Brexit Referendum Superthread

murphaph

But I don't believe there is anything incompatible with our EU obligations in offering citizenship to any third country that we like. How EU members deal with third countries in matters of immigration are strictly national competences.

murphaph

First Up wrote: »

I don't think so. The EU is negotiating as an entity and terms will be agreed as an entity. I don't expect we will see bi-lateral deals being agreed across the EU and for sure the migration issue will be part of an overall agreement that covers trade and much more.

Yeah that's if an agreement is reached and a treaty concluded. In the no deal scenario it's definitely as I alluded to.

First Up

murphaph wrote:

But I don't believe there is anything incompatible with our EU obligations in offering citizenship to any third country that we like. How EU members deal with third countries in matters of immigration are strictly national competences.

Yes, but as I said in an earlier post, negotiating a divorce settlemnent with a departing EU member brings new and unprecedented factors into play. It takes us into uncharted waters.

Fratton Fred

View wrote: »

It would be incompatible with our commitments under the EU Treaties particularly wrt third country nationals.

I can't see how it would be. One of the criticism of the Brexit voters was that many were voting to stop immigration from Pakistan/Syria/Iraq etc, when in reality, the UK could prevent non eu immigration any time it liked

View wrote: »

EU/EEA citizens must be given preference over non-EU ones. Hence it is legally indefensible to treat non-EU/EEA ones better than EU ones. UK citizens will have to join the same queue as Brazilians. Egyptians etc and cannot expect to get any preferential testament

No one is treating any one better, every one is being treated the same.

View wrote: »

Need I point out that claiming "the eu does not do, is tell eu countries how it can treat citizens of non eu countries" while expecting a non-EU UK-EU deal to do precisely that is contradictory?

It is, but this is a first time event.

First Up wrote: »

If we were talking about Burundi or somewhere, Ireland could make its own immigration policy and it would be just our business. But we are in uncharted waters as regards how a country departing the EU will be treated. The EU and the UK will be unraveling a range of immigration related issues - travel, working rights, residence, access to services etc - all of these are up for discussion and negotiation as part of the overall divorce settlement.

All the signals are that the EU intends to adopt a single position in negotiations, plus you have the threats from the Visegrad countries to block any Brexit deal that limits their citizens' rights to work in the UK.

Exactly, so this is clearly a big issue for the Visegard countries and an important negotiation point. Especially if you are prepared to concede on it anyway, why not try and get something in return, for example, the support of the Visegard countries in securing rights for your own citizens.

First Up wrote: »

Clearly the long standing Ireland/UK FTA and the land border are complications but I expect these will be addressed as a specific issue and not be allowed to be used as negotiating ploy for the wider UK - EU agreement on travel.

I would expect these to be among the first things to be addressed

djpbarry wrote: »

The EU has repeatedly said it will say nothing until Article 50 is triggered. It’s the British government that has made this an issue, not the EU.
I would be amazed if has not been discussed behind closed doors.

I don't think they have made it an issue, the fact that the Lords put it in the Bill and the commons took it out again gave the media something to make an issue out of.

The fact that it then went back through the Lords unamended and unchallenged a second time, suggests to me there has be discussions behind closed doors there as well.

djpbarry

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The Ireland Act (1949), which thus predates the EU, guarantees the rights of Irish citizens in the UK, and those of UK citizens in Ireland, so hard to imagine that either would want to revoke its terms.

I really wouldn't bet against anything at this point.

View

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The Ireland Act (1949), which thus predates the EU, guarantees the rights of Irish citizens in the UK, and those of UK citizens in Ireland, so hard to imagine that either would want to revoke its terms. That said, unless and until the British government makes their position clear, it's hard to see why any EU country would make the first reciprocal move.

The Ireland Act (1949) is a piece of UK legislation. It has absolutely no legal status under Irish law and therefore does not and cannot guarantee UK citizens any rights in Ireland.

Even if it or any other act of the Oireachtas did so, EU law would "trump" it in the event of a clash. The "No provision" clause of the constitution is clear.

ancapailldorcha

Thomas__ wrote: »

Sorry but you appear to be not sharp on the up take, aren´t you?

The insults aren't acceptable here so refrain from any more of this please.

Fratton Fred

View wrote: »

The Ireland Act (1949) is a piece of UK legislation. It has absolutely no legal status under Irish law and therefore does not and cannot guarantee UK citizens any rights in Ireland.

Even if it or any other act of the Oireachtas did so, EU law would "trump" it in the event of a clash. The "No provision" clause of the constitution is clear.

UK citizens are not subject to the 1935 aliens act. That is Irish law.

I'm not sure which piece of eu law would trump or even clash with that.

Foghladh

djpbarry wrote: »

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Has the eu made any such guarantees? can the eu make any such guarantees?

The EU has repeatedly said it will say nothing until Article 50 is triggered. It’s the British government that has made this an issue, not the EU.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Are the eu council and eu parliament debating the fate of British citizens in the eu?

I would be amazed if has not been discussed behind closed doors.

I'm not sure that it's fair to say that the British government has made an issue of it. Essentially they're following the same position as the EU in this regard, in that they aren't commenting until Article 50 has been triggered. The notification is served, an agreement on mutual recognition is reached, the issue is resolved. What seems to be happening is that one side is being pilloried for not having an issue enshrined in law whilst the other is saying 'no comment'

View

Fratton Fred wrote: »

UK citizens are not subject to the 1935 aliens act. That is Irish law.

That is the situation that applies while the U.K. is an EU member. It can only continue if it is compatible with EU law (which it would not be).

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I'm not sure which piece of eu law would trump or even clash with that.

Try looking up "third country nationals". The EU already has a number of directives and regulations relating to them so this is not a new concept.

Once UK citizens become "third country nationals", Ireland will have no option other than to treat UK citizens as any other "third country national". There is no legal basis in EU law for us to pretend either
that UK citizens will be EU citizens when they won't or that we are all back in the days of the Empire circa 1935.

View

Foghladh wrote: »

I'm not sure that it's fair to say that the British government has made an issue of it. '

The British government just went out of its way in the House of Commons to vote down an amendment from the House of Lords dealing with the status of EU citizens in the U.K. - Actions speak louder than words as the saying goes.

Foghladh

View wrote: »

Foghladh wrote: »

I'm not sure that it's fair to say that the British government has made an issue of it. '

The British government just went out of its way in the House of Commons to vote down an amendment from the House of Lords dealing with the status of EU citizens in the U.K. - Actions speak louder than words as the saying goes.

The House of Commons voted down a unilateral declaration of an issue.

Enzokk

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I was just pointing out the double standards that seem to be prevelant on here.

I like pointing out double standards as much as anyone, but you seem to be predicting how people would react to something that hasn't happened so I am not sure what to make of your post. I think you will be offended if I was accusing you of double standards to something that hasn't happened and that you haven't replied to.

Unless you can show that Verhofstadt did actually say that the rights of British citizens currently working and living in the EU are a bargaining chip for the EU to use in the upcoming negotiations.

Peregrinus

View wrote: »

Try looking up "third country nationals". The EU already has a number of directives and regulations relating to them so this is not a new concept.

Once UK citizens become "third country nationals", Ireland will have no option other than to treat UK citizens as any other "third country national". There is no legal basis in EU law for us to pretend either
that UK citizens will be EU citizens when they won't or that we are all back in the days of the Empire circa 1935.

Is there an EU directive or regulation which requires member states, in immigration matters, to treat all third country nationals identically, and which forbids them from granting the nationals of some third countries rights or status which is more advantageous than the rights or status of other third country nationals?

If there is such a law, you need to cite it at this point.

If there is no such law, your argument basically falls over, doesn't it?

I'm pretty certain that there is no such law, if only because the UK - currently an EU member state - does treat different third country nationals differently for immigration purposes, and does treat them differently from the way they are treated by other EU member states, and I have never seen any suggestion that in doing so they infringe EU law.

So if the Brits can do it with respect to, e.g., Australians, as they currently do, the Irish can certainly do it to the Brits once the Brits become third-country nationals.

If you say EU law forbids this, link to the law, please.

First Up

Peregrinus wrote:

Is there an EU directive or regulation which requires member states, in immigration matters, to treat all third country nationals identically, and which forbids them from granting the nationals of some third countries rights or status which is more advantageous than the rights or status of other third country nationals?

A common immigration policy has been in train since the Lisbon Treaty in 2009 but it is not complete or universal and may never be. Ireland, the UK and Denmark opted out of some aspects (our opt out because of the CTA.)

Some competences remain at national level.

djpbarry

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I don't think they have made it an issue, the fact that the Lords put it in the Bill and the commons took it out again gave the media something to make an issue out of.

It’s not like it suddenly raised its head when the Bill was passed through to the House of Lords – this is something that has been discussed since before the referendum itself. It’s something that the government could have addressed before the result was even known.

Realistically, nobody wants the status of British or EU nationals abroad to be altered, because the tremendous upheaval it would cause is in nobody’s interest. The British government had the opportunity to officially recognise this and set a positive tone for the upcoming negotiations. Instead, they have literally taken the polar opposite stance and said they’re not guaranteeing anything, threatening to just walk away if they don’t get what they want. If “getting the best possible deal for Britain” is the aim, then they really couldn’t have set a more adversarial tone for the negotiations. All the while, the British tabloids paint the EU as the bad guy.

And I don’t buy the whole “poor negotiating strategy” argument either. In stating that they plan to leave the single market and probably the customs union, and repeated references to a long list of countries supposedly waiting in the wings to sign trade deals, the Tories have essentially already played their hand – playing the EU citizens card at the same time would hardly have been a major leap beyond that.

djpbarry

Foghladh wrote: »

I'm not sure that it's fair to say that the British government has made an issue of it. Essentially they're following the same position as the EU in this regard, in that they aren't commenting until Article 50 has been triggered.

As said above, the UK has already commented extensively.

Foghladh wrote: »

What seems to be happening is that one side is being pilloried for not having an issue enshrined in law whilst the other is saying 'no comment'

No, one side is rightly being pilloried for calling a referendum without clarifying what the result of that referendum would have on three million residents (whose votes very likely would have changed the result).

Thomas__

The final date to send the letter to Trigger Article 50 for the UKs Exit from the EU is set to be 29th March 2017:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/0320/861092-brexit/

Exit aimed for 29th March 2019.

Nody

Thomas__ wrote: »

The final date to send the letter to Trigger Article 50 for the UKs Exit from the EU is set to be 29th March 2017:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/0320/861092-brexit/

Exit aimed for 29th March 2019.

Good; that should sort out my summer quota for laughs then once the Brexit trio finds out what EU puts on the table and thinks of their demands to date. Oh and as a recap here's what they are suppose to deliver:

“After we Vote Leave, there won’t be a sudden change that disrupts the economy.” – Boris Johnson, Gisela Stuart and Michael Gove

“We would immediately be able to start negotiating new trade deals… which could enter into force immediately after the UK leaves the EU” – Chris Grayling

“There is a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it… Britain will have access to the Single Market after we vote leave… The idea that our trade will suffer because we stop imposing terrible rules such as the Clinical Trial Directive is silly.”

“It will be possible to negotiate a new settlement with the EU, including a UK-EU free trade deal, by the next general election in May 2020”

So new trade deals to go live on day 1, no disruption to the economy, free trade deal with EU, access to the single market without applying EU rules to be delivered by the three stooges in the next two years. Sit back and enjoy the popcorn.

Thomas__

Nody wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

The final date to send the letter to Trigger Article 50 for the UKs Exit from the EU is set to be 29th March 2017:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/0320/861092-brexit/

Exit aimed for 29th March 2019.

Good; that should sort out my summer quota for laughs then once the Brexit trio finds out what EU puts on the table and thinks of their demands to date. Oh and as a recap here's what they are suppose to deliver:

“After we Vote Leave, there won’t be a sudden change that disrupts the economy.” – Boris Johnson, Gisela Stuart and Michael Gove

“We would immediately be able to start negotiating new trade deals… which could enter into force immediately after the UK leaves the EU” – Chris Grayling

“There is a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it… Britain will have access to the Single Market after we vote leave… The idea that our trade will suffer because we stop imposing terrible rules such as the Clinical Trial Directive is silly.”

“It will be possible to negotiate a new settlement with the EU, including a UK-EU free trade deal, by the next general election in May 2020”

So new trade deals to go live on day 1, no disruption to the economy, free trade deal with EU, access to the single market without applying EU rules to be delivered by the three stooges in the next two years. Sit back and enjoy the popcorn.

Well, it´s certainly not unwise to look at the things unfolding within the coming two years from an angle with more humour than annoyance. I am looking forward to watch the Brexiteers throwing one fit after another when they have to realise that they were all lied to.

They should remember those who were lying to them and deliver their anger right to them at their door step, above all the Brexiteers, Mr Farage and Mr Johnson.

wes

Nody wrote: »

So new trade deals to go live on day 1, no disruption to the economy, free trade deal with EU, access to the single market without applying EU rules to be delivered by the three stooges in the next two years. Sit back and enjoy the popcorn.

I wonder who they will blame for all there lies. A mix of the EU, and "Brexit traitors" (the people who pointed out there claims were bull to begin with) who just didn't wish hard enough, will be blamed.

demfad

Thomas__ wrote: »

Well, it´s certainly not unwise to look at the things unfolding within the coming two years from an angle with more humour than annoyance. I am looking forward to watch the Brexiteers throwing one fit after another when they have to realise that they were all lied to.

They should remember those who were lying to them and deliver their anger right to them at their door step, above all the Brexiteers, Mr Farage and Mr Johnson.

I fear Thomas that the role of the media in this will be exposed for all to see.
The papers that the Brexiters read will spin this and blame the EU for being unreasonable. In fact I believe this is the only 'safety net' that the UK negotiators are interested in.

Thomas__

demfad wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

Well, it´s certainly not unwise to look at the things unfolding within the coming two years from an angle with more humour than annoyance. I am looking forward to watch the Brexiteers throwing one fit after another when they have to realise that they were all lied to.

They should remember those who were lying to them and deliver their anger right to them at their door step, above all the Brexiteers, Mr Farage and Mr Johnson.

I fear Thomas that the role of the media in this will be exposed for all to see.
The papers that the Brexiters read will spin this and blame the EU for being unreasonable. In fact I believe this is the only 'safety net' that the UK negotiators are interested in.

The role of the media has been already exposed by many people and you´re right, this is the way it will go. Blame anybody but not oneself, that´s how the Brexiteers think and act.

As the Brit govt has already stated that there will be no early GE, Mrs May will have to work through these two difficult years ahead.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/mar/20/tom-watson-accuses-momentum-of-hard-left-plan-to-take-control-of-labour-politics-live

The Scottish will not give in which means more ordeals on her back:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/19/theresa-may-warned-of-looming-battle-over-Devolution

I think that this will not just lead the UK to the breaking point, but to the actual break up upon Brexit.

If it finally comes to that, it will be very ironic that it all falls back on the very party which always campaigned with their national pride and "sense of Independence" that pathed the way to see the very country they hold so dear breaking up itself, the UKIP was the driving force behind Brexit, and the UKIP will be the party that goes down in history as the one party initiating that break up of the UK. I hope that on this day, someone will get hold of Mr Farage and holds him accountable because it was him in the first place who propagated the lies that will fall apart like a house of cards.

Thomas__

wes wrote: »

Nody wrote: »

So new trade deals to go live on day 1, no disruption to the economy, free trade deal with EU, access to the single market without applying EU rules to be delivered by the three stooges in the next two years. Sit back and enjoy the popcorn.

I wonder who they will blame for all there lies. A mix of the EU, and "Brexit traitors" (the people who pointed out there claims were bull to begin with) who just didn't wish hard enough, will be blamed.

Quite so, cos they really believe that Britain is so special that she has to get all she wants and that without concessions from herself. I can imagine that the rest of the EU might be relieved once the Brits are out of the door, being rid of some difficult member, but one shouldn´t forget about the consequences this Brexit will bring with for some close trading partners in the EU with Britain.

yosser hughes

Do people really still use The Guardian as a source of objective news and opinion?

Thomas__

yosser hughes wrote: »

Do people really still use The Guardian as a source of objective news and opinion?

Who really has or is the source of objective news and opinion when it comes to Brexit? The media is as much divided on the subject like the people are themselves. I even no longer consider the BBC as being objective on the subject. There is no such source and one is rather left to pick one side or both and form his / her own opinion on the matter.

There is more coverage about this subject on The Guardian than on the BBC and frankly, I am pro-EU and have no desire to read the tabloids who back Brexit.

ancapailldorcha

Thomas__ wrote: »

There is more coverage about this subject on The Guardian than on the BBC and frankly, I am pro-EU and have no desire to read the tabloids who back Brexit.

As would I be. I have family in London who are quite conservative and buy many of the right-wing papers on a daily basis. I gave it a go and found them severly lacking in insight with the same tropes about wages being lowered and German cars being trotted out ad nauseam.

yosser hughes

Thomas__ wrote: »

Who really has or is the source of objective news and opinion when it comes to Brexit? The media is as much divided on the subject like the people are themselves. I even no longer consider the BBC as being objective on the subject. There is no such source and one is rather left to pick one side or both and form his / her own opinion on the matter.

There is more coverage about this subject on The Guardian than on the BBC and frankly, I am pro-EU and have no desire to read the tabloids who back Brexit.

Right so. You read what confirms your own bias. You're not alone there I suppose.

Thomas__

yosser hughes wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

Who really has or is the source of objective news and opinion when it comes to Brexit? The media is as much divided on the subject like the people are themselves. I even no longer consider the BBC as being objective on the subject. There is no such source and one is rather left to pick one side or both and form his / her own opinion on the matter.

There is more coverage about this subject on The Guardian than on the BBC and frankly, I am pro-EU and have no desire to read the tabloids who back Brexit.

Right so. You read what confirms your own bias. You're not alone there I suppose.

You might call it "my own bias", but in the end of the day, as I am no UK citizen, I can only watch what comes along with Brexit and hold those 48% remainers in higher esteem than the 52% Brexiteers. Sometimes, one doesn´t has much of a choice but to take the one side that suits oneself best.

catbear

In fairness the electoral system in the UK influences the partizan nature of its media. In other nations where there's PR voting systems and a lot more coalition governments its not as easy for the media to take sides.