Europe: Youth Mobility

Earl of Effingham Excerpts

Thursday 30th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, I start by thanking the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans for securing this debate. I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Moraes, on his maiden speech. I also flag that I greatly enjoyed hearing about the tour of the noble Baroness, Lady Featherstone—from Oxford Polytechnic to travelling in Europe to politics.

I believe all noble Lords would agree that our country’s youth are our future. We have heard much talk this week of the importance of economic growth, but long-term growth will be achieved only if we nurture and cherish those young people who are the future leaders of tomorrow. Educational opportunities, including those for travel and exchange, are vital for Britain’s youth if they are to flourish. The noble Lord, Lord Watson of Invergowrie, mentioned the existing bilateral youth mobility agreements, as did my noble friends Lord Kirkhope and Lord Jackson.

To facilitate such educational exchanges, the UK already has bilateral youth mobility agreements with 12 countries. These are reciprocal arrangements that benefit young people from both countries involved. We also have the Turing and Horizon schemes. However, it is equally important that we ensure that such bilateral schemes are balanced with the needs of the UK. Therefore, these schemes have strict caps on the numbers of people who are able to obtain visas under them and quotas to ensure that the UK retains complete control over the numbers of people entering the country through such visas.

Many noble Lords have raised in the debate the proposal for a new EU-UK youth mobility scheme put forward by the European Commission last year, but His Majesty’s Official Opposition believe that there are several issues with this. First, an EU-UK youth mobility scheme would pose challenges to British universities. The Commission’s proposal included provision for equal treatment between EU and UK citizens in respect of higher education tuition fees. Currently, the level of tuition fees for international students for an undergraduate degree varies between £11,400 and £38,000 per year, and the institutions involved derive approximately 20% of their revenue from international students’ fees. If EU students were to pay home fees, this could place a further strain on the finances of universities, many of which are already struggling.

Jamie Arrowsmith, head of the international arm of Universities UK, told the trade publication Research Professional News that an EU-UK youth mobility scheme would be

“difficult for the Government to agree to”

given the financial situation of British universities. He continued:

“At a time when tuition fees don’t cover the full cost of teaching … it’s difficult to see how this could work without exacerbating concerns over financial sustainability or imposing a significant cost on the government”.


Secondly, there are concerns surrounding numbers. Home Office statistics indicate that, during the year ending June 2024, 24,091 grants were made through the current youth mobility scheme. That would appear manageable, but with the ONS recently stating that the UK population will rise to 72.5 million by 2032, it is important that we take a measured approach to the number of people coming to the UK. The country voted to leave the EU. We must therefore be careful that we do not enter into any arrangement that may lead to freedom of movement being unintentionally implemented. An EU-wide youth mobility scheme, as the European Commission called for, would potentially lead to that.

We have also heard much talk of the Government’s proposed EU reset, which was mentioned by my noble friends Lord Frost and Lord Jackson. The 2024 Labour manifesto stated that Labour is:

“confident in our status outside of the EU, but a leading nation in Europe once again, with an improved and ambitious relationship with our European partners”.

The Prime Minister has stated that the Government do not have plans to introduce such a scheme, but he has not ruled it out completely. Given that they have made so much of their reset with the EU and that the European Union appears to be pushing for a youth mobility scheme to be part of any new deal with the UK, how can we be sure that the Government do not agree to something that may see freedom of movement reintroduced? Can the Minister confirm that His Majesty’s Government will not enter into an agreement with the EU that introduces an open-ended youth mobility scheme?

Finally, we should have a greater focus on domestic opportunities for our young people. There is a plethora of enriching experiences from which they can benefit at home, such as the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award and the cadet force, which I referred to in today’s third Oral Question. As an example, studies have confirmed that being on the cadet force improves school attendance, improves mental and physical well-being and results in enhanced employability. While the report did not make a monetary estimate of the total benefits of being a cadet, it estimated that the cost savings from a reduced use of mental health services and better educational outcomes were worth around £95 million a year. For that reason, we ask the Minister why the Government are removing the National Citizen Service and why the Department for Education is ceasing its funding of the cadet expansion programme.

I hope all noble Lords agree that, if we want our young generation truly to thrive, we should be strengthening these programmes and others like them, not removing them or cutting their funding.