This article says that the UK might be willing to sign up for a youth mobility scheme with the EU (for 18-30 year-olds) because it could boost economic growth: “by some estimates, it could do more for growth than planning reform and housebuilding combined”.
However, the article also says that the UK government thinks it would be a mistake to get too close to the EU, because this could serve the narrative of right-wing populists:
Downing Street believes that part of the appeal of both Trump and our homegrown [British] strain of rightwing populism lies in how institutions like the EU became too detached from the people they were meant to serve. In short, [the UK government is] determined not to be seen defending the status quo.
Thoughts?
I never understood why the torries thought implementing Brexit meant cutting all strings and burning each and every bridge though. They could’ve pursued a deal like Norway or Switzerland, if the vote was this narrow you could easily spin it as ‘we want to find a solution that makes everybody happy’.
They wanted to have their cake, and eat it, too. Maintain full access to the all benefits while giving nothing back in return. This includes burning all bridges, because nobody, especially not an alliance of 27 countries, is especially fond of being taken advantage of.
A Norwegian or Swiss style arrangement wouldn’t have worked with the Tories either, because access to the free market automatically signs you up to freedom of movement and acceptance of EU regulations, as well as mandatory contributions to the EU budget.