Fact check: More people leave than arrive on current youth mobility schemes
Asked 'how do you know there will be fewer people coming here than leaving?' Mr Reynolds said: 'Well, I've got 13 schemes in action already and that's the evidence of them.'
He later added: 'I tell you the evidence of the current schemes just so you know is that they're a net negative on immigration.'
Around 24,400 youth mobility visas were issued to people wanting to come to the UK in 2024.
Although figures are patchy for how many Britons go abroad, data from just three countries – Australia, New Zealand and Canada – suggests that 68,495 British citizens travelled to those countries in 2024 (the Australian data is for the 12 months to the end of June 2024).
That would suggest that Mr Reynolds is right. However it does not take into account that Britons going abroad on these temporary visas will sooner or later come back, as will those who come to the UK.
It is also not clear that this pattern will repeat in any similar deal with the EU. The UK population is much larger than those of Australia, New Zealand and Canada, so there are more Britons who can go to those countries than can come here. With the EU that is reversed.
How many people come to the UK on a youth mobility visa?
Government data shows there were 24,437 people who were handed a youth mobility visa last year. Most of these were from one of the 13 countries with which the UK has a reciprocal arrangement.
A small handful of visas – 131 in total – were for people from countries other than the 13. The Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford has suggested that these are the result of errors in data recording, or due to people having dual nationalities.
The top three countries that sent people to the UK on youth mobility visas between January and December 2024 were Australia (9,754 visas), New Zealand (4,304 visas) and Canada (3,060 visas).
How many Britons go abroad on youth mobility type schemes?
Figures are patchy on how many British people have gone abroad on a youth mobility scheme. The Department for Business and Trade was unable to share data.
Australia publishes a twice-yearly report into what it calls its working holiday visa programme. That is the Australian equivalent to the UK's youth mobility scheme.
The latest such report covered the 12 months to the end of June 2024. That report showed that Australia issued 48,973 working holiday visas to UK citizens.
Data from New Zealand is available on the website of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Using its migration data explorer produces a spreadsheet which shows that there were 9,486 working holiday visas granted by New Zealand to UK citizens in between January and December 2024.
Canadian data does not appear to be publicly available, but the figures were provided to the PA news agency by the Canadian Department for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship.
The data shows that in 2024 there were 9,972 work permits issued to UK and UK overseas territories citizens under the country's working holiday scheme, and a further 64 people had their permits extended.
How do incoming youth mobility visas compare to outgoing?
Net migration is a figure which subtracts the number of people coming into the country from the number of people leaving.
The data cited above suggests that while 9,754 Australians came to the UK on youth mobility visas, 48,973 Britons went in the opposite direction. It must be noted that the time periods measured here are different, the Australian data is for the 12 months ending June 2024, while the UK data is for the 12 months ending December 2024.
Meanwhile the data suggests that 4,304 New Zealanders came to the UK while 9,486 Britons went in the other direction.
Data further shows that 3,060 Canadians came to the UK in 2024, while 9,972 Britons went in the other direction.
This suggests that for each of these three countries the youth mobility schemes are – as Mr Reynolds suggested – reducing net migration. In fact Australia alone appears to receive twice as many Britons (48,973) as all people who the UK receives from all 13 countries added together (24,437).
However, it should be noted that because youth mobility schemes are time-limited, Britons going abroad and people who have come to the UK on such visas will eventually be forced to return.
This means the UK's inbound migration figures should take into account not just Australians and Canadians – for example – coming to the UK, but also Britons returning from Australia and Canada after their youth mobility visas expire.
If it is assumed that everyone returns then over a longer time frame the youth mobility programmes will have a neutral impact on net immigration because every Briton who leaves the UK will come back and every non-Briton who comes to the UK will leave.
This does not take into account the people – both Britons abroad and non-Britons in the UK – who apply for a different visa to stay in their adopted country.
Do these conclusions also apply to the EU scheme?
The impact on net migration of the potential EU scheme will depend on the details of the agreement between London and Brussels.
Madeleine Sumption, director at the Migration Observatory, told the PA news agency that the size of the cap on the programme would be vital for the impact on net migration.
She said the fact the UK sends more people to Australia, Canada and New Zealand than it receives from them 'probably results from the fact that the UK has a much larger population than they do, so we just have more young people potentially interested in moving'.
With the EU scheme, Ms Sumption said, the population sizes are flipped – that is to say the EU's population is much bigger than the UK, leaving more young people who might be willing to come here.
Therefore the smaller the cap on the number of visas is, the more likely both the EU and UK will fill their quotas. If both fill their quotas – and the quotas going both ways are the same – then the impact on net migration will be zero.
However if the cap is large then it is more likely that there will not be as many Britons going to Europe as are coming in the opposite direction, which will bring up net migration.
But, as with the existing schemes, both Britons in Europe and Europeans in the UK will eventually have to leave unless they find another visa, which over the long run should mean that the programme has a neutral impact on net migration.
BBC – Today, 19/05/2025
Migration Observatory – What is the Youth Mobility Scheme and how does it work? (archived)
Gov.uk – Entry clearance visas granted outside the UK (archived page and spreadsheet, using tab Data_Vis_D02)
Australian Department of Home Affairs – Visitor visa statistics (archived)
Australian Department of Home Affairs – Working Holiday Maker visa program report (archived)
New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment – Migration data explorer (archived page and downloaded spreadsheet. To download the correct spreadsheet, instructions can be found at figure.nz (archived): In dataset select 'W1 work decisions', in time period select 'calendar year' and in variables select 'application substream', 'application criteria' and 'decision type')
Canadian data provided to PA news agency (archived)
Madeleine Sumption profile (archived)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
2 hours ago
- ITV News
Reform UK to send first ‘Doge' team to look at council spending in Kent
Reform UK is set to send in its first Elon Musk-style Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) unit to look at 'wasteful spending' in councils. A team of software engineers, data analysts and forensic auditors will 'visit and analyse' local authorities, starting with Kent County Council on Monday, the party said. It follows the US Doge, which was launched during Donald Trump's presidency to cut federal spending. Billionaire Musk was involved but has since left his position spearheading the unit. Reform says its UK version will be led by a yet-unnamed man described as one of the country's 'leading tech entrepreneurs with a specialism in data analytics who has also been a turnaround CEO'. The party said that the unit will use artificial intelligence, advanced data analysis tools and forensic auditing techniques to 'identify wasteful spending and recommend actionable solutions'. A letter sent to Kent County Council, which Reform now controls after the May local elections, read: 'The scope of the review includes but is not limited to: Contractual arrangements with suppliers and consultants, all capital expenditure, use of framework agreements and direct awards, any off-book or contingent liabilities, use of reserves and financial resilience, any audit flags raised by internal or external auditors in the last three years. 'We request that all relevant council officers provide the Doge team with full and prompt access to: Council-held documents, reports and records (electronic and paper), relevant finance, procurement, audit and contract data, meeting minutes and correspondence concerning major procurements, any internal investigations or whistleblowing reports relevant to financial matters, any additional documents that might be of assistance.' It added: 'Should you resist this request, we are ready to pass a council motion to compel the same and will consider any obstruction of our councillors' duties to be gross misconduct. We trust this will not be required.' It is signed by council leader Linden Kemkaran, party chairman Zia Yusuf and party leader Nigel Farage. Mr Yusuf said: "For too long British people have been British taxpayers have watched their money vanish into a black hole. "Their taxes keep going up, their bin collections keep getting less frequent, potholes remain unfixed, their local services keep getting cut. Reform won a historic victory on a mandate to change this. "As promised, we have created a UK Doge to identify and cut wasteful spending of taxpayer money. Our team will use cutting-edge technology and deliver real value for voters." A Kent County Council spokesman declined to comment. The Liberal Democrats, who are the second-biggest party in Kent, say that when so much of the budget is mandatory, Reform have very little room to make savings. Liberal Democrat Cllr Richard Streatfield, Kent County Council, said: "Cuts are not part of the equation. "We have a growing population of over 65s who are using demand-led services and only 0.6% of our budget is on discretionary services. "We are using 99.4% of the county council's taxpayer's money for services that we are legally obliged to provide." Sarah Barwick, Branch Secretary of Unison said: "There's fears of job cuts. KCC's really reduced its number of staff in the number of years I've been employed. "We're right at almost the lowest point of staff that you can get without serious problems that could compromise the services." During a local election campaign launch in March, Mr Farage told supporters: "Frankly folks, what we need in this country to pay for the cuts that people deserve and need, we need a British form of Doge, as Elon Musk has got in America. Let's have a British Doge."
NBC News
3 hours ago
- NBC News
U.S. Salvadoran family's tough journey to Canada: 'We didn't want to be deported'
Aracely Serrano Ayala said she felt her world was ending several times in the last three months. After living and working in the U.S. for more than a decade, the 35-year-old resident of Plainfield, New Jersey, and her partner, Marcos Guardado, began to live in fear because they were undocumented immigrants. The Salvadoran couple never started the process of seeking a green card. As the Trump administration increased its deportation efforts, in March they decided to embark on a journey to Canada with their two daughters and apply for asylum there, where Serrano's brother is a citizen. 'We wanted a better future, to legalize our status and continue working," said Serrano, "but the United States gave us no hope." Serrano said nothing prepared her and her family for being turned away twice at the Canadian border, detained by U.S. immigration authorities and separated from her husband for several weeks, after he was transferred to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center. Serrano and her family are now living legally in Canada, but their story illustrates the complexities of the immigration and the asylum process, both in the U.S. and Canada. 'We just wanted to get out of the country and never imagined we would go through all this,' she says, her voice breaking. An opportunity in Canada - and unexpected setbacks Under the 2015 Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA) between Canada and the United States, asylum-seekers must seek protection in the first safe country they arrive in. That is, if someone enters the U.S. first and meets the requirements, they must begin their asylum application there and cannot do so in Canada, and vice versa. However, there are exceptions in the agreement. If a person enters Canadian territory from the U.S. and can prove they have a close relative in the country who meets certain requirements (being of legal age, having Canadian citizenship or being a permanent resident, among other conditions), the person can enter the country and is allowed to begin their asylum application. 'I was hopeful because I know this agreement exists — and my brother had been there for 20 years,' Serrano said. But when the family got to the Canadian border, issues with documentation and even a misunderstanding over how last names are used in Latin America prevented them from being allowed into Canada and led to their detention in the U.S., illustrating the difficulties around migration and entry into another country. Serrano said that when she and he family crossed the Rainbow Bridge into Canada, "our dream of entering the country had collapsed," as Canadian border officials flagged several issues with their Salvadoran documents. One of the birth certificates had a mistake regarding Serrano's mother's name, Serrano's Canadian attorney, Heather Neufeld, said. Though there was a correction note in the margins, the border officials didn't pay attention to that and thought there was a discrepancy in their names, so they didn't accept it,' Neufeld said in an interview. The attorney added that another aspect complicating the process was that on one document, Serrano's father appeared with only one of his surnames, while on other documents, he had both. 'The [Canadian] officers didn't understand that in Latin America, people have two last names, but sometimes only one appears on the documents. So they thought they were fake. It was a series of errors made by border officials, when in fact, they were legitimate documents,' Neufeld said. Telemundo Noticias requested comment from the Canada Border Security Agency on the Serrano and Guardado case. Although authorities declined to comment on the Salvadoran family's case out of respect for their privacy, Luke Reimer, a spokesperson for the agency, said in a statement that port-of-entry officials are the ones who determine whether the evidence demonstrates that the asylum-seeker is subject to the Canada-United States Agreement. After the couple was declared inadmissible, Canadian authorities deported them back to the U.S., where they were detained at a U.S. Customs and Border Protection facility. 'They checked our documents there at U.S. immigration and then took us to a cell. It was a place with no windows or bathroom. When we wanted to go to the bathroom, we had to tell them to take us,' said Serrano. She said they were held there for two weeks. At the end of March, Serrano said, without warning, U.S. immigration agents sent them back to the Rainbow Bridge port of entry, but because they had the same papers, they were deported again to the U.S. Serrano, Guardado and Neufeld said that neither U.S. nor Canadian authorities have explained who made the decision to take them back to the Canadian port of entry. This is important because generally people only have one opportunity to resubmit their case to authorities. Noticias Telemundo contacted the Department of Homeland Security, ICE and CBP for comment on the case, but didn't receive a response. After the second deportation, Serrano and her daughters were separated from Guardado, who was transferred to an ICE detention center. Guardado said he'd never been imprisoned in his life; "it was the first time that happened to me, and I was there for a month and a few days,' he said, adding that he only had a few minutes to say goodbye to his daughters. However, things began to change. While Guardado was in detention, U.S. authorities placed Serrano in an electronic bracelet and released her along with her daughters. They spent a few days in a shelter in Buffalo, New York, and their case began to attract attention in the Canadian media. Neufeld then filed an official appeal with Canadian authorities. 'We submitted all the evidence with our arguments, but they sent us a one-sentence letter stating that they weren't going to change their initial decision, so the only option left was a petition in federal court,' Neufeld said. On May 5, the Canadian government agreed to allow Serrano and her two daughters to enter the country to begin the asylum application process. Meanwhile, Guardado remained detained in the U.S. and had to post a $12,000 bond to attend the interview with Canadian authorities to be able to reunite with his family. They turned to their family and close friends, all from the same Salvadoran town as Serrano and Guardado. "They all raised the bail to get me out; some put up $50, others $500," Guardado said. "Little by little, it all came together. I have a list of more than 500 people who helped me." Guardado recalled the day they told him he was entering Canada. 'I was able to be with them and hug my crying girls,' Guardado said. Serrano said the biggest difference she's experienced living in Canada is a sense of security and freedom that comforts her. 'We're no longer afraid. Imagine having that freedom with my girls, to go anywhere, without the fear that they'll find us and deport us without us committing any crime,' she said. But while the family begins a new life in Canada, bad news continue to cloud their horizon. Guardado's brother, Jaime — who's married to a naturalized U.S. citizen from El Salvador and was planning to go back to El Salvador as part of his green card process — was detained in New Jersey and continues to be in ICE custody.
Finextra
3 hours ago
- Finextra
How do we regulate a future not yet written?
0 This content has been selected, created and edited by the Finextra editorial team based upon its relevance and interest to our community. This is an excerpt from The Future of European Fintech 2025: A Money20/20 Special Edition. According to the European Fintech Association, the fintech industry has attracted the largest share of all VC funding over the last five years, worth around $85 billion. This showcases the strong potential of fintech in Europe, and how the sector will be a driver for economic growth – with the industry expecting to grow more than fivefold over 2021 figures (5.5x) and be worth $190 billion by 2030. As fintech increasingly enters the social and economic fabric of Europe, the question of governance is no longer one of compliance with rules. In 2025, new rules such as PSD3, MiCA, DORA, and MiFID II are beginning to converge. Even though their real impact will be a five- to 10 year play, actually rewriting the way fintech is imagined, deployed, and depended upon will happen in real-time. As Vibhor Narang, executive director, structured solutions cash management, transaction banking, Europe, Standard Chartered, observes, 'the evolving regulatory landscape in Europe is not merely reshaping fintech. It's redefining the very foundations of financial innovation and collaboration.' Regulation will be more innovation driver than compliance tool Looking forward to beyond 2025, regulation will be less of a brake and more of an active driver of innovation. The convergence of PSD3, MiCA, DORA, and MiFID II shows a Europe which is open, transparent, and bestows data rights that are not just regulated but architected to foster competitive environments. In Julija Fescenko, head of marketing and communication, Magnetiq Bank's view, 'these combined forces will drive standardisation and foster more innovation-friendly environments, provided implementation does not stifle agility.' The industry should expect regulators stepping in to design digital infrastructure, particularly in relation to open finance. PSD3's extension into safe data portability will broaden, enabling consumers to seamlessly coordinate financial experiences between providers in the future, just like APIs do with software. Narang goes on: 'PSD3's extension into open finance […] is connecting previously siloed financial products into cohesive customer journeys. This could influence the rise of modular finance: hyper-personalised financial 17 services constructed dynamically through regulated data-sharing protocols.' Operational resilience will become a competitive differentiator By 2030, operational resilience will not be a regulatory checkbox under DORA but a market expectation. Financial institutions that can assure service continuity and cybersecurity against volatility will be more trusted. Johnnie Martin, senior associate, Augmentum Fintech, believes that 'the need for the robust back-up systems required by DORA was brough into sharp relief.' He adds: 'Fintechs are uniquely placed to deliver solutions to many of the problems that these regulations are trying to solve.' The fintech sector can expect fintech firms to create resilience-as-a-service offerings, including third-party monitoring products, stress tests managed by software, and disaster recovery solutions made in modules. With the entire fintech value chain now in the spotlight, resilience will no longer be each company's concern but a collective responsibility across the ecosystem. MiCA will unleash a tokenised finance boom MiCA's launch in 2025 is only the start. Within the next ten years, it will standardise digital asset adoption throughout Europe, opening doors to mass tokenisation of traditional assets, programmable payments, and the emergence of regulated stablecoins. This view is shared by Narang, who clarified that 'MiCA's unified framework […] is creating unprecedented opportunities for regulated innovation in digital assets.' In the future, controlled digital wallets that can deal with fiat and tokenised assets may be incorporated into mainstream banks. MiCA will prompt traditional institutions to enter Web3 finance, especially as corporate treasuries search for programmable yield-generating products. Regulation will, however, have to catch up with innovation in DeFi, which MiCA addresses only marginally at present. This suggests the introduction of MiCA II, a second, more advanced regulatory layer that addresses staking, algorithmic stablecoins, and cross-border DeFi protocols. Europe is at a fintech leadership fork While Europe once led the world in open banking, that leadership is now in question. Ahmed Badr, chief operating officer, GoCardless, explores how 'Europe led the world in open banking innovation a decade ago, but is now at risk of falling behind as other countries leapfrog ahead.' The next few years will tell whether the continent doubles down on competitive, consumer-driven innovation, or allows red tape to stifle momentum. Badr calls for 'greater ambition and support for innovators,' and that need is likely to intensify as global players, especially in Asia and the Middle East, move aggressively on embedded finance and real-time cross-border infrastructure. AI governance will define institutional trust The most uncertain, and urgent, regulatory horizon is artificial intelligence. By 2030, AI will be embedded into every tier of financial services, from real-time lending decisions to autonomous risk scoring and investor advice. But trust in this future hinges on one factor: ethical regulation. Tom Moore, head of financial services at Moore Kingston Smith, mentions that 'the risks of bias, misinformation, or system failure are very real. These will only grow as generative AI is used more and more for personalised financial advice.' Leading institutions are already preparing for this shift. Wendy Redshaw, chief digital information officer, NatWest Group, outlines a framework based on explainability, fairness, and human oversight: 'We ensure AI systems are subject to human oversight […] that their decisions can be explained, and that they are free from unfair bias.' Standard Chartered has also formalised this approach with its Responsible Artificial Intelligence Framework, embedding 'governance, continuous oversight, and robust data privacy into every deployment. Leadership will be defined by those who not only harness the power of AI, but also set the benchmark for ethical stewardship,' says Narang. By the end of the decade, we predict a harmonised European AI regulation for financial services, likely inspired by the EU AI Act but more tailored to the risk profile of finance. This will require firms to perform continuous AI audits, maintain decision traceability, and prove non-discrimination by design. Governance will become real-time and inclusive As data quantities grow and digital services get spread across third-party platforms, strict regulation will become less suitable. Europe's governance model will be required to change towards real-time supervision that combines regtech solutions, AI-driven anomaly detection, and adaptive policy updates. This implies a future where regulators and businesses collaborate continuously and in the long term, rather than sporadically through compliance tests. Fescenko continues to say that 'fintech companies must take the initiative in self-regulation. This involves conducting regular AI audits and implementing strong governance structures.' Ultimately, regulatory agility will become as critical as business agility. Toward a new regulatory future Europe's regulation of fintech is changing from a rulebook-based approach to a co-created, principle-based approach. The successful institutions will be those that redefine compliance a constraining idea rather than as a strategic background for expansion and growth. Redshaw says 'we are focused on aligning innovation with regulation. Our priority remains on supporting customers with the best, safest and most compliant digital experiences.' Looking ahead, regulation will no longer chase innovation, it will partner with it. The governance of tomorrow will demand new capabilities: regulatory forecasting, ethical design thinking, real-time oversight, and cross-sector collaboration. As Narang aptly concludes: 'The institutions that will thrive […] will be those that view regulatory compliance not as a burden, but as a strategic enabler that builds trust, enhances service delivery, and accelerates responsible innovation.' Europe now has the opportunity to set the gold standard for fintech regulation in the digital age, not by slowing change, but by governing it wisely.
