Earlier the unskilled labours would land up in UK and then would start search for any opening, according to the sources. But now after the 25000 minister Priti Patel revealed the government policy it is crystal clear that no migrant from the EU or anywhere else across the world would be able to come to Britain for work without a firm job offer. The government would adopt liberal attitude only in the case of candidates who are Ph D, or have science background, speaking English and 25000 pound salary.

The UK government has been systematically tightening the screw since 2006. The points based system will judge applicants based on their salary, qualification, ability to speak English and the type of jobs they are planning to do.

While this move will invariably harm the interest of the Indians, it would either not be in the interest of Britain. The workers and the office going people feel that this is the first major impact of the Brexit. The number of EU workers seeking job in UK has been quite high.

Meanwhile the senior Scotland politician Nocola Sturgeon has claimed that it would have devastating impact on Scotland. Under the post-Brexit system, the UK ministers want to move away from cheap labour from Europe and instead target the brightest and best.

According to Patel, the government wants to encourage people with the right talent and reduce the levels of people coming to the UK with low skills. Patel holds that firms will need to train more UK workers. It preferably is a known fact that the local people have less representation in the industry or companies. The primary reason according to the business circle has been unwillingness of the local Britons to take to rigorous works, They have been averse to developing their talent and skills. Obviously the companies and industries functioning in UK preferred to hire workers from third world countries who happen to hard working force. They were cheap too.

This shift in the employment strategy by Boris is viewed as imitation of Donald Trump’s tactics to have a base in this circle. The industry circle is nevertheless sceptical about the success of the new move. They have their valid argument too that would witness fall in production level. The UK would face the potential threat of economic slowdown.

Incidentally the Home Office has already told the businesses and industries that they should end their reliance on cheap labour. Low skilled labour and instead undertake the task to train British workers. On their part the businesses are scared that their investment would multiply many times and unfortunately at the same time would lose the element of competitiveness in the market. The British product would become costly.

If the officials are to be believed the new system will be take effect on 1 January 2921, at the end of the Brexit transition period. It is said that the move will restrict the entry and opportunity to work in UK, but it does no appear to be tangible. Still there are a large number of forces in UK which are friendly to EU and would like to serve the interest of EU. The prevailing situation is very precarious for UK and particularly for Boris Johnson.

Economically inactive’ Britons could do jobs in sectors where there are shortages under new system. Priti Patel said it would be necessary for businesses to look more to potential British workers, helping them to ‘up their skills and make their skills relevant’.

Around 8 million people between the ages of 16 and 64 were “economically inactive” and could be given the skills to do jobs in sectors where there were shortages as a result of the new points-based system. At present 20% of available working age people were inactive and could be encouraged into work. She said the government was “no longer going to have a route for low-skilled workers to come to the UK” but denied this would be the end of Polish builders arriving in Britain as they could get jobs with construction companies rather than being self-employed.

Border control will no longer accept ID cards from countries such as France and Italy. This, it is understood, is an attempt to clamp down on non-EU workers beating the system with forged or stolen ID cards. The Confederation of British Industry director general, Carolyn Fairbairn, said the removal of the cap on the number of skilled workers was welcome, but she warned that in “some sectors, firms would be left wondering how they would recruit the people needed to run their businesses.

It looks like the NHS and schools will be able to recruit skilled workers without worrying about salary thresholds. And finance, business services and higher education should also be able to live with this. But social care faces a big hit, unless it gets a big infusion of much-needed government funding that will allow it to increase wages and training budgets. Other sectors that have come to rely on EU migrants to provide a flexible (and often motivated and trained) workforce, from food processing to construction, will also be very worried.

Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, will introduce new laws next month aimed at limiting migration to skilled workers from the EU and rest of the world. Ministers claim it will lead to a “significant reduction” in migration with advisors saying up to 70 per cent of EU workers allowed into the UK since 2004 would not have qualified under the points system.

Under the plan, the definition of skilled workers would be expanded to include those educated to A-level/Scottish Highers-equivalent standard, not just graduate level, as is currently the case.

For the first time in decades the UK will have full control over who comes to this country and how the immigration system operates. The inability of the successive governments to control the mass migration of people into the UK was a key factor behind the vote to leave the EU.

The way the things are taking shape the immigration policy will create more confusion and problem for the UK than evolving the mechanism for smooth functioning. It is said that one of the biggest prizes of Brexit has been that the British voters should get to decide who should be eligible to work and settle. But the situation evolving is opposed to this. Bringing about a change of this nature would not only create employment problems instead it would have a major drag on the economy. (IPA Service)