On 30th January 2025, the Bishop of St Albans led a debate on the case for a new youth mobility scheme with European countries:
The Lord Bishop of St Albans moved: That this House takes note of the case for a new youth mobility scheme with European countries.
My Lords, youth mobility schemes are a topical subject in this Parliament at the moment. A Private Member’s Bill on this very subject is making its way through the other place, which yesterday held a debate on youth mobility schemes with the EU. In this Chamber, we had a Question on it from the noble Lord, Lord Balfe, last week and a Question today from the noble Lord, Lord Liddle. I am aware that a number of noble Lords have already asked supplementaries and I look forward to the opportunity for them to develop some of those points more fully in this debate. In particular, I look forward to the maiden speech of the noble Lord, Lord Moraes.
I believe that the need for closer ties with our European neighbours is more pressing now than it has been for some time. There are many reasons for that, but, with the Ukrainian war and increasing geopolitical instability likely to exacerbate existing migration issues, the need for international co-operation is all the more important, especially with those countries that are quite literally our neighbours. I hope this debate will provide an opportunity to think how we might maximise the opportunities for our young people to experience study, work, leisure, sport, music and so on in the wider world beyond our shores.
However, building mutual trust and respect with our European allies, both those in the EU and those that are not members, cannot be achieved simply in political fora or via policy decisions only. Indeed, sometimes they can be a source of much wrangling and entrenched resentments, which both led to and were a result of Brexit. That decision has been made, and I hope this debate is not about that. If we want to build trust and mutual understanding, we need a whole host of positive engagements and relationships at all levels in science and research, education, culture and sport, and, critically, opportunities for citizens to live and work together, both here and across mainland Europe.
Quite apart from the fact reintroducing youth mobility and cultural exchanges would be expedient for our foreign policy, there is the sheer demand for the restoration of these opportunities for our young people and the broader public. Polling in August 2024 found that 58% of the population think a youth mobility scheme is a good idea. There is a real demand for something like this. There has been a great loss to our young people just at the very time when they should be gaining new experiences and broadening their worldviews, making friends from people of other nations and cultures, with opportunities for travel, education and study abroad with our European partners. Those opportunities have gradually diminished and, where arrangements exist, they are usually more complicated and even more competitive.
There are broadly two strands of argument that I intend to cover when it comes to making the case for a new youth mobility scheme with European countries, although I also hope to touch on some of the challenges facing our creative industries, especially touring musicians. I have to confess that I feel rather daunted by the expertise of so many in your Lordships’ House on this topic. I come to this debate not as an expert but as someone who has greatly benefited from rich experiences in other cultures over extended periods and as someone who cares deeply about the opportunities for our young people to travel, learn languages and be exposed to the world and the cultural exchange of ideas and for our creative industries, one of the great success stories of our nation, to thrive. I look to listen and learn about the various challenges and opportunities that exist when it comes to negotiating youth mobility, and to better understand the position of His Majesty’s Government.
This Motion was deliberately worded to say “European countries” rather than “the EU” as I hope to avoid us becoming mired in old debates. However, the question of bilateral agreements with the EU versus individual approaches to EU member states is likely to be an integral part of this debate. In spite of that, I hope we can be open-minded as we think about how best to renew the rich landscape of cultural, educational and civic ties that we have shared with mainland Europe in the past, whether that be through rejoining the Erasmus scheme or by agreeing a new youth mobility scheme altogether.
Another point I would like to stress is that sometimes people conflate youth mobility schemes with freedom of movement. This has cropped up repeatedly, including in this House recently during Oral Questions. Will the Minister confirm that the Government understand that youth mobility schemes are not the same thing as freedom of movement? Indeed, the proposal for a new youth mobility scheme from the European Commission last year was both age limited and time limited. I appreciate that that scheme was rejected by the previous Government, and indeed the current one, but even had it been accepted, it would not have been a return to free movement.
I note that in these parliamentary exchanges His Majesty’s Government frequently point to the Turing scheme as the answer, which offers funding for UK students to go abroad on placements. The focus within this scheme of ensuring that disadvantaged students are able to access this funding is admirable, and I totally support it—indeed, it is appropriate. But still this does not make it a substitute for the Erasmus programme, which was much broader in scope and scale. For example, the Erasmus+ scheme includes specific partnerships and funding streams to promote sport and physical activity. The Turing scheme is also, critically, not an exchange programme.
His Majesty’s Government have committed to a reset in relations with the EU. The noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Newnham, led a debate on EU relations last October. The government spokesperson for that debate, the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, said:
“This is about turning the page, reinvigorating alliances and forging new partnerships with our European friends, rather than reopening the divisions of the past”.—[Official Report, 10/10/24; col. 2210.]
In that spirit, His Majesty’s Government recently successfully negotiated the UK rejoining the Horizon programme post Brexit. There are positive examples here of how this can be done. The Erasmus scheme does not consist only of EU member states. Norway, for example, is a country which has developed extremely close and collaborative relationships with the EU despite not holding member status. If that is not going to work for us, let us at least propose something new, given that we have turned down the most recent proposal.
Like all Members of your Lordships’ House, I am acutely aware that the public purse is under strain and that one of the arguments against Erasmus was the cost, due to more students coming to the UK than UK students going to Europe. I for one am not sure that that is an argument against the Erasmus scheme, but rather the result of our embarrassingly poor foreign language learning and teaching here in the UK. If anything, it is an argument to encourage more of our young people to go abroad to study at European universities and improve their foreign language skills. Speaking a second or even a third language is a vital skill that is only becoming more and more important in our globalised world, yet the number of students and pupils taking language courses continues to decline.
I would like to pick up on a few points from the excellent debate on EU relations I mentioned. First, the facilitation of overseas school trips has been complicated by regulations on the UK-EU border post Brexit. Last week, the noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Malvern, committed to:
“ensuring school visits and other opportunities for exchange”
and eradicating
“some of the challenges that have arisen”.—[Official Report, 20/1/25; col. 1479.]
Can the Minister update the House on whether there has been any progress on that issue? What specific takes are being considered or taken?
Secondly, there are challenges facing the creative sector, particularly musicians. This was raised this morning by the noble Baroness, Lady Nicholson of Winterbourne, in one of the Oral Questions. This is an issue that first came to my attention through the particular challenges facing choirs that have tried to arrange overseas tours. I understand that DCMS is working closely with representatives from the industry to try and find solutions to the challenges facing the sector after leaving the EU, and this is welcome news. Will His Majesty’s Government, in the short term, do their utmost to secure an EU-UK visa waiver agreement for performing artists and their staff? This is widely supported within the creative industries, and there is precedent for these kinds of agreements with the EU.
In the longer term, it is vital that some music performers are able to stay for periods of more than 90 days. It is particularly important for orchestras, choirs and the theatre sector, which generally have longer touring periods. Can the Minister tell us what steps His Majesty’s Government are taking towards negotiating such an agreement with the EU?
Finally, the Government have said that they do not want to commit to a specific programme regarding youth mobility in the UK at the moment. I appreciate that the Minister may not be able to say much today in the light of future negotiating strategies, and that there are a number of obstacles we are seeking to resolve with the EU—for example, concerning Northern Ireland. However, as they enter the first EU-UK summit, I hope they will bear in mind how much the UK stands to gain from renegotiating a youth mobility scheme, which could be a real win-win and be of mutual benefit, in particular for our young people. Can the Minister confirm when we might expect an update on this issue?
I will conclude my opening remarks by reiterating that close ties with our neighbours are essential to UK interests in the current global climate. These have to be underpinned by a mutual understanding of and respect for other nations, cultures, languages and customs if they are going to be sustainable and resilient. There are so many difficulties facing our young people today. The opportunity to travel, live and work abroad has enriched the lives of so many in the past, as well as proving essential to their future success. I hope we will ensure that we are not depriving Britain’s young people of these experiences and those opportunities to thrive.
Extracts from the speeches that followed:
Lord Moraes (Lab): I want to start my remarks in this maiden speech with some comments on the approach of the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans to these mobility schemes. Many noble Lords and Baronesses in this Chamber will have had experience of those reciprocal mobility schemes in their work. In my experience over 20 years, I helped many young constituents with these reciprocal schemes and how to navigate them. Over the years I saw UK students, some from disadvantaged backgrounds who would not otherwise have afforded to access those schemes to study, benefit from Erasmus and other mobility opportunities. Those schemes were not perfect. For example, there should have been more UK take-up between 1987 and when we left in 2020—that is clear. But, very objectively, I saw a lasting benefit for those students in the UK, and I also saw measurable economic benefit and benefit to our academic institutions in the UK.
On this vexed point that the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans raised about free movement, I would love to hear other opinions on it in this debate, but my understanding was always that the legal base of these reciprocal mobility schemes was never anything to do with free movement because they did not involve settlement and that was the key legal element that would make such schemes “free movement”. These schemes are not free movement; they are reciprocal schemes that generate advantages in all aspects of our lives. I will limit my comments on the debate to that and will now proceed with my maiden speech.
Lord Watson of Invergowrie (Lab): I commend the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans on securing this important debate. As he said in his comprehensive opening speech, this is a topical subject that I sense is beginning to gain some traction. Last year, as we know, the European Commission announced a proposal to open negotiations with the UK on a youth mobility scheme for all EU citizens, which would give 18 to 30 year-olds the opportunity to work or study in the UK for up to four years and offer the equivalent entitlement to young people from the UK. The Commission stated that the proposal would not be a return to free movement because it would be time limited, but it would enable studying, training, working and travelling. However, that proposal did not get very far. Although the previous Government rejected it, it is only fair to say that the EU was insistent that it must apply to all EU member states and not just be on an individual basis. That was the rock on which it foundered at that time.
Lord Frost (Con): I also thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans for securing and opening this debate. I listened to his speech with a good deal of interest, and he set out the positions very clearly. I was waiting, I confess, for the moment at which he would show how his positions derived from the doctrine of the Church of England or Christianity more broadly, but sadly, that point never came. Nevertheless, I take them as so derived, and he certainly made a very good political case for the changes in rules in our relationship to the EU that he set out. He referred to the reset, and I want to begin by talking a little about the so-called reset, because that is the context in which we are looking at this idea of youth mobility.
I confess that I am not completely convinced that we need a reset with the EU. The relationship seems to be working perfectly well for the moment, but I accept that there are many who think differently, and that is why the Government have taken us on the path that we are now on. I think it would be better if the Government could set out their objectives for that reset a bit more clearly. I refer the Minister to the comprehensive document that we set out in February 2020 outlining our approach to the free trade association negotiations. It is a pity, to put it no more strongly, that in a negotiation of this nature we have no real guidance on what the Government are seeking to achieve and why, so I guess we have to define it for ourselves.
Baroness Featherstone (LD): If we do not give young people the opportunities that we tore from them when we left the EU, then we will not only deny them all the wonderful broadening of mind and experiences that came from the EU mobility scheme; we will deskill them and reduce our own future, because if we limit young people, we limit ourselves. I congratulate the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans on securing this vital debate, and I could not agree more on the harm that is being done to the creative industries, tourism and all that area, and therefore to our country, for which the creative industries are an economic driver.
If we could restore to our young people at least some of the opportunities that they had when we were members of the EU, we would give them a whole range of advantages that will remain with them all their lives. Travel not only broadens the mind but gives young people independence and confidence. When you have to navigate a new country on your own, you are forced to step up, to solve problems and become self-reliant. You have to overcome challenges in an unfamiliar environment, and that builds resilience and confidence. Living and working in another country exposes you to different cultures, enables you to understand different perspectives and makes you more open-minded and reasonable—we could sure do with more reasonableness. You learn to be adaptable when you have to work and communicate with people from diverse backgrounds. For some young people, who have limited horizons because of the circumstances of their birth, this is a route to change. Getting away from an environment that is damaging or limiting is vital to life chances.
Lord Hannay of Chiswick (CB): The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans is also to be congratulated and thanked for securing this timely debate on the potential for a UK-EU mobility partnership as part of the Government’s reset of our post-Brexit relationship with the EU, and for his most helpful and illuminating introduction to the debate. This debate is all the more necessary as it provides an opportunity to clear away some of the quantities of disinformation that have swirled around the subject since the idea surfaced in Brussels early last summer, well ahead of the July election here.
To clear up one of those bits of disinformation, the idea has not yet been put to the UK by the EU in any formal sense. It was an idea that the Commission raised with the EU member states, and to which they got a reasonably positive response, but it was not put to us—except by journalists—because there are no current negotiations going on between the UK and the EU, so there was no need to respond to it, positively or negatively. The then Labour Opposition chose to react to it—quite unnecessarily, I have to say—in a way that was interpreted more negatively than was justified.
The second piece of disinformation is that the concept of mobility partnerships for particular age groups and professions is not understood as being as widespread as it is around the world. In no case does it amount to full free movement, and it is often numerically capped. So far as the EU is concerned, the Commissioner who will now be handling the matter in the new Commission, Maroš Šefčovič, made clear last week that any UK-EU scheme would not—I repeat “not”—amount to free movement.
Baroness Smith of Llanfaes (PC): My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Balfe, and the pro-European words he has just shared with us. I thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans for bringing this important debate to this House and congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Moraes, on his maiden speech. He introduced today’s debate with such passion, and it was important to hear his own experiences of how mobility schemes have reached out to those from underprivileged backgrounds. That was an important note. I look forward to hearing more of his contributions and say croeso, welcome, to the noble Lord.
As the youngest Member of this House, I take a special interest in proposals that will offer young people more opportunities. Under-30s, who such schemes are aimed at, are a generation which has been most affected by the loss of work opportunities post-Brexit. This has been coupled with the isolating experiences that the Covid pandemic had on youth. Along with being locked out of the housing market with low wages, hopes are dashed for many in my generation. His Majesty’s Government have an opportunity to change this with an act of good will towards young people, establishing a new youth mobility scheme with the EU. This is not just about young people but about the other benefits to the economy and society, as has been shared by many noble Lords today.
We are not alone in this view. A poll conducted by YouGov for the European Council on Foreign Relations found that almost seven in 10 Britons, including a 55% majority of former pro-Brexit voters, would support a scheme that would allow 200,000 18 to 40 year-olds from the UK and the EU to travel, study and work freely in each other’s countries for up to four years.
Baroness Twycross (Lab, Government Whip): My Lords, I thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans for securing this debate on the case for a new youth mobility scheme with European countries. (…)
We have heard a lot of interesting, impassioned speeches about the opportunities of the reset and youth mobility. I will address these points in turn but, as someone married to an EEA citizen, I first thank the right reverend Prelate for noting that Europe extends beyond the EU. As someone who sees the significance of the right to vote and to obtain a passport, I cannot quite agree with the noble Lord, Lord Jackson of Peterborough, that settled status is de facto citizenship. However, it is significant, not least because my husband got his settled status just two weeks ago and we celebrated that as a major life moment.
The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans, the noble Lords, Lord Moraes and Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate, and the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, talked about a youth mobility scheme, which differs from free movement in several ways. A youth mobility scheme would require an application. It is time-bound. There are age restrictions. It operates on quotas generally and is subject to charges such as a visa application fee and the immigration health surcharge. The free movement provisions were unconditional for those who were entitled to access them.
A number of noble Lords mentioned Turing. As noble Lords are aware, the Turing scheme is the UK Government’s programme for students to study and work anywhere in the world. Since 2021, the scheme has helped tens of thousands of UK students to develop new skills, gain international experience and boost their employability, both in the EU and beyond. Turing provides more funding to students from disadvantaged backgrounds, so they can participate in international placements, breaking down barriers to opportunity.
For the 2024-25 academic year, education providers and other eligible organisations from across the UK have been allocated over £105 million to send more than 43,000 students on study and work placements across the globe. I am pleased to say that around 53% of those opportunities will be for participants from disadvantaged backgrounds. Those are not small numbers, in my view.
The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans, the noble Baroness, Lady Bull, the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley of Knighton, and others referred to the issues facing touring artists, soft power and Creative Europe. Noble Lords have highlighted the benefits of mobility arrangements for musicians, choirs and artists, as well as for the wider creative sector. We are working with the creative and cultural sectors to ensure that our world-leading sectors can continue to promote growth and enrich lives at home and abroad.
(…)
With regard to a prospective scheme with the EU, the Government have been clear that we do not have any plans for a youth mobility scheme, but we will look at the EU’s proposals on a range of issues. The Government have been elected on a commitment not to return to free movement. In response to the question from the noble Earl, Lord Effingham, we will not be returning to free movement. This objective must be respected, but it does not diminish the value of the schemes that we have discussed in your Lordships’ House today. We are committed to our promises and to delivering for the British people.
The Lord Bishop of St Albans: My Lords, I thank all Members of your Lordships’ House for their contributions to this debate, which has been wide-ranging and fascinating. I particularly congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Moraes, on his excellent maiden speech. I am sure he is going to make many valuable contributions to the work of your Lordships’ House over the coming years.
It is clear to all of us that this is a subject which is going up the agenda; it is not going to go away. This is so important to our young people. We have all managed to resist, by and large, rerunning arguments about the EU or Brexit, because we need to try to find new ways forward. As always in a debate in your Lordships’ House, I find myself having learned a whole lot of new information. Some of the facts, for example, on university fees I was not aware of. I realise, as always when we look at the seemingly simple problems we want to solve, that often there are things we have not considered. That is certainly true for me.
However, there is a consensus that there is a real urgency to try to see how we can take this forward for some areas, particularly, for example, for musicians and artists, and how we can perhaps build and develop Turing and Horizon; how we can look to develop other bilateral agreements; and how, with the EU reset, we can take every opportunity to find as many win-win solutions as we can to provide as many opportunities as possible for our young people to be able to move
into other cultures and to learn—whatever we call it; let us keep away from some of the phrases we have used. We just need to try to find movement on this.
I am hugely grateful for all the contributions and I look forward to working in the future with Members of your Lordships’ House as we try to develop this further, for the sake of our young people and our place in the world.
Motion agreed.
The Church of England in Parliament 
You must be logged in to post a comment.