UKH

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANZUK

FWIW, I quite like the idea.

I would be all over that!

If only there was a trading partner on our doorstep we could deepen ties with...

Edit: Just read you live in Canada!

goes against tackling Climate change, particularly as regards ANZAC.  Regionalisation is more acceptable except for things that cant be obtained regionally.

I thought that was going to be a website selling smoking paraphernalia 

To be fair, I think Brexit is crazy but I don't have a dog in the race (apart from all of my hard earnt pensions ).

But if its going to go ahead, I quite like the idea of a free trade, freedom of movement arrangement between this group of "culturally similar" countries.

"culturally similar" = same language (well almost), likes beer, annihilated their indigenous populations. The only real fly in the ointment is Canada which drives on the wrong side of the road and where cricket is a complete mystery. 

I suspect that, in the grand scheme of things, this argument is almost completely irrelevant.

Just look at the map! It makes no sense at all. Still, fingers crossed, the gliding and skiing in NZ looks awesome and it saves me doing a PhD to emigrate.

Jk

It would be awesome to get a freedom of movement deal between the EU and Canada, Australia and New Zealand.   That is the sort of thing the UK should be arguing for instead of this Brexit nonsense.

No sense at all, apart from having the same language, head of state, close cultural ties, very cooperative military and intelligence agencies, broadly similar legal and political systems, membership of the commonwealth and, of course, hundreds of years of intertwined histories.

TBH, from a strategic perspective, the map makes perfect sense.

But about half the population would be in the UK - you'd be going from a 65 million person market to a 130 million person market where the EU gives you 500 million.

Also the distances are too large for many classes of goods,  the time zone difference to Australia makes providing services difficult and Canada is necessarily tied closely to the US which limits their ability to make other deals.

Getting something bulky from the EU compared with Australia is the difference between 90 minutes on a ship and a few weeks.  Visiting a customer in the EU compared with Australia is the difference between a day trip or one night in a hotel and a few hundred quid and 4 travel days, massive jetlag making you unproductive for days and several thousand quid in fares.

Closer trade ties to Australia/Canada and New Zealand and freedom of movement would be great but there is no way they are anything close to a substitute for the EU.   

I'm not sure anyone is making this claim. 

Very good idea unfortunately a majority of the British public seems to have a big problem with freedom of movement with neighbours that are already culturally and geographically closer, so I guess that's not going to happen any time soon.

That's a little bit of a stretch and your point seems to have been made more as a dig at Brexit rather than a true analysis of the CANZUK proposal. There is no disputing the geographical proximity of Europe but to suggest that it is culturally closer is a little less honest. 

I'd be really interested to find out how many UK citizens would be truly opposed to the CANZUK idea if it had any real possibility of coming to fruition?

As a citizen of Australia, Canada and the UK it works for me 

Works for me 'n all mate. Struggling to see a real downside.

I have not mentioned Brexit. I have mentioned opposition to free movement and substantial immigration.

Is it ? Having travelled extensively in all CANZUK countries as well as having lived in 4 different EU countries, I frankly don't see much difference on the aggregate across so regions, in fact I find that there are bigger and starker differences within countries that between countries

For ex an IT professional in Sidney and a financial analyst in London have probably more in common culturally than they have with respectively a farmer in the Scottish highlands and someone in an aboriginal community.

Unless you had noticed there has been a large backlash against immigration and free movement, most of the polls have indicated for several years that people in this country don't want free movement and want immigration reduced (Which indeed, has resulted in Brexit)

I suspect that if you ask people if they want the freedom to move to CANZUK countries they'll say yes, but if you ask them if we should have freedom of movement with other countries they'll say no. Which of course is incompatible.

Oh gimee a break. We are talking about collective culture.  Obviously if you break it down I have nothing in common with a single mum living in Hull but we speak the same language, have the same legal system, went through a similar education process etc. etc.

And then you are ignoring the racism in all of this. We are much more likely to accept freedom of movement where the predominant culture in all of the countries is closely aligned to our own.

Should I cancel my Canadian Citizenship test on Tuesday then?

Well even in this country we have several legal systems, different education systems, and different languages. Unfortunately many tend to forget that. But obviously culuture is a lot bigger than that.

You cannot not break it down.

That is not racism though. A weak form of homophilia is not the same as xenophobia.

Where it's a problem is when it starts to be exclusive, promotes mono identity or monoculture.

However for the reasons cited above I don't think you objectively can say that for ex, a Canadian would be closer culturally to the UK than say, a Dutch. 

I agree that many Brits might "perceive" Canada as closer culturally. But most of the time that's just:

1) ignorance of the diversity of cultures and identities in their own country, and in Canada

2) just plain old post imperialist nostalgia.

It's essentially a nationalist myth we tell ourselves.

I'm not going to Aus any time soon while they've still got those dinner-plate-sized spiders hanging out of trees in major cities. The UK in Sept/Oct is bad enough.

They kind of are: the Wikipedia page shows CANZUK as a trading block alongside the EU.

For what it is worth I think CANZEU would make more sense than CANZUK.   There is more in it for everyone trade wise.  Canada has cultural ties to France as well as the UK and already has a special deal with the EU and Australia has many immigrants from EU countries outside of the UK.   

Well ideally having freedom of movement with both EU and CANZUK, that would be great. 

Not the times we live in unfortunately.

It does seem to be a popular idea, this from the OP's link:-

"Opinion polling of 13,600 respondents from Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom conducted between January and March 2018 found increased support for reciprocal free trade and movement between the countries when compared to 2017, with support at 68% in the UK (up 4%); 73% in Australia (up 1%); 76% in Canada (down 1%) and 82% in New Zealand (up 1%)"

Probably not going to happen soon given how many in the metropolitan liberal establishment hate themselves for the very reasons the rest of us think this sounds like a good idea, because the liberal metropolitan establishment clearly doesn't care much for what the plebs think, even when they've asked them.
 

I think, like many remainers, you misunderstand the backlash. Most people have little problem with immigration per se, they have a problem with uncontrolled mass migration which offers nothing to them personally.

One of the big problems with EU migration is not a few German engineers and French entrepreneurs coming here, its hundreds of thousands of low skilled people from much poorer countries in the East which make it largely a one way street into what is already the most densely populated corner of Europe with all the problems that brings.

Freedom of movement under CANUK is not the same, wealth levels are broadly similar so along with strong historical, often family ties to these countries the migration would be much more balanced and it offers something to the British because lets face it, many more Brits would go and live in Europe if they could speak the language, this problem goes away under CANZUK.

I know you're keen to dismiss the historical and cultural links, but that's because despite having a piece of paper that says you're a UK citizen, at heart you clearly don't feel that British. Despite what you may protest to the contrary I have never seen you say anything even vaguely patriotic about Britain and as many others on here have noted, all you ever do is complain about us and tell us how wrong we are about everything. And of course your loyalty to Britain is such that as soon as you didn't get your own way you pissed off to Cypress for a life in the sun.

Just because you don't feel or even see those links, doesn't mean they don't exist.

What total arse bollocks this is.

I grew up in Cradley Heath but now live in a nice bit of Nottingham and have an office job and voted remain. Am I part of this amorphous liberal metropolitan establishment crap that you're on about?

Fine then, if that's your argument then you should be in favour of FoM for the French, the Dutch, and the Germans, who are as rich or richer as us.

We have lots of family ties with continental Europe as well. Millions of Brits live in Europe. Most of continental Europe speak English as a second language.

And here we go, the usual nationalistic argument. If you're not a patriot then you're just an evil foreigner.

Guess what many people in the UK, British born and bread, don't ever consider themselves British.

I have many good things to say about Britain but nothing good to say about those who want Britain to be mono-identity and mono-culture.

You said above your objection to immigration is about the practical aspect, but in that comment you make it clear that actually it's more about identity, loyalty. And patriotism.

Strawman, of course these links exists, I've not denied them - on the contrary - I'm simply saying that you have similar cultural  links with most of continental Europe.

For example, Cyprus was a British colony until the 60s, most people speak English, they are part of the commonwealth, have common law, wealth level are similar to the UK, the population is highly educated.

How would you justify offering FoM to Canada and not to Cyprus ?

The problem is that you are trying to force your identity on others. I have no problem with you feeling more cultural affinity with Canada than with say, Germany. That is as long as you also accept that some people may feel the opposite or differently.

If I'm part of the metropolitan liberal establishment, if there is such a thing, then I'm a datapoint that contradicts your view because I'm heavily in favour of CANZUK, in fact I've promoted the idea many times on here in the past.

However I don't see any logic, other than a identitarian one, in closing down FoM with the EU to then open it up with those countries.

Looks like a great idea!

We should extend it a bit further, though - perhaps using the stong ties between Quebec and France as a bridge to get it going.

You are in favour of FoM in CANUK as well as the EU because as you've stated before, you'd like to see freedom of movement accross the whole world which is frankly, absolute madness. But then you've also stated the the UK could easily cope with a doubling of its population without affecting quality of life which is even greater madness although that's exactly what would happen if all world borders were thrown open.

You seem to have missed the bit in my posts where I said most people would have little problem with German engineers and French entrpreneurs coming here. If the EU had introduced freedom of movement such that it was only permissable between countries whose wealth levels were similar it might not have been such a problem although even then, the fact that English is so widely spoken and so few Brits speak a foreign language means the movement would still have been skewed towards our direction.

My point about FoM in CANZUK is that similar levels of wealth, a common language and greater distances mean that it would be at manageable levels and balanced in all directions unlike the free for all we have seen in the EU.

You might live in a lala land where a UK population of 130 million is acceptable but personally it is overpopulation which is the biggest impediment to quality of life in this country and the biggest driver of that is net inward migration. One day a lot more people are going to wake up to this and think how the hell did we let this happen.

Your support for FoM is an ideological one and sod any consequences because in your metropolitan liberal bubble you are pretty well insulated from them. My more limited support of migration is grounded in the realities of dealing with sustainable population growth.

No, strawman. I'd like to see freedom of movement wherever possible and practical.

It is with the EU has we had it for 40 years without any major issues. And I suspect it's perfectly doable with CANZUK too.

That's completely true though, many countries have much higher density with similar or better quality of life.

Why ? Many Brits work in the EU and speak English at work. That's pretty much the case for most of the Brits I know who worked in the EU, and I know many.

Plus it's very easy and very beneficial to learn a foreign language. In fact the only way to be fluent is often to live in another country. Having FoM makes that easier, since you don't need to already learn the language before you move, it's gives you that oppprtunity.

What's your evidence to support that ?

Moreover, immigration from outside of the EU is higher than immigration from the EU.

As EU immigration fell after Brexit - the slack as entirely been taken by non-EU immigration - which btw is on average poorer and less educated.

About half is birth. You can easily fix overpopulation by not having kids. Surprisingly most people who worry about population growth are not so keen about not having kids. Hypocrisy is a terrible thing.

Actually I'm in contact with a lot of immigrants in my so called metropolitan "bubble", which is in fact the vast majority of immigration goes : in the big cities. So far from being insulated I'm in direct contact.

My position at least is consistent : I'm in favour of FoM wherever it is possible and practical, my default position is to allow for maximum individual freedom wherever we can.

You are in favour of FoM only when it's with countries that conform (in your head) to your identitarian ideal, which btw is not shared by large parts of the UK population let alone that of other countries.

I'd argue that it is your position, not mine, that is mostly ideological.

At least those who argue we should have no FoM with any country have somewhat a more reasonable position than yours.

We can all define that in different ways

What, like Monaco, Vatican City and Rwanda? What characterises almost all the more densely populated countries than England is that they are tiny islands, city states or shitholes, I wouldn't want to live in any of them and anyway, quality of life is subjective, hence I vote/campaign/ argue for what I prefer. Furthermore on the thread in which you argued for a doubling of the UK population absolutely nobody else agreed with you so I'm hardly alone in my view.

All that is true but the reality is that far fewer Brits go to work in Europe than vice versa and the lack of existing language skills and the percieved, if not real, difficulty of gaining them is one of the big barriers.

I know but it doesn't mean I'm happy about it and I certainly didn't vote for it. That's not a justification for allowing uncontrolled mass migration from the EU.

So would you advocate compulsory birth control? I'd support any government which nudged people in the direction of having fewer kids such as restricting child benefit to the first two but I don't think we should be in the business of enforcing a one child policy. And by the way, I don't have any children so no hypocrisy on my part.

I wasn't suggesting you were insulated from meeting migrants, but as a well paid professional you're well insulated from many of the negative impacts of mass migration of low skilled workers.

No, that's your incorrect interpretation of what I've said. My default position is I'm against freedom of movement but I'd find it acceptable, with suitable restrictions on claiming benefits, criminal backgrounds and so on when it doesn't result in unsustainable population growth.

Curiously I can´t think of anything I´ve ever bought from Canada, Australia or New Zealand and can´t think of anything I´d want to buy Don´t want to move there either.

Can you tell me more about the metropolitan liberal establishment, what do I have to do to join? As a remainer I feel ought to be a member but I've always thought of myself more of a pleb.

Happy to oblige

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_elite

with further information here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_elite#United_Kingdom_usage

You can decide for yourself if you tick the boxes.

Seems like a very small group of people, none of whom are currently in govt so probably not really relevant to this topic?

Well it's debatable whether they're in government (don't ask me to, I can't be arsed, especially if it means getting pinned up against the wall by Rom) but they certainly are in power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managerial_state

Anyway, just to lighten the mood, lets expand the definition with this Christmas quiz which you can take to see if you qualify

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/31/are-you-metropolitan-...

Happy Christmas

Be careful here.

Take a look at IMF 2017 figures for GDP per head at PPP here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita

These give the following comparisons:  NZ $38.5k, Czech $35.2k, Slovenia $34.0k, Slovakia $32.8k, Lithuania $31.9k, Estonia $31.4k, Poland $29.2k, Hungary $28.9k.

Yes, Eastern Europe is not yet at NZ levels (and NZ is the lowest rated CANZUK country) but I'm not sure these figures justify your "much poorer" contention. And the East European countries have been pretty consistently on an upward trend since joining the EU and are likely to continue that trend.

As for population densities, take a look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_and_population_of_European_countries

Netherlands 416/km^2, Belgium 374/km^2, UK 272/km^2, Luxembourg 233/km^2, Germany 232/km^2

OK, so you're correct if you were referring to all the above as our "corner of Europe" but I assumed you were referring to the UK alone.

And my impression is that EU migrants into UK are not generally "low skilled" They tend to be quite well-skilled people willing to do low-skilled work, at least initially, for more money than their skills attract in their own countries. 

I think perhaps the main attractiveness of allowing free movement of CANZ immigrants is that (a) they speak English and (b) they don't generally want to come here!

Martin

I accept that in time rates of migration within Europe will decline but unfortunately much of the harm of rapid population growth has been done, it could take decades for our infrastructure to catch up with the population so to speak and if it keeps on growing in the meantime that will take longer still.

As you say NZ is the poorest CANZUK country and not much ahead of the wealthiest Eastern Europeans but its still some way ahead. Given the distances involved we aren't going to see huge numbers of Kiwis arriving anytime soon like we have from the East and as I've said above, the common language means Brits are probably more likely to head to NZ than to the Czech republic hence its a two way street not the one way street we've been on.

As I live in England the more relevant figure is England's 427 people/km2, hence more dense than even the Netherlands. Personally I'd rather not use the most densly populated country as our yardstick, in this respect I definitely prefer the Norway option

Either way the net effect is the same, large quantities of cheap labour. Surely controls which admit the high skilled to do high skilled jobs whilst not allowing the low skilled who are a net drain on the economy is a far more sensible approach. It also prevents the brain drain of graduates from eastern Europe who would be of more benefit to them over there than they are here stacking shelves in Tescos.

strawman. I've never argued for doubling the UK population. I've argued that it is far from impossible, not the least by bringing up the density of our big cities 

That's barely the case though. There are about two millions Brits living in the EU and about 3 millions EU citizens in the UK. It's not a terrible imbalance. There is no guarantee that the balance would not flip at some point either, this has happened before.

I agree, generally speaking I think people should be left alone and given as much freedom as possible, including freedom of movement.

Where I grew up I was the only white boy in the whole neighbourhood, most of the neighbourhood were immigrants, and we were so poor we had to shit in a bucket cause we couldn't afford to fix the bog.

I'm not taking any more idiotic lessons about the liberal metropolitan elite nonense.

The country is full of EU immigrants who came here to take a low or medium skill job the time to build up language skills, and two three years later they are running their own business, or moving up the ranks, and end up paying tons of taxes and creating jobs and wealth for everybody.

That's basically the story of every single EU immigrant I know. 

its very short sighted to simply let in "high skilled" people, as if the governement has any clue anyway.

My first ever job in the UK was to wash dishes in a restaurant. 7 year later I made partner in one of the biggest consultancy in the UK, paying the top rate of tax, and went on to run my own business.

I would never been able to come at all with a skill based visa system. I probably wouldn't even have been able to afford the fee let alone qualify.

I believe the media has somewhat reinforced the perception of EU immigration as low skill. Only 15% of EU immigrants are in low skill jobs. Yet every time you see a report on EU immigration, they show you a bunch of folks picking strawberries or packing frozen food.

youtube.com/watch?v=HRvrU1FXtY0&

According to full fact there are 1.3m UK citizens in the EU, and 3.8m EU citizens here.  Well over 2m in combined Canada, Aus and NZ.  Far more despite moving to the EU being relatively extremely easy.

Fine. So what ? That's still a big share of expats going to the EU. Are they less worthy of consideration than those who move to CANZUK ?

Arguably securing FoM woth CANZUK would mean more emigration from the UK, since CANZUK are an attractive for Brits.

That would go a long way to reduce net migration and hence the concerns of those worried by overpopulation and pressure on services, and at the same time increase opportunities for Brits instead of reducing them.

So your facts are just wildly out.  Close to 3:1 is nothing like parity, it's a massive disparity.

Yes, most likely because of all the reasons the OP and others have said.

Since I had never said there was parity, no. I've said it's not a terrible imbalance. Which it really isn't, and it's meaningless frankly. 

There are much wider imbalances in population movement within the UK itself. What are going to do ? Break up the country and put hard borders everywhere until everybody stays where there are ?

So wouldn't that be a better way to deal with net migration ? Give more destinations options instead of reducing them ?