the-EU-referendum.htmlConnington, J. (2017, March 10). How Brexit will affect your money investments, currency and more. Retrieved from http//www.telegraph.co.uk/investing/isas/brexit-will-affect-money-investments- currency/Dyson, R. E. (2016, June 24). Brexit how will your savings and mortgages be affected? Retrieved from http//www.telegraph.co.uk/personal-banking/savings/brexit- outcome-what-it-means-for-savings/Financial TimesBrexit risks destabilizing Irelands fragile peace. (n.d.). Retrieved from https//www.ft.com/content/046ce872-c30a-11e7-b2bb-322b2cb39656Financial Times Brexit timeline key dates in UKs divorce with EU. (n.d.). Retrieved from https//www.ft.com/content/64e7f218-4ad4-11e7-919a-1e14ce4af89bKennedy, S. (2017,July 14). Explaining Brexits Costs and Whether Britain willing Pay Up. Retrievedfrom h ttps//www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-14/brexit-s- costs-and-whether-britain-will-pay-up-quicktake-q-aRiley-Smith, B. (2016, June 16). Leave or Remain in the EU? The arguments for and against Brexit. Retrieved from http//www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/16/leave-or-remain-in-the-eu-the- arguments-for-and-against-brexit/Theresa May Seeks2-Year Brexit Implementation Period. (n.d.). Retrieved from http//time.com/4952988/britain-theresa-may-brexit-two-years-implementation- period/United Kingdom. (n.d.).Retrieved from https//atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/gbr/What are the keyissues for the Brexit negotiations? (2017, March 29). Retrieved from http//www.bbc.com/news/uk-39196315Wheeler, A. H.(2017, November 13). Brexit every you need to know about the UK leaving theEU. Retrieved from http//www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32810887