Is the EU youth mobility scheme finally going to happen?

Sean O’Grady looks at how such an arrangement could be managed – and why it’s suddenly being taken seriously by the government

Well-sourced reports suggest that the government is willing to introduce a “one in, one out” youth mobility scheme in partnership with the European Union. The idea would be that people aged 18 to 30 could travel to the UK on a work or educational visa, on a time-limited basis, and with reciprocity for their British counterparts.

It’s an idea that’s been discussed and periodically dismissed for some time, but with an EU-UK “Brexit reset” summit approaching next month, it could be that its time has come...

Why now?

As recently as February, the home secretary, Yvette Cooper, insisted in the House of Commons that such a scheme “is not our plan, and we are clear that net migration needs to come down”. What’s different now, perhaps, is that the EU has agreed to impose a quota on the scheme – a rumoured figure of 70,000 people – and a time limit of one year for the visas; and that, therefore, Cooper was prepared to consider the idea more seriously.

It also seems No 10 is exerting pressure to agree the youth mobility scheme in an effort to secure much more important concessions from the EU Commission on trade barriers, and from other European national leaders on defence, security and the “Coalition of the Willing” in Ukraine.

Why only a one-year visa?

Because it means that the flow (in both directions) wouldn’t inflate or otherwise distort the highly sensitive net migration figures. A relatively short visit also means that the scheme is less likely to be abused – or to be perceived, by its opponents, as being abused.

What are the objections?

Well, there is always scope for “gaming” any system, and the Conservatives, Reform UK and their allies in the press can be expected to highlight the risks – such as the visas being used to enter the UK and then “disappear”, or as a way to make an asylum claim (albeit perfectly legitimately in international law). There is also the cost of any use the visitors might make of the NHS or other public services; and the idea that they will provide unwelcome competition for young British people trying to find work. The allegation is that the EU wishes to “export” its youth unemployment.

Sooner or later, someone on the youth scheme visa will commit a serious offence; the headlines and the attacks on Labour will write themselves.

Who’s pressing for this scheme?

The EU, principally, which places a disproportionate value on something that feels pretty tokenistic. But also many in the Labour Party: 70 Labour MPs and peers have written this week to Nick Thomas-Symonds, minister for Europe, urging the introduction of such a time-limited, capped youth visa scheme.

Is it a ‘Brexit Betrayal’?

Only on the crudest of interpretations, and if you subscribe to the belief that the treaties signed by Boris Johnson in 2019 and 2020 were perfect.

The youth mobility scheme wasn’t even hinted at in the Labour election manifesto, but the relevant passage on Europe was just about flexible enough to accommodate such a limited initiative: “With Labour, Britain will stay outside of the EU. But to seize the opportunities ahead, we must make Brexit work. We will reset the relationship and seek to deepen ties with our European friends, neighbours and allies. That does not mean reopening the divisions of the past. There will be no return to the single market, the customs union, or freedom of movement.”

“Free movement” is not the same as “capped movement”, so it works. But just wait till the negotiations on fish get going again.

What’s in it for the Europeans?

To encounter the cream of Britain’s Byronic youth, embarking on the modern equivalent of the “Grand Tour” of continental antiquities enjoyed by so many aristocrats in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Who wins, politically?

The government, probably. A poll commissioned by Best for Britain a couple of months ago suggested that a majority (54 per cent) were in favour even if it was a four-year scheme, with two-thirds backing a two-year duration. So it would be popular, overall, even if it convinced more hardline Leavers that the Starmer administration was plotting to reverse Brexit (which would also in fact be fairly popular, especially if Donald Trump continues to spurn Britain’s “special relationship” with tariffs and threats to withdraw from Nato).

The more unpopular Brexit grows, the worse it is for the Conservatives and Reform UK.