My piece concentrated on the position under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. That’s what I know about: and it’s a single public document that anyone can look up and get advice on.
If it is clear from the TCA that something is permitted across the EU then - armed with that - you can reasonably sensibly go and do it.
And if the TCA had mobility provisions covering all short term work (or categories of short term work clearly including music) then you’d expect people like @WeAreTheMU to issue advice saying “don’t worry: if it’s less than 90 days go and play”.
And those asking bands to come and play in their venues or booking opera singers for a season’s run could say “they’re British: but no problems because the TCA means they can do this without paperwork our end”.
The problem though with the position for musicians and venues is that they can’t find anything relevant to them in the TCA. So if someone asks “Can I/they play a gig in Spain or take a part in a run of 7 performances in an opera in Munich?” the answer is “get local advice.”
Or, of course, speak to an expert like Steve - but you need to find him (and pay for him).
Moreover, the nature of work permit/immigration rules is often that there is a lot of room for interpretation/discretion. So the advice - when you get it - may not be clear: it may be “do the paperwork to be on the safe side”.
So even if it is right that in fact the UK opera singer or band would be fine, they - or the organiser - may just find the uncertainty or recommendation to get paperwork to be on the safe side just too much bother. Book the Irish band or the Maltese singer instead.
And note here that these problems exist throughout the SERVIN provisions into which the UK govt tells us it tried to shoehorn musicians. Those provisions are riddled with national exceptions and qualifications. OK for big business that can get advice. Not so good for individuals.
That is one of the reasons why a mobility chapter - allowing all or categories of short term working - would have been a much better and effective way of dealing with musicians than the current government’s approach could ever have been (and we still don’t know the details of it)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
What is needed is a new mobility chapter setting out general rights (which could be qualified) to allow short-term visa-free working by UK citizens in the EU and vice versa - along the lines offered by the EU and rejected by the current government for ideological reasons.
This whole passage (with its spectacular misquote of an article by me) has sensibly been removed.
The piece though retains its bizarre analysis of the subsidy control provisions - which, as I explain in my thread, seizes excitedly on alleged new flexibilities without realising that those flexibilities were already in the State aid rules.
A further thread on the EU/UK musicians/visa for paid work issue (the issue is paid work: travelling to sing or play at eg a charity event for free can be done without a visa).
In essence the UK permits foreign (including EU) nationals to stay up to 30 days to carry out paid engagements, but they must (a) prove they are a professional musician and (b) be invited by an established UK business.
Problems with that. 1. There is no public appetite for divergent regulation. 2. Both keeping trade going with NI and business pressure point away from divergence. 3. Economic gravity. 4. Need for framework for mobility, security is rather determined by being surrounded by the EU.
While on the topic of Lexit pieces that go off piste when it gets to the detail, some particularly strange passages from Larry Elliot’s piece in the Guardian. theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
Discuss what this is supposed to mean as a claim about the real world, with particular reference to the word “reputation” (and to the fact that many countries in the EU don’t have that “reputation” - let alone the reality).