In many countries, you will need to carry your registration certificate and national identity card or passport at all times. If you leave them at home, you may be fined but cannot be expelled just for this.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
I have just learnt that the Spanish girlfriend of a relative is moving to Ibiza and he's going too. No reason other than the political climate for EU citizens feels different now. As someone who has a home in France it did make me wonder whether things might eventually turn sour the other way. I'm coming to the conclusion that nothing short of a full reversal of the referendum should be acceptable to the 16.5 million Remainers. Possession is 9/10th of the law and we shouldn't give up our membership without a much more prolonged fight than we've done so far.
I do hope your relative will remember he has to register with the authorities if he wants to live in Spain for more than 3 months. He will also need to have proof that he can support himself and have his own medical insurance.
No, say it aint so, Roger and his second home in France and Polly with her tuscany villa? Who will serve them in pret a manger once we leave the EU? Their lack of self awareness is outstanding.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
They are not changing retrospectively. You don't have to prove you had already registered which is what retrospective would mean. When Spain changed their immigration rules in 2012 it wasn't a 'retrospective' change.
This really is desperate spinning from you Eurofanatics. Isn't Britain horrible, asking people to do exactly what they have to do in most other countries in the wonderful EU.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
. No reason other than the political climate for EU citizens feels different now.
That's a shame - and of course, "how they feel' is the appropriate metric for them.
But it shouldn't be read across into a broader picture - on many measures the UK remains among the more open and tolerant societies in Europe.
Two friends have left the country to return to Eastern Europe due to Brexit worries. Middle class computer programmers, the type of which this country can't get enough of.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
. No reason other than the political climate for EU citizens feels different now.
That's a shame - and of course, "how they feel' is the appropriate metric for them.
But it shouldn't be read across into a broader picture - on many measures the UK remains among the more open and tolerant societies in Europe.
Two friends have left the country to return to Eastern Europe due to Brexit worries. Middle class computer programmers, the type of which this country can't get enough of.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
It also shows the "if only our own government had enforced the rules" argument to be barely holding water. Soon as they did we would get this. As soon as we start trying to deport the army of romanian big issue sellers and the 30% of rough sleepers who are of EU origin back to their country we would hit the brick wall like this.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
They are not changing retrospectively. You don't have to prove you had already registered which is what retrospective would mean. When Spain changed their immigration rules in 2012 it wasn't a 'retrospective' change.
This really is desperate spinning from you Eurofanatics. Isn't Britain horrible, asking people to do exactly what they have to do in most other countries in the wonderful EU.
Good to know the Europhobes are happy to frighten little old ladies in pursuit of their mad obsession.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
I have just learnt that the Spanish girlfriend of a relative is moving to Ibiza and he's going too. No reason other than the political climate for EU citizens feels different now. As someone who has a home in France it did make me wonder whether things might eventually turn sour the other way. I'm coming to the conclusion that nothing short of a full reversal of the referendum should be acceptable to the 16.5 million Remainers. Possession is 9/10th of the law and we shouldn't give up our membership without a much more prolonged fight than we've done so far.
I do hope your relative will remember he has to register with the authorities if he wants to live in Spain for more than 3 months. He will also need to have proof that he can support himself and have his own medical insurance.
No, say it aint so, Roger and his second home in France and Polly with her tuscany villa? Who will serve them in pret a manger once we leave the EU? Their lack of self awareness is outstanding.
To be fair to Roger, France is pone of the few EU countries that doesn't require registration these days for EU nationals. So with his parochial French view of the world he is probably unaware it is the norm in most other EU countries.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
But it's not the same is it. We have a major constitutional change imminent and as part of that change we are requiring registration for the first time. That doesn't feel like a neutral thing just to bring us into line with the practice in other countries.
Personally I'm hoping that I shall have an operation this year which will sort out my lumbar stenosis and in due course give me both legs again. I also hope that this time next year I shall be in a warmer climate.
I had that operation early last year and it went very well (although as a progressive condition some of the symptoms have returned), so I wish you the best of luck. Very important to follow the post-op instructions regarding exercise, and the things you shouldn't be doing.
Having scrolled back to find something else I found your very kind and helpful post. I'm sorry to learn that some of the symptoms have returned; an acquaintance who has also had it done reports that he's back to normal. Or, at least his wife reports that he is. Might be different!
TBH I'm looking forward to getting back to exercise, especially walking!
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
But it's not the same is it. We have a major constitutional change imminent and as part of that change we are requiring registration for the first time. That doesn't feel like a neutral thing just to bring us into line with the practice in other countries.
which is why free movement has been such a disproportionate problem here. We dont have the systems or values necessary to police it properly.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
They are not changing retrospectively. You don't have to prove you had already registered which is what retrospective would mean. When Spain changed their immigration rules in 2012 it wasn't a 'retrospective' change.
This really is desperate spinning from you Eurofanatics. Isn't Britain horrible, asking people to do exactly what they have to do in most other countries in the wonderful EU.
Good to know the Europhobes are happy to frighten little old ladies in pursuit of their mad obsession.
Ah, falling back on your old tricks when you have been found out to be speaking in ignorance. Try answering the points at hand rather than just thrashing out because you have been shown to be an ignorant hypocrite.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
Nonsense, Richard. The Home Office ad talked about EU citizens having to “apply” to remain here. No EU citizen has to apply to stay in another EU member state. They have the right to do so. Applications can be refused.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
But it's not the same is it. We have a major constitutional change imminent and as part of that change we are requiring registration for the first time. That doesn't feel like a neutral thing just to bring us into line with the practice in other countries.
It is exactly the same. You may not like it but it is bringing us into line with most other EU countries.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
They are not changing retrospectively. You don't have to prove you had already registered which is what retrospective would mean. When Spain changed their immigration rules in 2012 it wasn't a 'retrospective' change.
This really is desperate spinning from you Eurofanatics. Isn't Britain horrible, asking people to do exactly what they have to do in most other countries in the wonderful EU.
Good to know the Europhobes are happy to frighten little old ladies in pursuit of their mad obsession.
Ah, falling back on your old tricks when you have been found out to be speaking in ignorance. Try answering the points at hand rather than just thrashing out because you have been shown to be an ignorant hypocrite.
Try not frightening little old ladies in pursuit of your mad obsession. It’s not hard.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
But it's not the same is it. We have a major constitutional change imminent and as part of that change we are requiring registration for the first time. That doesn't feel like a neutral thing just to bring us into line with the practice in other countries.
which is why free movement has been such a disproportionate problem here. We dont have the systems or values necessary to police it properly.
How has free movement from the EU been more of a problem than the much larger number of immigrants from outside the EU?
I see that Tories actually realise how bad their evil policies are once they are personally affected , now that Nigel Evans has been beggared he has a damascene conversion and admits he was wrong to vote for the Tory policy. Poetic justice, if only more of them could be hoist by their own petards.
It does seem inequitable that a cleared defendant in a criminal case is not allowed to recover their costs. I could see the argument for capping it to “legal aid rates” (if there is such a tarrif, don’t know) and if they want a QC they pay the excess out of their own pocket but not reasonable to have nothing
'Want' a QC or 'need' the expertise of a QC?
We are returning to the days of 'Justice, like the Ritz Hotel, is open to all!'
I suspect that in most criminal cases that truly need the expertise of a QC for more than a quick consult are those where the accused have the means (legitimate or not) to pay!
Hard cases/bad law?
If it’s uncapped then the incentive is for defendants to choose the most expensive counsel. All I’m suggesting is a fixed reimbursement hourly rate. If a QC is willing to work for that they can.
Add in judicial discretion to authorise additional cost coverage if appropriate.
The honours list does seem to contain many people previously honoured, now having their baubles upgraded. For instance, just one BBC page includes CBEs for: Gruffalo author Julia Donaldson MBE; stage actress Sophie Okonedo OBE; violinist Nicola Benedetti MBE; artists Tacita Dean OBE and Gillian Wearing OBE. Is this usual or has the honours committee simply run out of ideas?
The whole system needs scrapping. It is beyond anachronistic.
It's not really as many nations have forms of civic awards, they're just called different things and they don't tend to add prefixes or post nomial letters. It's also entirely harmless as gongs don't confer any power or privilege anymore.
You'd have a better argument with peerages since those actually include power. Since gongs don't I don't really understand why people get so upset. I wouldn't be surprised if we keep them even after the monarchy is abolished - systems can be improved, but as we have one for recognising service there's no need to tear it down for a new one.
I take your point. Peerages in that case, but perhaps the knighthoods could be renamed as something less anachronistic and snobbish (unless you are suggesting that those knighted will provide their own swords, horses and men-at-arms when the sovereign leads them into battle)
Should be made to sit on their swords.
I would struggle to call anyone by their title. I'd just give them a nod and an "Alright, mate?"
The only people with titles that I know are “Dr” so and so. I do use those if honestly earned with a PhD or if they are medics, particularly at school.
If the medics, start calling me 'Engineer' I'll start calling them 'Doctor'.
There is a difference between a job title and a bestowed title.
Your title as we sink slowly down the toilet will always be 'Leaver'. (excuse my bitterness but Labour Leavers' like Frank Field and Kate Hoey are beyond my understanding...........)
Morning all. I agree with David’s central assertion that the Deal will be ratified, there being no alternative. It might be defeated first time, but TM has surely factored that in and is holding something back, perhaps a very sombre letter of assurance on the Backstop from Juncker & Co, which, combined with rising panic across the House about No Deal, will be just enough to swing it. She does not wish to reveal this now, because MPs would laugh and still vote against, timing is all. I’m not normally a fan of analogies in political punditry (better to simply say what you mean in plain and precise language) but in this case I feel it is genuinely useful to think of the Deal as a thoroughbred racehorse and Theresa May as Lester Piggott. She will play her mount late, in the frantic finish, as the post looms and the other contenders (Messrs Referendum, No Deal, No Brexit) tire and go backwards. And just as with Lester in his prime, it will be a privilege to behold, that dramatic final vote as Brexit squeaks home by a nostril.
Has there yet been a single MP publicly change their mind to support Deal?
No, but she doesn't need to win (first time), just do better than any alternative proposition.
She needs to close a gap of roughly 200. Alternative propositions look likely to do better than that.
I think a lot of the opposition to the Deal on the Conservative MP side will quietly melt away now post-leadership challenge - a lot of MPs will be realising they had only one round in the chamber and they missed by a reasonable distance. I think it will have clarified for a lot of them that the MV will now be more about voting against the Government than it is voting against May individually per se.
I would guess the MV still gets voted down but only by around 30-40 votes, as opposed to much more than 150 as was previously being speculated.
In a way this may be the worst possible outcome - May will find a way to keep limping on with it yet further. The best chance for any significant political progress on this (that being separate to what's actually the best outcome) would have been for May's deal to be absolutely pummelled into the dust in the originally scheduled vote.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The political content is not up to the Electoral Commission. (They couldn't insist "No Deal" is on the ballot paper for instance).
The Electoral Commission merely checks that the referendum question presents the options clearly, simply and neutrally. So it should: • be easy to understand • be to the point • be unambiguous • avoid encouraging voters to consider one response more favourably than another • avoid misleading voters
IIRC, the Electoral Commission's advice is in any case not binding. Wasn't there a recent case (something to do with the speed at which new postal vote rules were being introduced?) where the Government simply ignored the advice? There was a day of grumbling and then everyone moved on.
That said, on something as high-profile as this, I expect the Government would try to phrase the question(s) neutrally. The Remain/Leave question was generally accepted as a fair way to put the question.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
Nonsense, Richard. The Home Office ad talked about EU citizens having to “apply” to remain here. No EU citizen has to apply to stay in another EU member state. They have the right to do so. Applications can be refused.
Tell you what then, when they actually refuse a valid application you can start to moan. In the meantime take a look at countries like Germany, Spain, Norway and Hungary all of whom regularly revoke settlement rights and deport EU citizens because they do not meet the requirements for being able to support themselves.
Like I said, Remoaners are displaying an extraordinary amount of hypocrisy over this.
Question I don't know the answer to and would be interested in opinions, aside from the likelihood of it happening:
Imagine TMay loses the meaningful vote with (say) 80 Con rebels. SNP/LD/Lab-remain offer to pass the deal subject to a Deal vs Remain referendum. Also imagine (bear with me) TMay then agrees and puts this to a (whipped) vote.
In the resulting Deal+Referendum vote, how many Con rebels are there?
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
Nonsense, Richard. The Home Office ad talked about EU citizens having to “apply” to remain here. No EU citizen has to apply to stay in another EU member state. They have the right to do so. Applications can be refused.
Tell you what then, when they actually refuse a valid application you can start to moan. In the meantime take a look at countries like Germany, Spain, Norway and Hungary all of whom regularly revoke settlement rights and deport EU citizens because they do not meet the requirements for being able to support themselves.
Like I said, Remoaners are displaying an extraordinary amount of hypocrisy over this.
Isn't that rather contrary to the leaver argument that we should take back control of immigration? If we could do those things all along, what is the problem?
Question I don't know the answer to and would be interested in opinions, aside from the likelihood of it happening:
Imagine TMay loses the meaningful vote with (say) 80 Con rebels. SNP/LD/Lab-remain offer to pass the deal subject to a Deal vs Remain referendum. Also imagine (bear with me) TMay then agrees and puts this to a (whipped) vote.
In the resulting Deal+Referendum vote, how many Con rebels are there?
I'll start: 115 Con rebels
I’d agree. If May advocated a referendum (because all other options are closed) the hardliners would be about the same number as voted against her in the VONC.
In many countries, you will need to carry your registration certificate and national identity card or passport at all times. If you leave them at home, you may be fined but cannot be expelled just for this.
Got a severe lecture last year in Thailand for not carrying either my passport or a photocopy. Up until then my driving licence had always been acceptable as ID.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
It also shows the "if only our own government had enforced the rules" argument to be barely holding water. Soon as they did we would get this. As soon as we start trying to deport the army of romanian big issue sellers and the 30% of rough sleepers who are of EU origin back to their country we would hit the brick wall like this.
The opposite is true. If sensible procedures had always been in place, we would've been used to them. We would also have fewer EU migrants living in the UK, and it's possible that Remain would've won the referendum.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter of a century before freedom of movement) either sorted out her immigration status half a century ago or has been living here illegally for 4 decades (unlikely). So you'll excuse me if I'm sceptical.
The crisis of European Social Democracy has received a lot of coverage, the crisis of European Christian Democracy, much less so. Long term, I'd expect more voters to be backing parties affiliated to ECR than EPP.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
In many countries, you will need to carry your registration certificate and national identity card or passport at all times. If you leave them at home, you may be fined but cannot be expelled just for this.
Got a severe lecture last year in Thailand for not carrying either my passport or a photocopy. Up until then my driving licence had always been acceptable as ID.
My first greeting in France as I walked to the Metro at Gare du Nord was a Gendarme demanding 'Carte d'Identite?'
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
I must admit I find it surprising that anyone could think it could be any other way. I am fully expecting I will have to reregister as a non EU resident in various EU countries if and when I am working there again. It is a natural and completely unproblematic consequence of Brexit.
Mind you as pointed out by notme2 below, it is another sign of the fundamental difference between British and EU outlooks that we have never required registration nor the carrying and production on demand of documents in the UK where it is the norm in many other EU countries.
I'm beginning to wonder if scrapping the ID card scheme when the Coalition came to power (a scheme which if IIRC Nick Clegg didn't like) was really such a good idea.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
And so what do you assume the point of the exercise is?
On the topic of leadership I think it's certainly true that we a ready for a change of leadership in the Lib Dems - but the problem is that there's still no clear sign that any of the credible alternatives actually want the job... yet.
When I was visiting my parents over Christmas my mum, when Paddy Ashdown's death was in the news, asked me who is the present Lib Dem leader. She follows current affairs but she genuinely didn't know... says it all, alas.
The leader is irrelevant. The Lib Dem’s weakness is that they have no power to offer anything on Brexit and an underlying sense that they would sell their own grandmothers if they did have the chance , so can’t really be trusted.
.
In terms of parliamentary numbers the LibDems are at least as strong as were the Liberals during the period from World War 2 until 1974. Despite having fewer MPs Jo Grimond and Jeremy Thorpe did make some impact on the political scene - as did David Steel in the late 1970s. I am surprise at Vince Cable's failure to register - particularly as he was quite effective as Acting Leader following Menzies Campbell's departure.
I think May's Deal will pass on the second attempt, the vast majority of MPs oppose No Deal more than May's Deal and of course ironically May's Deal passing is the only way the DUP will vote with Labour on a VONC to force a general election so Corbyn May find it in his interest to get it passed.
If May wins that general election with a majority Corbyn will likely be gone soon after, if Corbyn becomes PM I expect him to still implement May's Deal but try and make the Customs Union backstop permanent. I also think Boris Johnson will be leader of the Opposition or PM by the end of the year if May loses a general election or we end up with No Deal
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter of a century before freedom of movement) either sorted out her immigration status half a century ago or has been living here illegally for 4 decades (unlikely). So you'll excuse me if I'm sceptical.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
And so what do you assume the point of the exercise is?
So that everyone is on the books come the end of the transition. That way there is no uncertainty about their status.
I think a lot of people would settle for one major constitutional upheaval at a time, but Diane James thinks bigger. She wants to split the UK up at the same time now.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter of a century before freedom of movement) either sorted out her immigration status half a century ago or has been living here illegally for 4 decades (unlikely). So you'll excuse me if I'm sceptical.
The honours list does seem to contain many people previously honoured, now having their baubles upgraded. For instance, just one BBC page includes CBEs for: Gruffalo author Julia Donaldson MBE; stage actress Sophie Okonedo OBE; violinist Nicola Benedetti MBE; artists Tacita Dean OBE and Gillian Wearing OBE. Is this usual or has the honours committee simply run out of ideas?
The whole system needs scrapping. It is beyond anachronistic.
It's not really as many nations have forms of civic awards, they're just called different things and they don't tend to add prefixes or post nomial letters. It's also entirely harmless as gongs don't confer any power or privilege anymore.
You'd have a for recognising service there's no need to tear it down for a new one.
I take your point. Peerages in o battle)
Should be made to sit on their swords.
I would struggle to call anyone by their title. I'd just give them a nod and an "Alright, mate?"
The only people with titles that I know are “Dr” so and so. I do use those if honestly earned with a PhD or if they are medics, particularly at school.
If the medics, start calling me 'Engineer' I'll start calling them 'Doctor'.
There is a difference between a job title and a bestowed title.
Your title as we sink slowly down the toilet will always be 'Leaver'. (excuse my bitterness but Labour Leavers' like Frank Field and Kate Hoey are beyond my understanding...........)
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter of a century before freedom of movement) either sorted out her immigration status half a century ago or has been living here illegally for 4 decades (unlikely). So you'll excuse me if I'm sceptical.
The political content is not up to the Electoral Commission. (They couldn't insist "No Deal" is on the ballot paper for instance).
The Electoral Commission merely checks that the referendum question presents the options clearly, simply and neutrally. So it should: • be easy to understand • be to the point • be unambiguous • avoid encouraging voters to consider one response more favourably than another • avoid misleading voters
IIRC, the Electoral Commission's advice is in any case not binding. Wasn't there a recent case (something to do with the speed at which new postal vote rules were being introduced?) where the Government simply ignored the advice? There was a day of grumbling and then everyone moved on.
That said, on something as high-profile as this, I expect the Government would try to phrase the question(s) neutrally. The Remain/Leave question was generally accepted as a fair way to put the question.
That's correct. The EC recommends on the intelligibility and fairness of referendum questions. It is advisory.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
Nonsense, Richard. The Home Office ad talked about EU citizens having to “apply” to remain here. No EU citizen has to apply to stay in another EU member state. They have the right to do so. Applications can be refused.
Tell you what then, when they actually refuse a valid application you can start to moan. In the meantime take a look at countries like Germany, Spain, Norway and Hungary all of whom regularly revoke settlement rights and deport EU citizens because they do not meet the requirements for being able to support themselves.
Like I said, Remoaners are displaying an extraordinary amount of hypocrisy over this.
I’d be very happy for the UK to do what other EU member states do. I do not share your confidence in the competence or goodwill of the Home Office. If that makes me a hypocritical Remoaner, so be it.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Well that's just dumb PR, rather than anything sinister.
Isn't that rather contrary to the leaver argument that we should take back control of immigration? If we could do those things all along, what is the problem?
Because it is not the way we generally do things.
Personally I am still of the very unpopular opinion that we should allow anyone who wants to come here from anywhere to be allowed to come unless they are a threat to us or until they prove they do not deserve to be here (by breaking laws or threatening our security). I also oppose all this rubbish about registration and ID cards.
But the screams of outrage from the Eurofanatics because, as we leave, we are deciding to do something that is done in practically every other EU country as a matter of course, really is the height of hypocrisy. As I said Roger might have an excuse for his ignorance since France is one of the exceptional countries that does not now require registration of EU citizens. But Meeks having lived in Hungary and all these other Eurofanatics who claim to know so much about the EU and how wonderful it is really are being total hypocrites verging on dishonesty.
The honours list does seem to contain many people previously honoured, now having their baubles upgraded. For instance, just one BBC page includes CBEs for: Gruffalo author Julia Donaldson MBE; stage actress Sophie Okonedo OBE; violinist Nicola Benedetti MBE; artists Tacita Dean OBE and Gillian Wearing OBE. Is this usual or has the honours committee simply run out of ideas?
The whole system needs scrapping. It is beyond anachronistic.
.
You'd have a for recognising service there's no need to tear it down for a new one.
I take your point. Peerages in o battle)
Should be made to sit on their swords.
I would struggle to call anyone by their title. I'd just give them a nod and an "Alright, mate?"
The only people with titles that I know are “Dr” so and so. I do use those if honestly earned with a PhD or if they are medics, particularly at school.
If the medics, start calling me 'Engineer' I'll start calling them 'Doctor'.
There is a difference between a job title and a bestowed title.
Your title as we sink slowly down the toilet will always be 'Leaver'. (excuse my bitterness but Labour Leavers' like Frank Field and Kate Hoey are beyond my understanding...........)
I am still a Labour Leaver. I don't regret my vote.
We've had the Brucie Bonus of getting rid of one Tory PM and still the prospect of splitting the Tory party. So things are progressing nicely.
It still isn't likely, but it is far from impossible that Brexit will end the Conservatives as a viable political party. How would that impact the Labour Party? It is pretty well designed to be the alternative when the Tories buggar things up and they need to be sorted out. (Happens nearly every time.) But they'd have to change a lot to become the natural party of government.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Well that's just dumb PR, rather than anything sinister.
Of course, no one sane trusts the Home Office. Its default assumption is that anybody seeking to immigrate to this country is on the take.
And I say that as a white, middle class male immigrant.
Question I don't know the answer to and would be interested in opinions, aside from the likelihood of it happening:
Imagine TMay loses the meaningful vote with (say) 80 Con rebels. SNP/LD/Lab-remain offer to pass the deal subject to a Deal vs Remain referendum. Also imagine (bear with me) TMay then agrees and puts this to a (whipped) vote.
In the resulting Deal+Referendum vote, how many Con rebels are there?
I'll start: 115 Con rebels
So for the Deal+ Referendum there are say 200 Tories plus 50 minor parties requiring 75 Labour MPs to support it to get a majority. That is doable.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Well that's just dumb PR, rather than anything sinister.
I agree. It sends a very negative message to entirely blameless people who made a decision to commit to this country in entirely good faith.
I think a lot of people would settle for one major constitutional upheaval at a time, but Diane James thinks bigger. She wants to split the UK up at the same time now.
Question I don't know the answer to and would be interested in opinions, aside from the likelihood of it happening:
Imagine TMay loses the meaningful vote with (say) 80 Con rebels. SNP/LD/Lab-remain offer to pass the deal subject to a Deal vs Remain referendum. Also imagine (bear with me) TMay then agrees and puts this to a (whipped) vote.
In the resulting Deal+Referendum vote, how many Con rebels are there?
I'll start: 115 Con rebels
So for the Deal+ Referendum there are say 200 Tories, 50 minor parties requiring 75 Labour MPs to support it to get a majority. That is doable.
Yes, but it will not be proposed by either Corbyn or May, even if one can make an argument it is in both their interests to do so.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Well that's just dumb PR, rather than anything sinister.
I agree. It sends a very negative message to entirely blameless people who made a decision to commit to this country in entirely good faith.
Hm, if they were truly committed, wouldn't they have obtained citizenship?
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
I agree with your concerns about Home Office competence.
But weren’t you arguing a few weeks ago in favour of retrospective rule changing in the case of equalisation of womens’ pension ages?
And many of the recent pensions changes have been retrospective in effect and affected the old. As would, say, a mansion or wealth tax be.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Well that's just dumb PR, rather than anything sinister.
I agree. It sends a very negative message to entirely blameless people who made a decision to commit to this country in entirely good faith.
Hm, if they were truly committed, wouldn't they have obtained citizenship?
My wife has not obtained citizenship. It’s expensive and offers no obvious benefits beyond Leave To Remain.
Isn't that rather contrary to the leaver argument that we should take back control of immigration? If we could do those things all along, what is the problem?
Because it is not the way we generally do things.
Personally I am still of the very unpopular opinion that we should allow anyone who wants to come here from anywhere to be allowed to come unless they are a threat to us or until they prove they do not deserve to be here (by breaking laws or threatening our security). I also oppose all this rubbish about registration and ID cards.
But the screams of outrage from the Eurofanatics because, as we leave, we are deciding to do something that is done in practically every other EU country as a matter of course, really is the height of hypocrisy. As I said Roger might have an excuse for his ignorance since France is one of the exceptional countries that does not now require registration of EU citizens. But Meeks having lived in Hungary and all these other Eurofanatics who claim to know so much about the EU and how wonderful it is really are being total hypocrites verging on dishonesty.
I only ask that they cover their own way, no access to in or out of work benefits, and evidence that they can support themselves, and expected to leave when no longer able to ( a certain amount of give and take in that, after a period of time of residing here than you kind of have to accept people as been entitled to contributions based support). I think the £30k pa threshold is too high and punitive though.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter of a century before freedom of movement) either sorted out her immigration status half a century ago or has been living here illegally for 4 decades (unlikely). So you'll excuse me if I'm sceptical.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter of a century before freedom of movement) either sorted out her immigration status half a century ago or has been living here illegally for 4 decades (unlikely). So you'll excuse me if I'm sceptical.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Well that's just dumb PR, rather than anything sinister.
I agree. It sends a very negative message to entirely blameless people who made a decision to commit to this country in entirely good faith.
Hm, if they were truly committed, wouldn't they have obtained citizenship?
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter of a century before freedom of movement) either sorted out her immigration status half a century ago or has been living here illegally for 4 decades (unlikely). So you'll excuse me if I'm sceptical.
File it under bad examples that dont stand up to scrutiny.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
I agree with your concerns about Home Office competence.
But weren’t you arguing a few weeks ago in favour of retrospective rule changing in the case of equalisation of womens’ pension ages?
And many of the recent pensions changes have been retrospective in effect and affected the old. As would, say, a mansion or wealth tax be.
Err Wasn't he arguing against retrospective changes to the pension ?
On topic, I'm closer to David's prediction than Alastair's, though I agree it's all up in the air. One point that both articles may overestimate is the intensity of Remainer passion in Labour (and hence the risk to Corbyn). I'm a passionate Remainer myself - I'd support a 2nd referendum, or with some queasiness having MPs simply vote to scrap the project a la Matthew Parris.
But I've been socially together with a lot of Labour people (ex-colleagues of various kinds and some former constituents) over Xmas. All of them without exception said they were Remainers. Most of them are Corbynsceptics (my social circle is more centrist than I am). Some of them are now constituents of the rump of pro-Leave Labour MPs. But none of them felt particularly rebellious - they feel sad about the probable outcome, hope that the leadership will try for a referendum in the end, but one way or another felt Leave is probably going to happen. For all of them, getting the Tories out is then the priority, and interest in leadership challenges, deselections, etc. was zero, except for any Labour MP who voted with the Tories, who would be deselected even if Momentum didn't utter a squeak.
A lot of people (to some extent including me) think this ultra-partisan approach is a pity - the issue is so important that we ought to be giving it priority. But this is a betting site and it's perhaps useful to have factual impressions. The Guardian is IMO misleading on this - they enthusiastically talk up every activist, however obscure, who takes a strong line, but the big hitters outside the longstanding anti-Corbyn ranks have been fairly quiet.
My friends are activists, and not a guide to the wider public. Their attitude makes it unlikely that Corbyn will face a serious new challenge, but not necessarily that Labour voters in general feel similarly inclined. That said, I've not been much on the doorstep recently so have no real evidence, but my impression is that the EU is still a secondary issue for most. It'd be nice to be able to work in France without bureaucracy and a shame if trade gets disrupted. But things like not getting into personal debt, seeing some coppers on the street and having granny not wait two years for an operation loom much larger.
Question I don't know the answer to and would be interested in opinions, aside from the likelihood of it happening:
Imagine TMay loses the meaningful vote with (say) 80 Con rebels. SNP/LD/Lab-remain offer to pass the deal subject to a Deal vs Remain referendum. Also imagine (bear with me) TMay then agrees and puts this to a (whipped) vote.
In the resulting Deal+Referendum vote, how many Con rebels are there?
I'll start: 115 Con rebels
So for the Deal+ Referendum there are say 200 Tories, 50 minor parties requiring 75 Labour MPs to support it to get a majority. That is doable.
Yes, but it will not be proposed by either Corbyn or May, even if one can make an argument it is in both their interests to do so.
Not by Corbyn but possibly by May if it is the only way to get her deal approved (over the heads of MPs who will have rejected it) and secure in the knowledge that 200 or so Tory MPs back her.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Well that's just dumb PR, rather than anything sinister.
I agree. It sends a very negative message to entirely blameless people who made a decision to commit to this country in entirely good faith.
Hm, if they were truly committed, wouldn't they have obtained citizenship?
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Well that's just dumb PR, rather than anything sinister.
I agree. It sends a very negative message to entirely blameless people who made a decision to commit to this country in entirely good faith.
Hm, if they were truly committed, wouldn't they have obtained citizenship?
My wife has not obtained citizenship. It’s expensive and offers no obvious benefits beyond Leave To Remain.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Well that's just dumb PR, rather than anything sinister.
I agree. It sends a very negative message to entirely blameless people who made a decision to commit to this country in entirely good faith.
Hm, if they were truly committed, wouldn't they have obtained citizenship?
My wife has not obtained citizenship. It’s expensive and offers no obvious benefits beyond Leave To Remain.
What does “committed” actually mean?
"offers no obvious benefits"
It will now.
Not really. Not for those already with Leave To Remain.
Unusually, I’m with those who don’t see registration of EU nationals as a big deal. Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
The problem is not the registration, it’s the way the government has framed it. Telling people who have made an entirely legal commitment to this country in total good faith that they have to apply to stay here is terrible messaging. They are telling parents and partners they have to apply to remain with their families, for example. Imagine receiving that message. What would it tell you about the way the government views you?
Isn't it just a formality, or are people really at risk of it being rejected? I would have thought only applications after the end of the transition had any risk of being denied.
It may well be, but the government chose to use the term “apply”. Applications can be refused. It could well be the ad was not really aimed at EU citizens at all, of course, but is messaging designed for the xenophobic tendency Mrs May is so keen to appeal to.
Well that's just dumb PR, rather than anything sinister.
I agree. It sends a very negative message to entirely blameless people who made a decision to commit to this country in entirely good faith.
When we were sorting the papers of my late Italian mother, there was nothing to show the basis on which she had been living in the country, other than my parents marriage certificate. All we had was a certificate of a wedding in Italy and its registration as a foreign marriage at Somerset House. Nothing else. She did not work. She paid her taxes of course on my late father’s pension.
Had she still been alive today how would she have proved her right to live here?
It is easy to forget that it is not always easy to prove things when there was no need to do so at the time when an arrangement was set up.
Why do we need such a registration scheme anyway? Surely have a simple free and voluntary registration scheme for those already here. No applications. And have a proper scheme for those who come here after the end of the transition period
I think a lot of people would settle for one major constitutional upheaval at a time, but Diane James thinks bigger. She wants to split the UK up at the same time now.
The suggestion is England and Wales leave the UK and the EU at the same time, leaving Scotland and Northern Ireland as the remaining UK nations who can stay in the EU, still technically appeasing the DUP as well, while England and Wales avoid the Irish border problem and can go straight to a Canada style FTA with the EU free of the Customs Union backstop.
All 4 nations still remain under the Queen as Head of State even if effectively independent
It needs to be repeated, Brexit has made too many people on here absolutely Batshit Crazy. You find offence and malice in every post, and resort to name calling and self righteous outrage at every opportunity and this happens on both sides. A lot of the time the site isn't worth reading much past the header, which is a damn shame as it has been the first place I look at most mornings for many years. Luckily, I don't believe the country is as riven as this place, because if it is we're even more fucked than I thought we were!
On topic, I'm closer to David's prediction than Alastair's, though I agree it's all up in the air. One point that both articles may overestimate is the intensity of Remainer passion in Labour (and hence the risk to Corbyn). I'm a passionate Remainer myself - I'd support a 2nd referendum, or with some queasiness having MPs simply vote to scrap the project a la Matthew Parris.
But I've been socially together with a lot of Labour people (ex-colleagues of various kinds and some former constituents) over Xmas. All of them without exception said they were Remainers. Most of them are Corbynsceptics (my social circle is more centrist than I am). Some of them are now constituents of the rump of pro-Leave Labour MPs. But none of them felt particularly rebellious - they feel sad about the probable outcome, hope that the leadership will try for a referendum in the end, but one way or another felt Leave is probably going to happen. For all of them, getting the Tories out is then the priority, and interest in leadership challenges, deselections, etc. was zero, except for any Labour MP who voted with the Tories, who would be deselected even if Momentum didn't utter a squeak.
A lot of people (to some extent including me) think this ultra-partisan approach is a pity - the issue is so important that we ought to be giving it priority. But this is a betting site and it's perhaps useful to have factual impressions. The Guardian is IMO misleading on this - they enthusiastically talk up every activist, however obscure, who takes a strong line, but the big hitters outside the longstanding anti-Corbyn ranks have been fairly quiet.
My friends are activists, and not a guide to the wider public. Their attitude makes it unlikely that Corbyn will face a serious new challenge, but not necessarily that Labour voters in general feel similarly inclined. That said, I've not been much on the doorstep recently so have no real evidence, but my impression is that the EU is still a secondary issue for most. It'd be nice to be able to work in France without bureaucracy and a shame if trade gets disrupted. But things like not getting into personal debt, seeing some coppers on the street and having granny not wait two years for an operation loom much larger.
Corbyn will not face any challenge, but he will have to deliver. The leadership’s decision to stand-by and watch the Tories own Brexit is a calculated gamble. One we have left and the implications of that become tangible, you may find Remain-supporting Labour members are less willing to back their Brexit-backing leader than was previously the case.
I think a lot of people would settle for one major constitutional upheaval at a time, but Diane James thinks bigger. She wants to split the UK up at the same time now.
The suggestion is England and Wales leave the UK and the EU at the same time, leaving Scotland and Northern Ireland as the remaining UK nations who can stay in the EU, still technically appeasing the DUP as well, while England and Wales avoid the Irish border problem and can go straight to a Canada style FTA with the EU free of the Customs Union backstop.
All 4 nations still remain under the Queen as Head of State even if effectively independent
Advanced fuckwittery of the highest order. These Brexiteers won’t be happy until there is nothing left.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
I agree with your concerns about Home Office competence.
But weren’t you arguing a few weeks ago in favour of retrospective rule changing in the case of equalisation of womens’ pension ages?
And many of the recent pensions changes have been retrospective in effect and affected the old. As would, say, a mansion or wealth tax be.
Err Wasn't he arguing against retrospective changes to the pension ?
I thought he was saying that the women now moaning about the changes were being utter hypocrites since they wanted equality but not if it affected them. He raised a concern about the publicity given to the changes but that is a different point.
The cap on how much you can save tax free in a pension is also retrospective in its effect.
The fact that a change has a retrospective effect is not, per se, an argument against making the change. Lots of changes have such an effect.
There are better arguments against this change than its retrospective effect.
Yes, but it will not be proposed by either Corbyn or May, even if one can make an argument it is in both their interests to do so.
What about the Grieve Amendment? The buzz at the time IIRC was that it would allow parliament to 'seize control' of Brexit from the executive in the event of the Deal being voted down. Was that not quite the truth?
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter of a century before freedom of movement) either sorted out her immigration status half a century ago or has been living here illegally for 4 decades (unlikely). So you'll excuse me if I'm sceptical.
Yes, but it will not be proposed by either Corbyn or May, even if one can make an argument it is in both their interests to do so.
What about the Grieve Amendment? The buzz at the time IIRC was that it would allow parliament to 'seize control' of Brexit from the executive in the event of the Deal being voted down. Was that not quite the truth?
Given the executive negotiates treaties, it's hard to see how that would work in practice.
Yes, but it will not be proposed by either Corbyn or May, even if one can make an argument it is in both their interests to do so.
What about the Grieve Amendment? The buzz at the time IIRC was that it would allow parliament to 'seize control' of Brexit from the executive in the event of the Deal being voted down. Was that not quite the truth?
If the Grieve amendment sees EUref2 and Norway Plus voted down by more than the Deal that helps the Deal become the last route to avoid No Deal
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades. 103 chars..
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
I agree with your concerns about Home Office competence.
But weren’t you arguing a few weeks ago in favour of retrospective rule changing in the case of equalisation of womens’ pension ages?
And many of the recent pensions changes have been retrospective in effect and affected the old. As would, say, a mansion or wealth tax be.
Err Wasn't he arguing against retrospective changes to the pension ?
I thought he was saying that the women now moaning about the changes were being utter hypocrites since they wanted equality but not if it affected them. He raised a concern about the publicity given to the changes but that is a different point.
The cap on how much you can save tax free in a pension is also retrospective in its effect.
The fact that a change has a retrospective effect is not, per se, an argument against making the change. Lots of changes have such an effect.
There are better arguments against this change than its retrospective effect.
To restore the status quo ante would be the retrospective (And expensive!) option though even though it would for instance benefit my mother
I read that the homeless person who died at the Westminster tube station was an EU immigrant, as are a high proportion of of those sleeping on the streets.
The Office of National Statistics recently estimated the number of rough sleepers in England to be 4,134 of whom 16% are EU nationals, 4% other overseas nationals and 8% of unknown nationality. See
Given that we have voted to leave the EU how do you think they should be treated?
(1) allowed to stay without registration (risk of future illegal immigration from EU and risk of “windrush” scenario in future
(2) administrative registration with automatic approval (you could argue the fee is a bit petty given that the registration is being required by the government)
(3) choose between U.K. and EU citizenship - unreasonable
(4) mass deportation
Given where we are (2) seems like the most reasonable route for the government to take. Have I missed an option or would you prefer another choice?
Easy fix: just provide that the fee isn't payable by anybody over the retirement age/65/60.
Why on earth should comfortably off pensioners be exempt automatically?
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter of a century before freedom of movement) either sorted out her immigration status half a century ago or has been living here illegally for 4 decades (unlikely). So you'll excuse me if I'm sceptical.
It needs to be repeated, Brexit has made too many people on here absolutely Batshit Crazy. You find offence and malice in every post, and resort to name calling and self righteous outrage at every opportunity and this happens on both sides. A lot of the time the site isn't worth reading much past the header, which is a damn shame as it has been the first place I look at most mornings for many years. Luckily, I don't believe the country is as riven as this place, because if it is we're even more fucked than I thought we were!
My wife, my father, my brother, my sister-in law all voted Remain, and about a third of my friends voted Remain, but we are still on good terms. Anecdote only, but I expect that's fairly common.
Social media magnifies every division, and destroys nuance. Imagine if we'd had social media, in the Seventies or the Miners' Strike. One would have thought we were on the point of civil war.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter of a century before freedom of movement) either sorted out her immigration status half a century ago or has been living here illegally for 4 decades (unlikely). So you'll excuse me if I'm sceptical.
I don't think citing the cases of people who moved here before either the EU or freedom of movement are helping your case.
Have you ever lived in an EU country and registered there?
I have.
Twice.
And the second time they had all the details of where I had lived the first time.
And whether I had paid my utility bills.
Is Stewart Wood a Brexiter? Naaah thought not. its those nasty EU bastards making poor old Britain do these things./ … and if he can misrepresent the truth.. so can I...
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that the EU fanatics like you and Meeks are now complaining about EU citizens having to do in Britain what they have had to do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter excuse me if I'm sceptical.
On topic, I'm closer to David's prediction than Alastair's, though I agree it's all up in the air. One point that both articles may overestimate is the intensity of Remainer passion in Labour (and hence the risk to Corbyn). I'm a passionate Remainer myself - I'd support a 2nd referendum, or with some queasiness having MPs simply vote to scrap the project a la Matthew Parris.
But I've been socially together with a lot of Labour people (ex-colleagues of various kinds and some former constituents) over Xmas. All of them without exception said they were Remainers. Most of them are Corbynsceptics (my social circle is more centrist than I am). Some of them are now constituents of the rump of pro-Leave Labour MPs. But none of them felt particularly rebellious - they feel sad about the probable outcome, hope that the leadership will try for a referendum in the end, but one way or another felt Leave is probably going to happen. For all of them, getting the Tories out is then the priority, and interest in leadership challenges, deselections, etc. was zero, except for any Labour MP who voted with the Tories, who would be deselected even if Momentum didn't utter a squeak.
A lot of people (to some extent including me) think this ultra-partisan approach is a pity - the issue is so important that we ought to be giving it priority. But this is a betting site and it's perhaps useful to have factual impressions. The Guardian is IMO misleading on this - they enthusiastically talk up every activist, however obscure, who takes a strong line, but the big hitters outside the longstanding anti-Corbyn ranks have been fairly quiet.
My friends are activists, and not a guide to the wider public. Their attitude makes it unlikely that Corbyn will face a serious new challenge, but not necessarily that Labour voters in general feel similarly inclined. That said, I've not been much on the doorstep recently so have no real evidence, but my impression is that the EU is still a secondary issue for most. It'd be nice to be able to work in France without bureaucracy and a shame if trade gets disrupted. But things like not getting into personal debt, seeing some coppers on the street and having granny not wait two years for an operation loom much larger.
Another data point which doesn't contradict what Nick is saying. In a big family gathering over Christmas My 80plus father in law brought up Brexit in an approving way. A mid fifties cousin was ready to argue the toss, but was faced down by myself and others of her generation. We didn't want to spend the time arguing. The younger people however were totally disconnected from the discussion. Leaving is outside their Overton Window. They simply don't see it as an issue. Europe is part of their mental furniture and they will obviously rejoin as soon as they are able to. Being strongly in favour of Europe is as weird to them as wanting to leave Europe.
Given the executive negotiates treaties, it's hard to see how that would work in practice.
That's my way of thinking too. But there was quite a stir when it went through, and Grieve is notoriously brainy, so I thought that perhaps I was missing something. We will soon find out, I guess. My view that the Deal will prevail is predicated on my understanding that no other course of action (other than No Deal) can in practice be implemented without changing the PM.
I think a lot of people would settle for one major constitutional upheaval at a time, but Diane James thinks bigger. She wants to split the UK up at the same time now.
The suggestion is England and Wales leave the UK and the EU at the same time, leaving Scotland and Northern Ireland as the remaining UK nations who can stay in the EU, still technically appeasing the DUP as well, while England and Wales avoid the Irish border problem and can go straight to a Canada style FTA with the EU free of the Customs Union backstop.
All 4 nations still remain under the Queen as Head of State even if effectively independent
The DUP and the Conservatives are both unionist parties, that is union between N Ireland and the other countries of the UK.
Donald J. Trump Verified account @realDonaldTrump 24h24 hours ago
.....Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador are doing nothing for the United States but taking our money. Word is that a new Caravan is forming in Honduras and they are doing nothing about it. We will be cutting off all aid to these 3 countries - taking advantage of U.S. for years!
It needs to be repeated, Brexit has made too many people on here absolutely Batshit Crazy. You find offence and malice in every post, and resort to name calling and self righteous outrage at every opportunity and this happens on both sides. A lot of the time the site isn't worth reading much past the header, which is a damn shame as it has been the first place I look at most mornings for many years. Luckily, I don't believe the country is as riven as this place, because if it is we're even more fucked than I thought we were!
My wife, my father, my brother, my sister-in law all voted Remain, and about a third of my friends voted Remain, but we are still on good terms. Anecdote only, but I expect that's fairly common.
Social media magnifies every division, and destroys nuance. Imagine if we'd had social media, in the Seventies or the Miners' Strike. One would have thought we were on the point of civil war.
Seriously amazed that two thirds of your friends voted Leave. To my knowledge of friends relatives and work colleagues I'm pretty sure none have voted Leave.
Balderdash - you pay as much if not more to obtain residency in almost any EU country now. You so often argue cogently it's a shame that on this subject you are completely ott.
Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
It is utterly laughable that theto do in practically every other EU country for decades.
It does show the hypocrisy and ignorance of Remoaners that they think this is somehow exceptional either inside or outside the EU.
You don’t change the rules retrospectively and especially not for the old and the vulnerable.
Where are the rules changing retrospectively?
90 year olds have been able to live here for many years without having to apply for a hefty fee to remain.
A 90 year old who moved here before 1948 (a quarter excuse me if I'm sceptical.
Comments
In many countries, you will need to carry your registration certificate and national identity card or passport at all times. If you leave them at home, you may be fined but cannot be expelled just for this.
https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/residence/documents-formalities/registering-residence/index_en.htm
Are we proposing the same?
This really is desperate spinning from you Eurofanatics. Isn't Britain horrible, asking people to do exactly what they have to do in most other countries in the wonderful EU.
TBH I'm looking forward to getting back to exercise, especially walking!
Seems fairer, certainly.
https://images.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=kate+hoey+and+nigel+farage&fr=yhs-domaindev-st_emea&hspart=domaindev&hsimp=yhs-st_emea&imgurl=https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/57ee7bdc170000e00aac86ff.jpeg?ops=scalefit_630_noupscale#id=0&iurl=https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/57ee7bdc170000e00aac86ff.jpeg?ops=scalefit_630_noupscale&action=click
I would guess the MV still gets voted down but only by around 30-40 votes, as opposed to much more than 150 as was previously being speculated.
In a way this may be the worst possible outcome - May will find a way to keep limping on with it yet further. The best chance for any significant political progress on this (that being separate to what's actually the best outcome) would have been for May's deal to be absolutely pummelled into the dust in the originally scheduled vote.
Or rather, I see it as one of the least controversial outcomes of Brexit.
What’s amusing though is how many Brexiters are still realising that Brexit has thousands of suboptimal consequences both large and small.
This is what happens when Brexit is sold as having no downsides whatsoever.
The Sun editorial is a classic example.
That said, on something as high-profile as this, I expect the Government would try to phrase the question(s) neutrally. The Remain/Leave question was generally accepted as a fair way to put the question.
Like I said, Remoaners are displaying an extraordinary amount of hypocrisy over this.
Happy Hogmanay.
The crisis of European Social Democracy has received a lot of coverage, the crisis of European Christian Democracy, much less so. Long term, I'd expect more voters to be backing parties affiliated to ECR than EPP.
Mind you as pointed out by notme2 below, it is another sign of the fundamental difference between British and EU outlooks that we have never required registration nor the carrying and production on demand of documents in the UK where it is the norm in many other EU countries.
If May wins that general election with a majority Corbyn will likely be gone soon after, if Corbyn becomes PM I expect him to still implement May's Deal but try and make the Customs Union backstop permanent. I also think Boris Johnson will be leader of the Opposition or PM by the end of the year if May loses a general election or we end up with No Deal
https://twitter.com/stewartwood/status/1078683297927041024?s=21
https://twitter.com/DianeJamesMEP/status/1077886083923365888
We've had the Brucie Bonus of getting rid of one Tory PM and still the prospect of splitting the Tory party. So things are progressing nicely.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/referendums-to-keep/electoral-commission-recommends-change-to-eu-referendum-question
I hope we have put the red herring of the EC controlling the referendum question back in its tin.
Personally I am still of the very unpopular opinion that we should allow anyone who wants to come here from anywhere to be allowed to come unless they are a threat to us or until they prove they do not deserve to be here (by breaking laws or threatening our security). I also oppose all this rubbish about registration and ID cards.
But the screams of outrage from the Eurofanatics because, as we leave, we are deciding to do something that is done in practically every other EU country as a matter of course, really is the height of hypocrisy. As I said Roger might have an excuse for his ignorance since France is one of the exceptional countries that does not now require registration of EU citizens. But Meeks having lived in Hungary and all these other Eurofanatics who claim to know so much about the EU and how wonderful it is really are being total hypocrites verging on dishonesty.
https://twitter.com/joehunter_/status/1078771517243211776?s=21
And I say that as a white, middle class male immigrant.
But weren’t you arguing a few weeks ago in favour of retrospective rule changing in the case of equalisation of womens’ pension ages?
And many of the recent pensions changes have been retrospective in effect and affected the old. As would, say, a mansion or wealth tax be.
What does “committed” actually mean?
https://twitter.com/frasernelson/status/1078614395092115456?s=21
But I've been socially together with a lot of Labour people (ex-colleagues of various kinds and some former constituents) over Xmas. All of them without exception said they were Remainers. Most of them are Corbynsceptics (my social circle is more centrist than I am). Some of them are now constituents of the rump of pro-Leave Labour MPs. But none of them felt particularly rebellious - they feel sad about the probable outcome, hope that the leadership will try for a referendum in the end, but one way or another felt Leave is probably going to happen. For all of them, getting the Tories out is then the priority, and interest in leadership challenges, deselections, etc. was zero, except for any Labour MP who voted with the Tories, who would be deselected even if Momentum didn't utter a squeak.
A lot of people (to some extent including me) think this ultra-partisan approach is a pity - the issue is so important that we ought to be giving it priority. But this is a betting site and it's perhaps useful to have factual impressions. The Guardian is IMO misleading on this - they enthusiastically talk up every activist, however obscure, who takes a strong line, but the big hitters outside the longstanding anti-Corbyn ranks have been fairly quiet.
My friends are activists, and not a guide to the wider public. Their attitude makes it unlikely that Corbyn will face a serious new challenge, but not necessarily that Labour voters in general feel similarly inclined. That said, I've not been much on the doorstep recently so have no real evidence, but my impression is that the EU is still a secondary issue for most. It'd be nice to be able to work in France without bureaucracy and a shame if trade gets disrupted. But things like not getting into personal debt, seeing some coppers on the street and having granny not wait two years for an operation loom much larger.
It will now.
Had she still been alive today how would she have proved her right to live here?
It is easy to forget that it is not always easy to prove things when there was no need to do so at the time when an arrangement was set up.
Why do we need such a registration scheme anyway? Surely have a simple free and voluntary registration scheme for those already here. No applications. And have a proper scheme for those who come here after the end of the transition period
The suggestion is England and Wales leave the UK and the EU at the same time, leaving Scotland and Northern Ireland as the remaining UK nations who can stay in the EU, still technically appeasing the DUP as well, while England and Wales avoid the Irish border problem and can go straight to a Canada style FTA with the EU free of the Customs Union backstop.
All 4 nations still remain under the Queen as Head of State even if effectively independent
Luckily, I don't believe the country is as riven as this place, because if it is we're even more fucked than I thought we were!
KH. Poof
The cap on how much you can save tax free in a pension is also retrospective in its effect.
The fact that a change has a retrospective effect is not, per se, an argument against making the change. Lots of changes have such an effect.
There are better arguments against this change than its retrospective effect.
I worked in a factory in W. Germany in 1966 and did not need any visa just my normal passport.
I read that the homeless person who died at the Westminster tube station was an EU immigrant, as are a high proportion of of those sleeping on the streets.
The Office of National Statistics recently estimated the number of rough sleepers in England to be 4,134 of whom 16% are EU nationals, 4% other overseas nationals and 8% of unknown nationality. See
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/682001/Rough_Sleeping_Autumn_2017_Statistical_Release_-_revised.pdf
Have you ever lived in an EU country and registered there?
I have.
Twice.
And the second time they had all the details of where I had lived the first time.
And whether I had paid my utility bills.
Social media magnifies every division, and destroys nuance. Imagine if we'd had social media, in the Seventies or the Miners' Strike. One would have thought we were on the point of civil war.
https://www.gov.uk/uk-residence-eu-citizens
Donald J. Trump
Verified account @realDonaldTrump
24h24 hours ago
.....Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador are doing nothing for the United States but taking our money. Word is that a new Caravan is forming in Honduras and they are doing nothing about it. We will be cutting off all aid to these 3 countries - taking advantage of U.S. for years!
But what about the (to me) billion euro question, can an alternative to the Deal be forced upon the PM by parliament?