šŸ“¢THREAD

Last week the Government announced, for the first time, that the EU rejected the UK’s proposals for ā€˜an ambitious agreement with the EU on the temporary movement of business travellers’ that would have ā€˜covered musicians and others’. 1/18

This is the first time the Government let it be known that they would not be able to make good on the assurances they had given the music sector regarding future travelling and working in the EU. 2/18
In February 2020 the Government stated that its objective was to negotiate a Canada-style trade agreement with the EU, similar to the free trade agreements the EU has previously struck with other friendly countries… 3/18
… and through its negotiations on mobility it was exploring how it could provide greater certainty for the music industry via reciprocal provisions based on ā€˜best precedent’. 4/18
But there was no precedent to this. A ā€˜Canada-style’ deal does little if anything for services. For example, Canadian musicians are treated as third-country nationals when travelling to the EU for work. It wasn't in the best interest of the music sector to seek this deal. 5/18
There were countless assurances from the Government in 2020 about their commitment to ensuring musicians could continue to travel and work in the EU. 6/18
For example:

Juneāž”ļøhttps://t.co/YAS7pLzp3a

Septemberāž”ļøhttps://t.co/Y89rYLPdZ6

Septemberāž”ļøhttps://t.co/kQuWwdoA6G

Novemberāž”ļøhttps://t.co/dW28suSMM0

7/18
This was reconfirmed as recently as December, when the Government said they were seeking ā€˜reciprocal mobility arrangements with the EU’ with the view to possibly include ā€˜talented people’ such as musicians under ā€˜temporary entry for business purposes’: Mode IV. 8/18
But now that the trade agreement has been published, it has become clear that Mode IV would have never been suitable for touring musicians from the start, as many have pointed out. 9/18
Mode IV has never been about visa-free travel; it merely offers a guarantee that if the requirements are met/paperwork is filled out correctly that the individual will not be refused entry for no reason. 10/18
Looking back over this, it was disingenuous of the Government to give the music sector assurances on a number of occasions that the trade agreement being negotiated would offer a viable route for touring musicians, under Mode IV or otherwise. 11/18
Musicians now face a mountain of red tape to work in the EU. Musicians need to check the requirements of each country - we have put together an overview of the different requirements for short-stay work permits of each country in the EU/EEA area: https://t.co/id9w8A16fc 12/18
Carnets, depending on instrument, start at approximately £400 plus a security fee. Very few musicians will be able to afford this extra cost which could run to thousands of £. 13/18
This scenario the music sector now finds itself in is not one that it has been preparing for or was assured would happen. 14/18
Therefore, the ISM is calling on the Government to be *fully transparent* as to their negotiations for including the music and wider creative industries in the trade agreement and explain what steps they are now going to take to support the music sector post-Brexit. 15/18
We are doing everything we can to keep our members and music profession up to date with the latest Brexit developments. Next Monday, the ISM (delivered by @ISM_Trust) is hosting an essential webinar on what the trade agreement means for musiciansā¬‡ļø16/18

https://t.co/cAiXqpTJYx
A parliamentary petition seeking a Europe-wide visa-free work permit for touring professionals and artists stands at 220,000+ signatures. Add your nameā¬‡ļø17/18

https://t.co/uavZqmXjSV
Our CEO @DeborahAnnetts will be on
@BBCFrontRow tonight discussing the trade agreement and its impact on musicians - listen live from 19:15ā¬‡ļø18/18

https://t.co/awAsVCNDLy

More from Government

Which metric is a better predictor of the severity of the fall surge in US states?

1) Margin of Democrat victory in Nov 2020 election
or
2) % infected through Sep 1, 2020

Can you guess which plot is which?


The left plot is based on the % infected through Sep 1, 2020. You can see that there is very little correlation with the % infected since Sep 1.

However, there is a *strong* correlation when using the margin of Biden's victory (right).

Infections % from
https://t.co/WcXlfxv3Ah.


This is the strongest single variable I've seen in being able to explain the severity of this most recent wave in each state.

Not past infections / existing immunity, population density, racial makeup, latitude / weather / humidity, etc.

But political lean.

One can argue that states that lean Democrat are more likely to implement restrictions/mandates.

This is valid, so we test this by using the Government Stringency Index made by @UniofOxford.

We also see a correlation, but it's weaker (R^2=0.36 vs 0.50).

https://t.co/BxBBKwW6ta


To avoid look-ahead bias/confounding variables, here is the same analysis but using 2016 margin of victory as the predictor. Similar results.

This basically says that 2016 election results is a better predictor of the severity of the fall wave than intervention levels in 2020!

You May Also Like