scholarly journals The biopolitics of the migration-development nexus: Governing migration in the UK

Politics ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 448-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Pinkerton

While politicians in the United Kingdom (UK) have engaged in fractious debate over the appropriate way of responding to the myriad issues arising from the so-called migration or refugee crisis in recent years, there is an apparent cross-party consensus regarding the ability of overseas aid and development spending to reduce levels of global economic migration. This suggests that the central tenets of what is known in the policy literature as the ‘migration-development nexus’ have been accepted by the political establishment in the UK, demonstrating a belief that development spending can be used to ameliorate the global economic inequalities seen as giving rise to mass migration. Drawing on Michel Foucault’s concepts of biopolitics, governmentality, and subjectification, this article argues that the migration-development nexus represents a technology for enacting a strategy of governance that operates through a dual process of enticing and maintaining mobile subjects. It is then suggested that in the UK context, this operates through the temporary nature of the time-limited visa regime, which allows migrants from outside the European Union to be ‘governed through mobility’. The article therefore illustrates how mobility can be central to governing logics, as well as something that can exceed them.

2018 ◽  
pp. 71-82
Author(s):  
Marcin Łukaszewski

The political system of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is of interest to researchers for several reasons. One of the most important motivations certainly involves the unique construction of its Constitution, the content of which is not formulated in a single legal act of a supreme status. This unwritten Constitution encompasses at least four parts. The most important part is undoubtedly constituted by one of three principles of the political system, namely the principle of the sovereignty (omnipotence) of parliament. This principle, which is regarded as a constitutional principle by some and as a principle above the Constitution by others, constitutes the core of British constitutional law. The topic of this paper is an attempt to indicate the boundaries of this principle in the British constitutional order and to place it in relation to remaining principles. The boundaries of this principle have been considered by British constitutionalists on numerous occasions. Considerations on the relation of this principle to the remaining elements of the Constitution have been the subject of interest for courts of law, including the House of Lords, which used to function as the court of last instance in judicial proceedings prior to the 2005 reform. It is worth emphasizing that even the lords/judges frequently disagreed on the boundaries of the principle and even on whether the principle can be examined by any court. There were also views that the principle is only a virtual construct, and even if it had ever applied to the political system at all, it can no longer be referred to, given contemporary European integration processes. The complicated combination of elements of the British constitution with the presence of the United Kingdom in the structures of the European Council and European Union (preceded by the European Community) have produced a number of interpretations of the principle of the omnipotence of the parliament in the new political reality the UK has found itself in. It was the adoption of the European Communities Act 1972, followed several decades later by the adoption of the European Union Act 2011 that led to the discussion on the construction of the British Constitution and either the approval or rejection of the concept that the Constitution of the United Kingdom with its meta-principle should be interpreted anew.


This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of the withdrawal agreement concluded between the United Kingdom and the European Union to create the legal framework for Brexit. Building on a prior volume, it overviews the process of Brexit negotiations that took place between the UK and the EU from 2017 to 2019. It also examines the key provisions of the Brexit deal, including the protection of citizens’ rights, the Irish border, and the financial settlement. Moreover, the book assesses the governance provisions on transition, decision-making and adjudication, and the prospects for future EU–UK trade relations. Finally, it reflects on the longer-term challenges that the implementation of the 2016 Brexit referendum poses for the UK territorial system, for British–Irish relations, as well as for the future of the EU beyond Brexit.


2002 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Ring ◽  
Roddy McKinnon

Across the European Union, national governments are re-assessing the institutional mechanisms through which pension provision is delivered. This articles sets the debate within the wider context of the ‘pillared’ structural analysis often adopted by international institutions when discussing pensions reform. It then sets out a detailed discussion of developments in the UK, arguing that the UK is moving towards a model of reform akin to that promoted by the World Bank – referred to here as ‘pillared-privatisation’. The themes of this model indicate more means-testing, greater private provision, and a shift of the burden of risk from the government to individuals. An assessment is then made of the implications of UK developments for other EU countries. It is suggested that while there are strong reasons to think that other countries will not travel as far down the road of ‘pillared-privatisation’ as the UK, this should not be taken as a ‘given’.


Author(s):  
Ludovic Highman

On such divisive issues as EU membership and, consequently, the post-Brexit relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union, it is unsurprising that Theresa May’s government has been torn between a “hard” and a “soft” Brexit. As of June 2018, there is still no indication of which approach will prevail, putting at risk UK universities’ participation in the Erasmus+ program, which has provided, among other things, opportunities for over four million Europeans to study, train, and volunteer abroad since its inception. Full access to EU research funds is also at risk. Universities cannot depend on the UK government’s help in securing the frameworks allowing for continuity. In such a context, universities have started to use their limited resources to secure bilateral international and European links to foster research collaboration and staff and student mobility, post-Brexit.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomasz Kubin

The exit of the United Kingdom from the European Union (so-called Brexit) is one of the most important events in the process of European integration. It has a lot of extremely remarkable implications – both for the EU and for the United Kingdom. Among other, Brexit will affect the security of the United Kingdom and the EU. The aim of the study is to answer the research question: how will Britain’s exit from the EU influence the EU common security and defence policy? In order to answer this question, the factors that are most relevant to the United Kingdom’s significance for the EU’s security and defence policy will be identified. This will show how the EU’s potential of the security and defence policy will change, when the UK leaves this organisation. The most important conclusions are included in the summary.


Author(s):  
Radovan Malachta

The paper follows up on the arguments introduced in the author’s article Mutual Trust as a Way to an Unconditional Automatic Recognition of Foreign Judgments. This paper, titled Mutual Trust between the Member States of the European Union and the United Kingdom after Brexit: Overview discusses, whether there has been a loss of mutual trust between the European Union and the United Kingdom after Brexit. The UK, similarly to EU Member States, has been entrusted with the area of recognition and enforcement of judgements thus far. Should the Member States decrease the level of mutual trust in relation to the UK only because the UK ceased to be part of the EU after 47 years? Practically overnight, more precisely, the day after the transitional period, should the Member States trust the UK less in the light of legislative changes? The article also outlines general possibilities that the UK has regarding which international convention it may accede to. Instead of going into depth, the article presents a basic overview. However, this does not prevent the article to answer, in addition to the questions asked above, how a choice of access to an international convention could affect the level of mutual trust between the UK and EU Member States.


2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-164
Author(s):  
Richard Barnes

Abstract On 30 September 2020, the United Kingdom and Norway signed the Framework Agreement on Fisheries that will provide the basis for future cooperation in the sustainable management of their fisheries. The Agreement is the first such agreement adopted by the UK following its decision to the leave the European Union. This note provides some background to the Agreement and examines its key features. Whilst the content of the Agreement appears to be rather basic, this is broadly consistent with other framework agreements, and it does provide some insight into the direction and focus of fisheries management in the North Sea, and how cooperation may develop between coastal States and the European Union.


Author(s):  
Federico Fabbrini

This introductory chapter provides an overview of the Withdrawal Agreement of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU). The Withdrawal Agreement, adopted on the basis of Article 50 Treaty on European Union (TEU), spells out the terms and conditions of the UK departure from the EU, including ground-breaking solutions to deal with the thorniest issues which emerged in the context of the withdrawal negotiations. Admittedly, the Withdrawal Agreement is only a part of the Brexit deal. The Agreement, in fact, is accompanied by a connected political declaration, which outlines the framework of future EU–UK relations. The chapter then offers a chronological summary of the process that led to the adoption of the Withdrawal Agreement, describing the crucial stages in the Brexit process — from the negotiations to the conclusion of a draft agreement and its rejection, to the extension and the participation of the UK to European Parliament (EP) elections, to the change of UK government and the ensuing constitutional crisis, to the new negotiations with the conclusion of a revised agreement, new extension, and new UK elections eventually leading to the departure of the UK from the EU.


Author(s):  
Anand Menon ◽  
Luigi Scazzieri

This chapter examines the history of the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European integration process. The chapter dissects the long-term trends in public opinion and the more contingent, short-term factors that led to the referendum vote to leave the European Union. The UK was a late joiner and therefore unable to shape the early institutional development of the EEC. British political parties and public opinion were always ambiguous about membership and increasingly Eurosceptic from the early 1990s. Yet the UK had a significant impact on the EU’s development, in the development of the single market programme and eastward enlargement. If Brexit goes through, Britain will nevertheless maintain relations with the EU in all policy areas from agriculture to energy and foreign policy. Europeanization will remain a useful theoretical tool to analyse EU–UK relations even if the UK leaves the Union.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 332-346
Author(s):  
David Mangan*

2020 had been marked as a significant year for the UK with its departure from the European Union. The coronavirus pandemic quickly became the most important issue facing the Government under a third Prime Minister since the 2016 referendum. From the start, problems have dogged this Government in meeting the monumental challenges posed by Covid-19. The UK approached the work implications of this pandemic in some distinct ways, as compared to European Union Member States. This piece is longer than other country reports in this volume as a result of critically engaging with these differences.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document