discussion topic/essay: Movement of Human Resources should be kept Free and Uninhibited., Esercizi di Lingua Inglese

Scarica discussion topic/essay: Movement of Human Resources should be kept Free and Uninhibited. e più Esercizi in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity! Discussion Topic Movement of Human Resources should be kept Free and Uninhibited within the EU. the main beneficiaries psychological issues economic issues the variety of needs communication issues emerging economies country’s reputation competitors fears/concerns local industries/jobs endangered jobs INTRODUCTION Good morning, welcome to our discussion. First of all, I would like to introduce the speakers: NOMI... We are going to discuss the topic “Movement of Human Resources should be kept Free and Uninhibited within the EU.” We are going to provide arguments for and against. PRO 1 and PRO 2 will be speaking in favour and CONTRO 1 and CONTRO 2 will be opposing the proposal. CURRENT SITUATION Let's start by clarifying what is meant by free movement of human resources: this expression refers to a fundamental principle of the EU, and it means that EU citizens are entitled to look for a job in another EU country. Also, qualifications are universally accepted across Europe and in theory, there should be no discrimination from firms choosing between native and migrant employees. Free movement of labour is generally considered to have worked quite well when the EU was composed of 12-15 Western European countries with similar income levels. Free movement of labour gives more opportunities to workers and makes labour markets more flexible. However, with the rapid expansion of the EU to include 27 countries after Brexit, the concept of immigration has become politically controversial because it has led to large migrant flows from low-income countries in the East to higher income countries in the West. Many have felt that the free movement of labour within an enlarged EU of wide income disparities has caused both economic and social problems. This raises the questions such as: what are the advantages and disadvantages of free movement labour and who benefits and loses from this agreement? LEADER: We shall now begin ….CONTRO1 would you like to start with your first point? ECONOMY: by James Wickham, trinity college Dublin, on 8th January 2019 https://www.socialeurope.eu/mass-immigration- growth-inequality ● CONTRO1: Immigration within Europe should not be kept free, on the contrary it should be more strictly controlled and limited. In fact, it is considered to be damaging for the economy of those countries with a high rate of immigrants, and that’s because mass immigration has been linked to social and economic inequality, more precisely to changes in the occupational structure. The point is that, if you allow large net flows of workers from low wage countries to move abroad, these workers will be willing to bid down wages and the increase in the supply of labour will lead to a fall in wages of native-born workers. https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/21073/labour-markets/problems-of-free-movement-of- labour/ https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/631742/ EPRS_BRI(2019)631742_EN.pdf European parliament research by Klaus muller in dec 2019 ● PRO 1: However, this is complicated. Firstly, migrants create more demand in the economy, compensating for the increase in supply. They also are net contributors to the government budget. A rising working population should directly increase GDP (Gross domestic product), leading to more tax incomes which can be invested on improving public services. ● CONTRO 1: Could you be more specific about it? https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/20750/economics/the-economic-effect-of- immigration-on-the-nhs/ ● PRO 1: As migrants get older, they often return to their country of origin. This age range (20-30s) is the best demographic for contributing taxes, but not using health care services. Health care services are much more likely to be used by people over 65. EU funded project coordinated by the University of Brighton 60 % of all migrants who had arrived in the UK in the last five years are in this age group. ● CONTRO 1: I see what you mean. (WORLD MIGRATION -REPORT 2020) pag. 92 https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/wmr_2020.pdf LEADER: The next aspect we should consider is related to demography, particularly to the declining population and shortage of workers in Eastern Europe due to emigration and the concerns that countries experience due to/because of the large flows of people. ● PRO 1: From this point of view, the free movement of labour, and therefore a rising population in the receiving countries, could help deal with demographic challenges. Many countries in Western Europe are experiencing a demographic time-bomb – with a rapidly ageing population. This places a strain on public finances because people over 65 are net recipients of state spending (pensions + healthcare means less income tax contributions). Free movement of labour can see young immigrants come to areas of declining working population and make a net contribution to public finances. ● CONTRO 1: But don’t you think that on the other hand free movement of labour can also cause large flows of people from low income to high income regions? For most South-Eastern and Eastern European countries, emigration has been the key feature over recent years and decades. To prove this point, I’d like to direct your attention to what International Organisation for Migrations indicates in their 2020 World migration report. It is that several countries in Europe, for instance Bulgaria and Romania, are projected to experience very significant population decline by 2050. Emigration from Eastern European countries to Western Europe has been a growing trend, particularly since the expansion of the EU in both 2004 and 2007. ● CONTRO 2: Exactly! World migration report This leads to some issues for both sides. Large net flows of people cause infrastructure problems. There is concern that a rapid rise in population can be a problem for public services – health, education and housing. For instance, some countries have a housing crisis. The large number of migrants doesn't cause this housing crisis, but it aggravates the gap between supply and demand. In theory, more houses could be built to deal with rising demand and population growth. But, this is complicated by the fact that some countries have limited land they are willing to give up for building, and this can cause protests against building new houses on greenbelt land. Tejvan Pettinger, Economics teacher ● CONTRO 1: Tejvan Pettinger, Economics teacher Yes, and even if public services and housing increased to meet supply, you could argue that a rising population leads to a decline in quality of life because it increases population density and congestion. Therefore, a rapid rise in population due to the free movement of labour will contribute to more traffic congestion, which has both economic and social costs. And another point is that a rising population makes it harder to reduce pollution and improve air quality. ● LEADER: PRO 1 do you agree with what CONTRO 1 has just said?  PRO 2: That’s a good point, but it’s also true that free movement contributes to avoiding conflict and promotes harmony between European nations. It was felt that the unlimited movement of people across national borders would diminish national rivalries because countries would become more integrated and less opposed. CONCLUSION Let’s finish here. Now I would like to summarize this discussion: Those for the free movement argued that the free movement of economically active citizens generally leads to higher employment, higher productivity and income, and has a positive impact on the flow of taxes and social contributions. Furthermore, there is no evidence of immigration leading to an increase in crime and unemployment. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/631742/EPRS_BRI(2019)631742_EN.pdf In contrast, the others stated that free movement of labour in the EU 28 has seen very rapid changes in population, and that can lead to real economic costs, especially if the governments are unprepared to deal with rising populations in particular areas.The other difficulty that has come up regards separating potential economic and social costs of free movement from more underlying issues, such as infrastructure challenges. https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/21073/labour-markets/problems-of-free-movement-of-labour/ Thank you to everyone for their contributions. We hope you found it interesting and you are welcome to ask any questions. References https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33655318 https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/brexit-change-the-game/58873/ https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/41/free-movement-of-workers criminality: - https://items.ssrc.org/border-battles/the-myth-of-immigrant-criminality/ (troppo vecchio ma utile per prendere idee) -https://cordis.europa.eu/article/id/20635-eu-research-disproves-link-between-immigration- and-increased-crime economy: https://www.socialeurope.eu/mass-immigration-growth-inequality https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/key-topics/jobs-welfare demography: https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/wmr_2020.pdf