Australia and New Zealand will be first in line to sign a free trade agreement with the United Kingdom after it leaves the European Union, according to New Zealand’s Trade Minister.
Todd McClay has revealed New Zealand & Australia will be first in line for Brexit trade deals (photo: Financial Tribune)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
Addressing his followers on Twitter, Todd McClay confirmed that New Zealand and Australia would be the first to enter into a new arrangement with the UK when it leaves the European Union this month.
Mr McClay said: “For the first time, Liam Fox has confirmed New Zealand will be the first cab off the rank, along with Australia, when it comes to the new FTAs they do once they leave the European Union. "We’ve been working hard at this for the last six or seven months, and it is extremely pleasing to hear because it means once the UK leaves the EU we have the opportunity to negotiate a high-quality, comprehensive free trade agreement, that will guarantee a secure ongoing access for Kiwis and Kiwi exporters to the important UK market. “There’s still a lot more to do but our relationship with the United Kingdom is going from strength to strength.”
Mr McClay was speaking after he met with the UK's International Trade Secretary, Liam Fox, who asserted the importance that the UK places on its trading relationship with New Zealand.
The confirmation is significant news for CANZUK International's campaign, as multiple sources have confirmed that free trade agreements between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom will likely include immigration deals for visa liberalisation and freer movement.
Former Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, has already called for free movement between Australia and the UK as part of any post-Brexit free trade agreement, as has Australia's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, Alexander Downer.
CANZUK International will continue to work with senior government officials and diplomats throughout the Brexit process to ensure trade and immigration deals are secured between the CANZUK nations following the UK's withdrawal from the European Union.
For decades, the UK has discriminated in its immigration policies, depending upon where the immigrant was from. It has been easier to get into the UK if you were from, say, France than if you were from, say, Somalia. We thus have no deep-seated objection to discriminating between countries.
Research indicates that more UK citizens favour free movement with Australia, Canada and New Zealand than the EU
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by Andrew Lilico - The Telegraph
We are now leaving the EU. There appear to be two broad schools of thought on how our post-Brexit immigration policies should work. According to one idea, we should take the opportunity of Brexit to be completely non-discriminating, treating immigrants from all countries in the same way.
According to the other idea, we should continue to give favourable treatment to immigrants from the EU, just not as favourable, relative to other countries, as we have had up to now.
But why are these the only two options? Why couldn’t we have more favourable treatment for immigrants from some other countries than the EU? Folk say: “Voters want immigration from everywhere curtailed.” But that just isn’t true.
Specifically, last year the Royal Commonwealth Society conducted a survey of views on whether there should be completely free movement between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK (the so-called “CANZUK” countries). That found three to one support in the UK, among those with an opinion (58 per cent including those “unsure”) for free movement within CANZUK. (Support was, incidentally, even higher among those in the other CANZUK states: five to one in Canada, seven to one in Australia, and eight to one in New Zealand.)
We do not currently have free movement within CANZUK. So, far from UK voters wanting a crackdown on immigration from the CANZUK countries (which, for example, the British government is doing from this April within its £1,000 per worker, per year “immigration skills charge”), voters actually want the rules relaxed!
We seem queasy about saying it, but voters do not regard immigration from all countries as the same. Our policy has not regarded it as the same, either, for decades, if ever. So the question is not really “is it legitimate to discriminate?” The real question is: “which countries do we want to discriminate in favour of?”
Perhaps three easy examples of countries Britons are happy to discriminate in favour of are Man, Guernsey and Ireland. Folk coming from these places may or may not see Britain as “foreign”; Britons don’t see folk from those places as foreign and our immigration laws with respect to them are as relaxed as it is possible to be. Indeed, folk from Man and Guernsey are even given UK Citizenship.
But are folk from New Zealand, say, really any more “foreigners” in Britain than are folk from Man or Guernsey or Ireland? The Irish are arguably much more foreign. After all, New Zealand still uses the Queen, and has sided with Britain in just about every military conflict going — including some where everyone else abandoned us.
It’s clear from the opinion polls that Britons regard Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders qualitatively differently from folk of every other country.
For example, in 2011, YouGov did a survey for Chatham House of “British Attitudes Towards the UK’s International Priorities”. One of the questions asked of the British survey respondents was “which of the following countries, if any, do you feel especially favourable towards?” It wasn’t close.
48 per cent said they felt especially favourable towards Australia, 47 per cent towards New Zealand and 44 per cent towards Canada. The next most favourably regarded country, the US, was way behind on 31 per cent.
Over 82% of the New Zealand population favours free movement with Australia, Canada & the UK (photo: awesometravel.co.za)
In Europe, even the most well-regarded states, the Netherlands and Sweden, trailed badly on 24 and 23 per cent. (Ireland was only 18 per cent.)
And note that while direct familial connection and perhaps the sense that folk in these countries are similar in status to British ex-pats are surely key factors in positive British sentiment, it isn’t about race. In the case of New Zealand, around 20 per cent of the population are Maoris or Pacific Islanders and a further 10 per cent are “Asian” — a “non-white” population of over 30 per cent, well in excess of that in, say, the Netherlands (12 per cent) or France (15 per cent), let alone Poland (where well over 99 per cent of the population is “white”).
If Britons just wanted relationships with “white” countries they’d be very keen on Polish immigrants and seeking to crack down on immigration by New Zealanders. But in fact exactly the opposite is true.
Britons don’t think of CANZUK countries in the same way they think of any other countries in the world, and they don’t want to restrict immigration from these countries.
So why, if restrictions on immigration are supposedly a response to public clamour, are we restricting immigration from countries that the public wants free movement with and regards as our closest kin in the world?
As the United Kingdom prepares to begin its formal negotiations to leave the European Union, the British government is looking to the Commonwealth for new business opportunities, and reports indicate that Canada is at the front of the queue.
Canada has already expressed great interest in striking Brexit trade agreements with the UK (photo: toutdz)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
Global News Network in Canada is reporting that Canada is "at the front of the queue" for post-Brexit trade deals, following the first ever Commonwealth Trade Ministers' Meeting in London last week.
The report affirms that CANZUK countries are top priority for the UK government, as Canada will now join Australia and New Zealand in being the first to establish trade deals following the UK's departure from the European Union.
Trade Ministers from 30 Commonwealth countries met to discuss upcoming trade negotiations, with Canada represented by its Minister of International Trade François-Philippe Champagne. Reports suggest that discussions were productive, with tremendous support for trade agreements advocated by the UK's Secretary for International Trade, Liam Fox.
A recent poll in the UK asked 500 companies which of the 52 Commonwealth countries should take priority in trade talks. Overall, Australia came first, followed by Canada and Singapore. But Canada was the top choice for London-based businesses.
“We view (Brexit) as an opportunity for Canadian companies to enter UK supply chains,” said Stephen Wilhelm of Export Development Canada, which opened an office in London last year.
“If we can get Canadian companies into UK supply chains, they may in fact benefit from UK companies looking to grow internationally, including those who have before been primarily reliant on the EU.”
Wilhelm noted that Canadian and British officials already have a blueprint for future trade talks, as Canada signed CETA (the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement) with the European Union last year, which will remove 98% of tarrifs.
However, upon invoking Article 50, the United Kingdom will no longer be a party to CETA, allowing the government to negotiate its own trade deals with Canada, which will likely include immigration deals promoting visa liberalisation and freer movement.
There are over 1100 Canadian companies currently operating in the UK, all of whom will be eager for trade neogitations to begin as soon as possible. However, official discussions for a Canada-UK trade agreement will likely have to wait until after the Brexit negotiations are complete. The formal talks are expected to begin by the end of March and last up to two years.
A leading presenter for LBC Radio in the United Kingdom has endorsed CANZUK freedom of movement, following former Prime Minister of Australia, Tony Abbott, calling for free movement between Australia and the UK last week.
Maajid Nawaz expressed his support for CANZUK free movement on LBC Radio this week (photo: LBC Radio UK)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
Speaking on his show, Maajid Nawaz explained why he supported Tony Abbott's proposals for free movement, which would allow citizens to travel freely between Australia and the UK with unrestricted living and working rights:
"If you make it very clear that it’s for work and not for welfare, you have the flexibility with free movement because the jobs market is in flux, its flexible..."
The issue of free movement became a hot topic this week, as the UK government confirmed that Australia and New Zealand are first in line for post-Brexit trade deals, which are likely to include agreements involving visa liberalisation and freer movement.
Canada is also prioritised for post-Brexit agreements once UK Prime Minister, Theresa May, invokes Article 50 (the process required to formally leave the European Union) later this month.
"With certain countries, if you opened up a free jobs market relationship with those countries, and said ''you can come here for work and not for welfare'', that would satisfy both the Brexiteers and the relationship that the Remainers wanted with the EU (but instead with other countries)”, Nawaz said.
CANZUK International will be meeting with senior government officials this month to ensure that CANZUK free movement is a priority policy for the UK government once withdrawal from the European Union is implemented. Updates regarding our progress will be published via our social media accounts.
CANZUK International's online petition, advocating the free movement of citizens between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, has received over 180,000 signatures (and is continuing to rise).
Over 180,000 people have signed our online petition promoting CANZUK freedom of movement
Our support is growing rapidly every day, and members of the public (as well as high-profile politicians and diplomats) are pledging their support for visa free/work permit free travel for citizens between the CANZUK nations.
Our petition is also one of the most viewed petitions on Change.org this month, as thousands of people have signed and shared online, demonstrating huge support for our proposals across the world and promoting our cause as one of the fastest growing issues within international politics.
The campaign is making tremendous progress, and we are determined to continue increasing our awareness so free movement will be adopted as official immigration policy of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.
However, we can only achieve this with your continued support…
Sign and share our online petition– with over 180,000 signatures, our petition is being viewed daily by politicians, diplomats and government officials across the world. The more signatures we receive, the more we demonstrate global support for our initiative, providing a mandate for our respective governments to adopt free movement as official immigration policy.
Donate - we rely solely on financial donations from the general public to ensure that free movement between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom is recognised and discussed among MPs, senior government officials and diplomats.
Contact your local MP– change within our parliaments begins with parliamentary members drafting Bills and promoting causes which the public support. By writing to your local MP, you are asking them to represent your voice in parliament and advocate CANZUK free movement within their respective national governments.
For details about contacting your local Member of Parliament,please click here.
We sincerely appreciate all support and efforts made to promote freedom of movement between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, and with your help, CANZUK International will continue to advocate, and achieve, free movement policies between these four countries.
The latest "Best Countries" rankings published by U.S. News have revealed Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom stand out as the top countries in the world for quality of life, wealth and economic opportunity.
U.S. News ranks the CANZUK countries as the highest quality of life in the world (photo: U.S. News)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
More than 80 countries were surveyed across 24 rankings, determining each country's "Adventure, Citizenship, Cultural Influence, Entrepreneurship, Heritage, Movers, Open for Business, Power and Quality of Life".
Canada scored the highest of the CANZUK nations, placing 2nd overall, with the United Kingdom 3rd, Australia 8th and New Zealand 14th.
Each of the CANZUK nations placed higher than many other highly developed countries around the world, including Italy, Luxembourg, Austria, Ireland, China and Russia.
Switzerland came out top of the rankings, boasting a GDP of $701 billion, a GDP per capita of $58,647 and a population of 8.3 million people.
CANZUK International campaigns for greater economic growth and prosperity between the CANZUK nations through free trade and free movement agreements, and the latest rankings from U.S. News confirm that such prosperity would be achieved through economic and diplomatic arrangements.
Taking an average of the rankings from Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK places the CANZUK countries 6th, ahead of major regional powers such as Sweden, the United States of America, France, Norway and Denmark.
Through greater cooperation, achievable via free trade, free movement and foreign policy coordination, the CANZUK nations can not only enhance their global influence within the international community, but develop greater prosperity, business opportunities and quality of life for each of their citizens.
After the British public’s historic referendum vote of June 2016, and months of speculation, debate and uncertainty, Theresa May’s government has invoked Article 50. Brexiteers will be overcome with joy, whilst Remainers will be dismayed at the thought of severing ties with our European neighbours.
Theresa May signs the letter instigating Article 50 and Brexit proceedings (photo: Jay Allen)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
As the old saying goes, however, "what’s done is done"– our nation may be divided on the issue, but we’re leaving the European Union.
But what if, in the wake of Brexit, an initiative were proposed that offered economic and social prosperity for us all outside of the EU? What if Britain had the chance to take the lead on the most politically progressive project the world has ever seen, guaranteeing us (and future generations) the opportunity to live, work and study abroad, reunite with family and friends thousands of miles away, and reap the benefits of a global footprint through our ties with other Commonwealth nations?
A proposal too good to be true? Not in the slightest, because all of this is achievable through greater cooperation with Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
CANZUK International is a leading advocacy group campaigning for free trade, freedom of movement and a coordinated foreign policy for Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom (the CANZUK countries).
Our proposals have gained credible support since our founding. Over 180,000 people have signed our petition calling for free movement between these nations, and our campaign has received the backing of numerous politicians and diplomats across the world.
Of course, there are those who will say our objectives shouldn’t be pursued, but allow me to explain why introducing free trade and free movement solely between the CANZUK nations would be the best thing for the UK and our Commonwealth partners.
Before the UK joined the European Economic Community in 1973, we shared our borders with Australia, New Zealand and Canada; and each citizen of these nations was free to live and work in the UK (and vice-versa). Our countries cooperated harmoniously with a mutual understanding that all of our citizens were welcome, and in return we reaped the economic and social benefits of open borders and reciprocal rights to ‘indefinitely remain’.
Post-Brexit, we have the chance to reap those benefits once more.
Collectively, we would have the fourth largest economic area in the world, a combined GDP of $5.7 trillion, a GDP per capita value higher than that of the United States, and an unemployment rate of under 6 per cent.
More so, citizens of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom would have the opportunity to work, study and reside freely within this kindred group of countries, whilst our businesses recruit the best international talent without the cost, risk and often lengthy delays experienced under present immigration controls.
And we only need to look to the EU for inspiration. If 28 member states with 508 million people, over 60 different languages and numerous cultures and backgrounds can afford the rights to free movement and free trade for their citizens, then why can’t we?
We are four, kindred, independent nations which share a Sovereign, the common law legal system, a venerable parliamentary tradition, and the English language – why should we ignore the outstanding post-Brexit opportunities available to us?
Our CANZUK partners are also eager to cooperate. A recent international poll found that 70 per cent of Australians, 75 per cent of Canadians and 82 per cent of New Zealanders would embrace a free movement initiative between our nations, all the while retaining our sovereignty and independence which the European Union could not afford us.
Former Prime Minister of Australia, Tony Abbott, has openly called for free trade and movement, reiterating Boris Johnson’s appeal for a ‘bilateral mobility zone’. Numerous MPs in Canada, such as Erin O’Toole and Andrew Scheer, have also backed free movement between the CANZUK countries, with support reciprocated by New Zealand’s ACT party leader, David Seymour.
Boris Johnson MP has publicly favoured CANZUK free movement over EU free movement (photo: Reuters/Benoit Tessier)
But where free trade would open our economy to growth and prosperity, would free movement for our citizens pose international security risks? Not at all.
As our four countries operate under the highly-effective ‘Five Eyes’ Intelligence Alliance (together with the US), there would be a natural mechanism for monitoring security threats, nullifying any risk that free movement might facilitate cross-border criminal activity and terrorism.
Our countries have always stood together throughout history as the leading nations of the Commonwealth and, to this day, our citizens share cultural and historical ties that cannot be replicated anywhere else in the world. Working together would give the CANZUK nations a truly global footprint in the realms of commerce and diplomacy.
Now that we are leaving the European Union, we can advance the ever-growing diplomatic, economic and political connections that we already share through our Commonwealth ties, and embrace the countless benefits that free trade, freedom of movement and a coordinated foreign policy for Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom would bring.
There is a long road ahead for the UK with its negotiations, but with our closest Commonwealth allies extending their hands in friendship, our future will be one of prosperity and opportunity.
Writing exclusively for CANZUK International, Australian Senator, Eric Abetz, explains how the UK's departure from the European Union presents a tremendous opportunity for Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom to unite under free trade and freedom of movement.
Australia & the UK have already accepted priority negotiations with each other following Brexit (photo: Aly Song)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by Eric Abetz MP
Today marks an important day as British Prime Minister Theresa May triggers Article 50 to formally commence the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union. This is an important moment in the history of western democracy and a win for the ordinary men and women of the United Kingdom who, with their largest ever democratic mandate, stood up to the political elite.
I have long been an advocate of free trade, and in particular freer people movement, between Australia and the United Kingdom. Indeed, on the sidelines of the G20 in my role as Australian Employment Minister, I directly raised the matter with my counterpart who similarly saw the opportunity but advised that it would be impossible due to their membership of the European Union.
Now that the United Kingdom has formally commenced the process for Brexit, I believe that there is a strong opportunity not only for Australia and the United Kingdom, but also for a stronger alliance including Canada and New Zealand.
There are many things that bind Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the United Kingdom – be it a similar heritage, adoption of the Westminster system of Government, all as members of the Five Eyes security group and all as members of the Commonwealth.
On every measure, we are all each other’s closest cultural, social, security, economic and societal partners and so it makes good sense for our four nations to come together and strike an historic multilateral agreement. We value the virtues of the inalienable freedoms, our societies and institutions were founded on the same world view which makes us the envy of the rest of the world.
While most Free Trade Agreements include trade-offs, because of our shared heritage, security intelligence and familial ties, such an agreement could uniquely benefit all nations without too much of a trade-off. For instance, right now in the United Kingdom there is expedited screening for entry into the country for EU passport holders, there’s no reason why this treatment couldn’t extend to CANZUK nations especially given the shared security information.
All of our nations have a high level of people movement yet streamlined visas and work rights are adhoc. These processes could be simplified and permit more opportunities for participants to work across our countries and hopefully especially for young people.
While there is still a path to travel on any potential multilateral agreement, today marks an exciting first step to both seeing the will of the people executed but to countless opportunities that could arise as a result.
I for one hope that the United Kingdom, along with Canada, New Zealand and Australia embrace and move towards a CANZUK agreement which, I believe, would be the envy of the world.
Eric Abetz is a Senator for Tasmania in the Australian Parliament and a former Leader of the Government in the Australian Senate.
The latest research from CANZUK International shows widespread support in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom for free movement between the CANZUK nations.
A vast majority of those surveyed in the CANZUK countries support freedom of movement
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
The survey was conducted over 15 days among 2,000 participants in each of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Participants were asked the following question:
UK example:"At present, citizens of the European Union have the right to live and work in other European Union countries. Would you support or oppose similar rights for UK citizens to live and work in Canada, Australia and New Zealand, with citizens of Canada, Australia and New Zealand granted reciprocal rights to live and work in the UK? If adopted, said rights would also encompass certain limitations upon citizens claiming tax-funded payments (eg: disability benefits, unemployment benefits, child tax credits, etc)."
A vast majority of those polled were in favour of free movement within the CANZUK countries, with 64% support in the UK, 72% support in Australia, 77% support in Canada and 81% support in New Zealand.
CANZUK International will be submitting the survey results to Members of Parliament in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, encouraging negotiations between the national governments to implement freedom of movement for citizens of the CANZUK countries.
We will also be meeting with senior government officials in the coming weeks to ensure free trade, freedom of movement and foreign policy cooperation are discussed as part of upcoming trade negotiations, following the United Kingdom's declaration of withdrawal from the European Union in March 2017.
The campaign surrounding CANZUK focuses primarily on free movement and free trade. But what other policies could a union between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom advocate?
The CANZUK nations could work towards trade, transport and environmental measures, as well as free movement
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by Andrew Lilico
Geopolitical partnerships must start somewhere. What we today call the “European Union” began with a series of so-called “communities” agreements.
First, in 1951, there was the European Coal and Steel Community. Then there were proposals for a “European Defence Community” and a “European Political Community”. When the European Defence Community proposal was abandoned, attention switched to the “European Atomic Energy Community” and the “European Economic Community”. From 1967 these and the European Coal and Steel Community were combined into the “European Communities”.
In the case of CANZUK, the most natural start-points are probably not coal and steel or atomic energy. Instead, we would begin with a free trade agreement, a migration agreement and a defence and security partnership. But it is important to understand that the merits of CANZUK deals in these areas are not stand-alone.
For example, in the UK, folk ask why one should consider a CANZUK deal any sort of priority when the UK’s total trade with CANZUK constitutes around 3 per cent of its trade, whereas trade with the EU is about 40 per cent and trade with the US around 15 per cent.
One reason not to be neglected is that trade within CANZUK could grow. When the UK joined the EEC in the early 1970s, the EEC6 constituted only around 16 per cent of UK trade; today it’s around twice that.
A further reason is that CANZUK itself could add extra members, as the EEC did.
But a more fundamental reason is that CANZUK is not, any more than the EEC or the Warsaw Pact or many other such arrangements have been, mainly a trade deal. Instead, the CANZUK trade deal would be just one component of a much broader geopolitical partnership.
What is a “geopolitical partnership”, though, in more concrete terms? It is an agreement (perhaps never quite stated explicitly) to work together over a range of globally relevant issues, so that by working together the partners can achieve more than they could by working alone.
To get things going, one must begin in areas that the populations and politicians of the countries concerned see concrete gains from. France and Germany had obvious reasons for seeing initial potential to cooperate together in coal and steel and food production. Once that got going, there were other clear gains in facing down Communists in Eastern Europe and in absorbing post-dictatorship states in Southern Europe.
The modern world and the nature of their economies and populations and histories means that the initial interests of CANZUK are different. They are all natural free trade advocates internationally, so a joint free trade deal is something concrete to begin with.
The populations are all heavily in favour of joint migration freedom and see very concrete personal gains in that (gains that would be mutual, with emigration opportunities being just as important as immigration ones, unlike many migration agreements which are mainly about “how many immigrants do we accept”), so a joint migration deal is another obvious step.
History and existing partnerships such as the Five Eyes, in combination with a desire, particularly on the parts of Canada and Australia to be able to defend themselves without total reliance upon the US, makes a security partnership covering defence, terrorism and areas such as cybercrime an obvious next extension.
But a CANZUK geopolitical partnership would not and should not stop there. Much of its purpose and advantage would lie in its being able to go vastly beyond the simpler free trade deals or NATO-style defence agreements others can participate in. Because of its very similar and interoperable legal systems, business cultures, regulatory frameworks and other natural affinities, cooperation could extend to many other areas.
Here are a few:
Patent and other intellectual property agreements
Here there are important international distinctions, and CANZUK members may wish to coordinate. For example, Canada and Australia have a twelve month “grace period” between when an invention can be revealed to the world and when it is no longer considered novel if no patent has been filed; the UK currently does not.
Global environmental agreements
In the past there have been very successful environmental accords over issues such as Acid Rain and Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Recent attention has focused upon problems with securing international agreements over carbon emissions and the collapse of international cooperation, of which, the Trump administration's drastic budgetary cuts are merely the most recent symptom. But that should not lead us to the conclusion that we cannot, in the future, secure global agreements as important and successful as those regarding Acid Rain or CFCs.
Even in respect of CO2-related climate change, if global warming resumes in due course as predicted, there will need to be work done on adaptation. There will also be issues for which CANZUK members will have specific and globally unusual interests, such as the rules that should apply if the Arctic or Antarctic have much less ice and offer more scope for commercial exploitation.
Defence agreements may even be important — e.g. enforcing Canadian claims to the North-West Passage, protecting shipping crossing an ice-free Arctic from piracy, or protecting the Antarctic from poachers.
And there will be new environmental challenges and deals to cut in the future that we cannot even imagine today, to which CANZUK members would offer important inputs.
Agreements concerning global capital movements
Just as CANZUK countries will have a natural interest in the mutual flow of labour, so too will they naturally be interested in the flow of capital. The UK, for example, is already a major investor in other CANZUK states.
One area for natural agreement concerns international financial regulation. There are global bodies at which such regulation is set, such as the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). With their similar regulatory philosophies and attitudes to the relative roles and responsibilities of the market and government, CANZUK countries would make very natural allies at these international forums, and might even find caucusing attractive in due course.
Other relevant questions on which CANZUK might work include agreements over tax avoidance, where the OECD coordinates agreements such as the “Base erosion and profit shifting” (BEPS) programme or broader investment agreements.
One area where there might be natural scope for a CANZUK-specific arrangement (as opposed to joint or coordinated CANZUK input into global agreements) would be takeover codes. Governments are often suspicious of foreign takeovers. CANZUK states have tended to be rather more open to foreign capital. But even CANZUK states can be suspicious of foreign takeovers under certain circumstances.
For example, in the UK in 2016, there were doubts about whether it was appropriate to allow a Chinese takeover of a UK energy company, because of the strategic threat this might present if relations with China were to deteriorate. By contrast, it should be straightforward for CANZUK members to have an agreement to deem takeovers by firms from CANZUK states to be treated exactly the same as domestic takeovers.
CANZUK nations could cooperate on foreign policy issues once free trade agreements are finalised (photo: Canada PM)
Agreements concerning the internet
Given their geographic separation, CANZUK members would have a natural interest in how the internet is managed and policed. They might, for example, offer joint views on technical standards and protocols, or on rules for the authorisation of payment systems.
Agreements concerning air transport and space transport
Given their geographical separation, CANZUK states would have an obvious interest in high-speed transport systems such as air (or, in the future, space or even hyperloop) transport. They might therefore make agreements amongst themselves or participate jointly in international accords in these areas.
They might also jointly sponsor relevant research — e.g. into hyperloop or space-plane systems. One potentially relevant point to note is that transport systems evolve to serve needs just as much as their innovation creates possible wants. If it became advantageous to get from Montreal to Sydney in four hours, there would naturally be much more research conducted into how best to do it.
Agreements concerning space exploration and the commercial exploitation of space
There is a joint European Space Agency. It is natural to imagine that a CANZUK geopolitical partnership would, similarly, coordinate some of its space exploration and commercial space exploitation efforts, exploiting some of the natural complementarities between CANZUK members — e.g. Canada has a very strong position in space-based radar technologies whilst the UK is strong in satellite technologies and has recently opened the Institute for Space and Earth Observation in Leicester, whilst Australia offers unique geographical positional resources for launch and downlink.
Sponsorship of culture and the arts
One of the attractions of CANZUK is its shared culture. Each of the individual countries has its own specificities, of course. Welsh, French and Maori speakers are just a few examples of CANZUK’s linguistic diversity. Scotland has its own Parliament and separate legal system, whilst the First Nations and the Aboriginal Australians have their own special statuses and unique histories. And there are also other important communities such as the Pacific Islanders in New Zealand or the British Jews.
But despite having this richness to call upon, there remains nonetheless a set of core similarities to CANZUK culture that we recognise — humour; music; films; drama. Britons watch New Zealand daytime soap operas, put Australian singles to Number One and laugh heartily at Canadian comedians. The same is true across CANZUK.
This shared understanding and appreciation of culture would make it natural to have joint sponsorship of cultural events — music festivals, fine art, modern art, authors, interpretative dance and so on.
Conclusion
To get CANZUK going it will need to have achievable first steps that deliver concrete gains for the politicians and populations of the members. The easiest to understand are probably a free trade agreement, a migration agreement and a defence and security partnership.
But we should think of CANZUK as a geopolitical partnership that provides us with the potential for many forms of coordination and joint action, across a wide range of economic, political, scientific and cultural life. I have sketched just a few areas here. Others could sketch more.
CANZUK International has published an infographic and policy outline document explaining the benefits of free trade, freedom of movement and foreign policy cooperation between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.
CANZUK International's new infographic explains the benefits of free movement between the CANZUK countries
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
The 8 page infographic explains how freedom of movement would be implemented between the CANZUK countries, while the 2 page policy outline document explains CANZUK International's proposals regarding free trade, foreign policy cooperation and constitutional affairs.
Both documents have been submitted to Members of Parliament within Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, with multiple media outlets covering our proposals for the CANZUK countries.
The documents are free to download and are also available via our Research & Publications section.
Canada wants to strike a trade deal with the U.K. very soon after Britain has left the European Union, and financial services will be part of the discussion, Finance Minister Bill Morneau said this week.
Canadian Finance Minister, Bill Morneau, has stated Canada's intentions for post-Brexit trade deals (photo: The Canadian Press)
Written by Alex Morales - Bloomberg
While dialogue with British officials will continue during the U.K.’s two years of talks to extricate itself from the 28-nation bloc, Canada will be “respectful” of the Brexit process, Morneau said at an event in London organized by the Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum. Under EU rules, Britain isn’t allowed to negotiate its own trade deals while still a member of the bloc.
Morneau’s comments will be a boost to Prime Minister Theresa May and International Trade Secretary Liam Fox, who are trying to show that Britain remains attractive to businesses even as it withdraws from the world’s biggest trading bloc. Fox has portrayed Britain as a champion of free trade in an era where protectionism is creeping back around the world.
Asked how quickly an agreement between Canada and the U.K. could happen, Morneau said: “I just can’t tell you what ‘rapidly’ is because there are too many things that I don’t know” about the shape of the eventual U.K.-EU deal.
The EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, or CETA, would be a “reasonable basis” for a starting point on any new trade deal with Britain, Morneau said.
Canada has about C$35 billion ($26.2 billion) of pension funds invested in Britain, some 1,100 Canadian companies have investments in the U.K. and they will “most certainly” still consider Britain an attractive place to invest post-Brexit, he said.
Morneau said that while many Canadian companies that use the U.K. as a base to do business in the EU will find that “the opportunities will be equally as good as they are today” after Brexit, “there could be some potential business sectors that feel that that’s no longer the perfect business strategy.”
CANZUK International Adviser, Andrew Lilico, explains why identity and common global interests are more important to a geopolitical partnership such as CANZUK than internal trade.
There are many reasons, aside from trade, why a CANZUK partnership would succeed (photo: Fabrice Coffrini/AFP/Getty Images)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by Andrew Lilico - Reaction.Life
In Douglas Dowell’s piece, Sentiments and statistics: why CANZUK won’t fly, he sets out the proportions of exports to CANZUK members relative to the total exports of each CANZUK member, showing that in all cases except New Zealand’s, CANZUK states are not amongst the top few export destinations for CANZUK exporters. He also considers the defence priorities of CANZUK states and shows that they are not currently aligned.
Since Douglas’ piece has garnered a bit of interest, it’s perhaps worth explaining where his argument goes wrong. A first, minor point is that he says re the UK “even if you doubled our trade with Canada, Australia and New Zealand, it’s never going to be anywhere near enough to make up for the hit to our European trade”; and re Canada “In Canada’s case, it’s quite obvious that nothing and no-one could match the scale of US trade”. But he’s mistaken in thinking the CANZUK partnership is intended to lead to the wholesale replacement of other trade with CANZUK trade.
A second point is that the fact one already trades with an economy is not a good argument that the main scope for extra trade is in that same place. In the case of the UK, for example, exports to the Single Market were around 55 per cent of total exports in the mid-2000s, are now down to a little over 40 per cent, and by 2030 will have fallen to around 33 per cent. Exports are growing faster to the rest of the world than to the market where they are already largest.
There is considerable scope for trade within CANZUK to grow. In the early 1970s, before the UK entered the EU, around 9.5 per cent of its exports were to the other CANZUK states and around 21 per cent was to the EEC6. The CANZ states grew 38 per cent more than the EEC6 did between 1970 and 2015, so one might have expected trade with CANZ to rise proportionately. Yet whilst the proportion of exports to the EEC6 grew to 28 per cent, to CANZ it fell to 3 per cent. One could certainly imagine intra-CANZUK trade quadrupling or more.
An additional minor trade-related point is that, just as the EEC added members over time, after an initial few decades with a core few to get itself established, CANZUK might do the same.
But let us move on to the more substantive errors in Douglas’ analysis. The most fundamental of these is the idea that countries choose their closest allies on the basis of whom they trade with most. For example, we can repeat Douglas’ exercise, but this time for China.
We can see here that the US and the EU are, by a long way, China’s most significant export partners. Does that mean that the US and EU are China’s closest allies? No. Because countries do not pick their closest partners on this basis.
Within the EU, the UK faced being dominated by the Eurozone. Canada faces domination by the US. Should China expand its influence in the Pacific region, Australia and New Zealand would face challenges there. The argument that a country must choose its geopolitical partners on the basis of whom it currently trades most with, even if that leads to domination, was one of the core arguments offered by the Remain campaign during the EU referendum – and it was rejected.
A further flaw in Douglas’ analysis is illustrated by his own graphs. His core argument is that a CANZUK partnership would be small beer and that all the CANZUK states should prioritise others. Intuition alone should have told him there was something wrong with that thought, given that the CANZUK states would be the world’s fourth largest economic zone. One quite obvious thing wrong with it is that the CANZUK states all trade significant volumes internationally. In 2015 their total trade was worth US$2.4 trillion. And as Douglas’ charts show, for all of them the US, EU and China are significant trade partners. They thus have a shared interest in the trade rules that will apply to all of them when they export to the US, EU and China. More generally, CANZUK will allow its members to collaborate in global fora.
Douglas’ thinking is dominated by an EU-type mindset, in which there is an implicit objective of internal self-sufficiency and internal prioritization – that the key question is how much we trade with each other, not how we all trade with the rest of the world.
Douglas adds some discussion of the defence priorities of CANZUK members. He shows that their current priorities are not aligned. Indeed they are not. That is why a new defence CANZUK agreement would be a change, not simply a continuation of the status quo. I think Douglas’ point is that he cannot see why CANZUK states would want to change their priorities. But that simply means he cannot see the merits of CANZUK states regarding each other as part of “us”, so that they would be interested in promoting each others’ interests as well as (perhaps even as much as) their own.
One reason for that might be the aspect of the core three CANZUK foundation blocks that Douglas did not touch upon: a migration agreement. The sense in which CANZUK citizens regard each others’ countries as much more alike than elsewhere in the world, and thus much more suitable as a place to settle, might naturally be mirrored in international cooperation over trade and defence. CANZUK citizens regard each others’ countries as (something close to) “us”. That is the most fundamental reason why a defence partnership makes sense.
Let’s back that up with some data. First, actual migration. UK citizens do move to the EU and US to live and work. There are around 1.2 million UK citizens living in the EU, and around 760,000 living in the US. But that is dwarfed by UK citizens moving to other CANZUK states. There are 1.3 million UK ex-pats in Australia, 670,000 in Canada and 310,000 in New Zealand. That is 2.3 million UK ex-pats elsewhere in CANZUK (about 45 per cent of all UK ex-pats), nearly twice as many as in the EU27 and three times as many as in the US — even though the population of the US is more than five times that of CANZ. Of 600,000 New Zealanders living abroad, around 90 per cent live elsewhere in CANZUK. For Australia, the figure is about 22 per cent, with the UK as the single largest destination. The key exception here is Canada, where of 2.8 million ex-pats, 1.1 million are in the US, with the UK only third.
UK voters regard folk from Canada, Australia and New Zealand qualitatively differently from those from other countries. A 2011 survey by the research firm YouGov found that Australia, New Zealand and Canada are regarded as “especially favourable” by 48, 47 and 44 per cent of Britons. The next most-favoured country, the U.S., was way behind at 31 per cent, and the most-favoured EU member, the Netherlands, had only half the favourability of those three countries, at 24 per cent. An as we can see in YouGov’s 2015 survey, UK citizens favour free movement within CANZUK to a much greater extent than in the cases of the US or EU.
Thus, alongside (and deeply connected to) the similarities in culture, political systems, law and regulation, the most fundamental aspect of CANZUK is the sense of “us”. Douglas may think that there is no value in “us” – that all that counts are regional economic priorities and that it does not matter if the common CANZUK way of doing things is dominated or replaced by European, US or Chinese ways.
But a central lesson of the UK’s experience in the EU – a lesson we can take and apply in Canada and Australia as well – is that for geopolitical partnerships to last, a common sense of “us” is vital. CANZUK has that. That is most basic reason why it will work.
CANZUK International is conducting regional research into the opinions of free trade, free movement and foreign policy coordination between the CANZUK nations, for citizens residing within Québec, Canada.
Montreal is the most populated city in the Province of Québec in Canada (photo: MSN)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
Québec is home to over 8.3 million citizens, with 78% speaking French as a first language. Over 40% speak English and French bilingually.
CANZUK International invites all Canadian citizens, who permanently reside in the Province of Québec, to undertake our 2 minute survey. This survey will collect information regarding Québécois sentiment towards Canada adopting free trade and free movement policies with Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.
As Québec is a majority Francophone Province, we are researching the opinions of Québec residents regarding Canada's place in a future CANZUK initiative. The study will focus on Québécois preferences towards free movement and whether closer diplomatic ties with Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom would be advantageous for Québec's economy and culture.
The survey can be completed here, or via the interactive survey sheet below. All responses will be confidential and validated for accuracy.
A former diplomat has demanded that Australia begins trade talks with the UK as soon as possible, as the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, toughens his stance on Britain exiting the EU.
Georgina Downer, a fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs, reiterated that Australia and the UK should begin informal talks about a trade deal now.
Britain cannot agree trade deals until the UK has fully cut ties with Brussels, however Ms Downer said informal talks should begin now to save time.
She said: “Well that is a difficult issue there. What he is talking about is whether Britain and the EU negotiate in tandem, an FTA (Future trade agreement) and a divorce settlement a large sum of money to exit out of its EU agreements. "For Australia, we cannot really formally negotiate an FTA until probably 2019 in two years time. “Of course we should be having informal negotiations. I expect they are ongoing at the moment. “There is no point waiting until 2019 and then negotiating an FTA because if we want to do a quick deal, which I think is very much in our interest and very much in Britain’s interest then we should have some preliminary negotiations now.”
EU diplomats have called on Mr Tusk, the President of the European Council, to strengthen his stance on the divorce bill Britain must pay when leaving the EU.
Mr Tusk’s Brexit negotiation plans have been backed by EU members, however many were keen to see a firmer stance.
Members are thought to have rejected the idea that a trade deal can be discussed simultaneously alongside the Brexit divorce bill, which is thought to be in the region on £50 billion.
Negotiating guidelines are likely to be approved by the 27 members without the UK when they meet for a summit in Brussels on April 29, with talks unlikely to begin until late May.
Ms Downer claimed that Britain voting to Leave the EU and wanting to agree trade agreements was the beginning of a “new relationship” between the UK and Australia.
She added: “I think it is absolutely a new chapter for Britain and for Australia’s relations with Britain.
“I would expect that we will see good market access opening up for agricultural exports especially. “Once the UK will be out it will determine the terms on which it receives our exports and we would expect very positive treatment in terms of low if not no tariff barriers there. “In the last 10 years we have seen a decline in Australian’s who have been able to live and work in Britain as the UK has tightened the restrictions for non-EU migrants, we would hope that an FTA would try and rectify that.”
Though we rightly revel in our Brexit victory, we must remember that leaving the European Union is a battle not a war. Brexit is a means and not an end.
CANZUK & Commonwealth agreements could be the future for the UK (photo: Peter Macdiarmid / Getty Images)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by Ted Yarbrough
Fundamentally, what Brexit does is hand back power to the British people that their representatives gave away. Brexit is not a vision of what Britain or the world should look like, it is giving the British people back the right to mold that vision.
Last year, I wrote of what I hope to see the post-Brexit United Kingdom end up looking like. Today, however, we focus on forming a vision of the post-Brexit international order.
Many people falsely view Brexit in terms of a nationalist versus globalist debate. In the thinking of many, Brexit represents the triumph of "populist" nationalism over the more "enlightened" internationalism seen in the EU.
Opponents of Brexit will rightly point out that nationalism and close borders are historically a recipe for a powder keg. Both world wars were caused by nationalist interests- specifically Germany's desire to take over their weaker neighbours. However, the 20th century's world wars are not the only examples of nationalism and conflict between nations with close borders going to war with each other. One need look no further than the historical relationship between England and France or the current relationship between the Koreas or the People's Republic and Republic (Taiwan) of China today to see that closed borders and competing interests are dangerous.
Thus, even though most of us (rightly) laughed off hysterical claims of a third world war when Cameron talked of it, there can be no doubt that contentious borders are never good - in modern terms the "conflict" is usually economic.
Contrary to the beliefs of some nationalists, (often found in UKIP), Theresa May is right to want good relations with the EU and not openly wish for its demise - even if its demise is inevitable as many believe.
With that being said, what the opponents of Brexit miss is that internationalist, or "supranational" institutions are, by themselves, no guarantors of peace either. As peaceful as Pax Romana may have been at certain points, the collapse of the Roman Empire brought upon the Dark Ages - ending the Classical advancements to humanity that began in the city states of Greece- for 1,000 years. The USSR and its empire held peace inside its borders for a time, but it was a brutal unlivable peace, to say nothing of the war they spread beyond their borders.
Though the EU is no USSR or even Roman Empire, its large, undemocratic institutions have brought misery to many, especially those in the south of the continent, but unlike when there is poverty in nation states, the people have found themselves powerless to get the EU to respond to their pleas for help due to the EU's inherently undemocratic nature.
Both nationalism and supranationalism are unattractive options for the United Kingdom. However, there is a third option that the United Kingdom should embrace wholeheartedly - the Churchillian option i.e. the Commonwealth option.
At the conclusion of the second World War, Churchill became a proponent for the free world being organised into three "majestic circles"- the American dominated circle, the European (or "United States of Europe") circle and the circle of the British Commonwealth and Empire. He believed these three circles could ensure stability, expand the scope of the free world, and most importantly maintain the peace.
After the war, two of the majestic circles, the American and European circles, bloomed and grew but the Commonwealth circle stagnated and largely went dormant as the empire disappeared. Britain did not go away, it did fulfill Churchill's wish to be a bridge between the US and Europe, but it largely abdicated its responsibilities to its Commonwealth friends and allies when it joined the EEC in 1973.
The world has changed significantly since 1973 and with Brexit, Britain has an opportunity to shape the 21st century international relations and the free world, with the rebuilding of the Commonwealth majestic circle.
Previously, I and others have written of the economic benefits of the Commonwealth and how it, along with including America in the Anglosphere, provides an economic security blanket and spring board to the UK economically becoming "global Britain". That is undoubtedly true, as the Commonwealth is now a larger economy than the EU and the US is the world's largest economy.
However, a Commonwealth majestic circle would not simply be about economics.
Currently, the American and European majestic circles are experiencing a lot of problems. The European Union is undemocratic and has been going through a series of crises and the United States's political system is being ravaged by toxic anger and division. Both the US and the EU appear to be losing their vision and are increasingly looking insular to deal with their problems. The world needs the third circle to counterbalance emerging forces from the "un-free" world in the forms of China, Russia, and Islamic fundamentalism.
In the Commonwealth, there is the potential for a third and most modern of majestic circles. Unlike the US and the EU, which are large regional blocs, the Commonwealth circle contains all the world's continents (if you include South Georgia, this even includes Antarctica). However, unlike the US and EU, an active Commonwealth could provide an example for twenty-first century co-operation, based not on a central capital decreeing orders from on high, but from treaties and shared initiatives done when they are implemented by states because they are good ideas.
Take for example the CANZUK nations (Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom). Because the "CANZ" and UK have roughly the same population size, living standards, and shared heritage, they could all agree to free movement of labour.
Commonwealth nations could sign a C9 trade deal for economic development (photo: Getty)
Other Commonwealth nations could agree to joint research projects, such as with India or Singapore, or others could agree to grand free trade deals such as the C9 deal I proposed between the UK, Canada, Singapore, India, Malaysia, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, and Nigeria. With shared institutions, such as having the figurehead of the Queen, the competition of the Commonwealth games, as well as the biennial meeting of leaders, the Commonwealth could become a shining light to the world on how to conduct and engage in international relations.
The Commonwealth members would all move at their own speed of integration with each other, but will always commit to peace with one another and be in control of their own destines. The Commonwealth could also be a vehicle for encouraging its members to adopt greater protections for human rights and the Commonwealth nations would be allies with each other.
The emergence of the majestic circle of the Commonwealth would provide a model for not only the free world, but help maintain and expand peace throughout the globe. The Commonwealth would also continue its policy of being open to new members- The Gambia is about to rejoin, and Rwanda and Mozambique joined despite never being British colonies.
The mission of making the Commonwealth the globe's third majestic circle should be at the heart of a foreign policy for post-Brexit Britain. Britain of course should not abandon its friendship with the US and EU, and should seek to trade with them as freely as possible, but it should, as it always has, turn its gaze to the world.
There is a leadership vacuum in the world at the moment - Britain and its Commonwealth friends should work to fill it.
CANZUK International's online petition, advocating the free movement of citizens between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, has received over 188,600 signatures (and is continuing to rise).
Over 188,600 people have signed our online petition promoting CANZUK freedom of movement
Our support is growing rapidly every day, and members of the public (as well as high-profile politicians and diplomats) are pledging their support for visa free/work permit free travel for citizens between the CANZUK nations.
Our petition is also one of the most viewed petitions on Change.org this month, as thousands of people have signed and shared online, demonstrating huge support for our proposals across the world and promoting our cause as one of the fastest growing issues within international politics.
The campaign is making tremendous progress, and we are determined to continue increasing our awareness so free movement will be adopted as official immigration policy of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.
However, we can only achieve this with your continued support…
Sign and share our online petition– with over 188,600 signatures, our petition is being viewed daily by politicians, diplomats and government officials across the world. The more signatures we receive, the more we demonstrate global support for our initiative, providing a mandate for our respective governments to adopt free movement as official immigration policy.
Donate - we rely solely on financial donations from the general public to ensure that free movement between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom is recognised and discussed among MPs, senior government officials and diplomats.
Contact your local MP– change within our parliaments begins with parliamentary members drafting Bills and promoting causes which the public support. By writing to your local MP, you are asking them to represent your voice in parliament and advocate CANZUK free movement within their respective national governments.
For details about contacting your local Member of Parliament,please click here.
We sincerely appreciate all support and efforts made to promote freedom of movement between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, and with your help, CANZUK International will continue to advocate, and achieve, free movement policies between these four countries.
The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has published CANZUK International’s latest report advocating freedom of movement between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.
CANZUK International's proposals for free movement have been published by the Australian government (photo: Expedia)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
The report, entitled “The Trans-Tasman Travel Agreement: Recommendations For The Australian Foreign Policy White Paper, 2017 ”, details how Canada and the United Kingdom can coordinate accession to the Trans-Tasman Travel Agreement which currently exists between Australia and New Zealand.
Under CANZUK International’s proposals, the governments of Canada and the United Kingdom would grant reciprocal living and working rights to Australian and New Zealander citizens; a proposal which has been backed by over 189,000 people through our online petition.
The report was submitted to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade as part of Australia’s public appeal for foreign policy recommendations in December 2016, and can be viewed via the official DFAT website here.
The Australian government will now review all submissions in the upcoming months to determine the future of Australia’s foreign policy. Supporters of free movement between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom are encouraged to contact their local Member of Parliament and pledge their support for CANZUK International’s proposals.
Sources within the Canadian government have confirmed that Canada is eager to negotiate Brexit trade deals with the UK, with discussions open for freer movement between the two countries.
Canada could soon negotiate freer movement with other CANZUK nations (photo: The Canadian Press)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
Speaking with CANZUK International, a government source confirmed that although negotiations could not be finalised until the UK withdraws from the European Union, the Canadian government "hopes to remain front of the queue for trade talks, and eager to negotiate freer movement as part of any deal with the UK ".
Another source also emphasised that Brexit negotiations were "the ideal opportunity to build bridges between [Canada and the UK], and extend relationships with other close Commonwealth countries" such as Australia and New Zealand.
The affirmation of upcoming visa negotiations between the CANZUK countries comes after confirmation that Canada, Australia and New Zealand will receive priority trade and immigration deals with the UK, following successful talks at a Commonwealth summit in London in March 2017.
Likelihood of visa arrangements between the CANZUK nations have also been exemplified by previous reports indicating that "special passport arrangements" are underway for specific Commonwealth nations, which will come into effect once the UK withdraws from the European Union in 2019.
Global media company Forbes has published its latest annual list of the best countries for business, with Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom placing within the top 11.
The CANZUK nations rank highly as the "Best Countries for Business" (photo: Forbes)
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Written by James Skinner
Out of 139 countries listed, New Zealand topped the CANZUK countries placing 2nd overall, followed by the UK in 5th, Canada in 10th and Australia in 11th place.
Forbes ranked each country according to its government's business policies and practices, including the reduction of tariffs on foreign imports, business deregulation, welfare state cuts, tax cuts and overall trade balances.
Combining the scores for an overall "CANZUK" ranking places the CANZUK nations in 7th place, ahead of economically developed countries such as Norway, Singapore, Switzerland, Germany and the United States.
CANZUK International continues to campaign for the free movement of citizens between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, as ease of labour mobility has been proven to strengthen economic ties and provide a greater pool for businesses to recruit skilled international labour, as seen through the Trans-Tasman Travel Agreement between Australia and New Zealand.
To view our recent policy submission advocating the inclusion of Canada and the United Kingdom to the Trans-Tasman Travel Agreement between Australia and New Zealand, please click here.
Image may be NSFW.
Written by James Skinner
Image may be NSFW.
Image may be NSFW.
