Brexit: Now What? Part II

[Aepervius]

It sounds like you object to it. If so, what are your objections exactly?

Out means out or in means in. Not an half hearted process with a little bit of money so that a few banker can keep a few folk they deem necessary.

You either take the freedom of movement, or you are out. In my view it is a fundamental point of EU. Dropping it for UK means on short or medium term possibly everybody will drop it.

That may be the wish of many xenophobe in many part of the EU, but if it happen I simply view the EU as an utter failure.

 

[CapelDodger]

Britain has talked about having some sort of immigration system that allows those with skills we need to come and work here.

Leavers have certainly talked about this, during the referendum campaign and after, in the vaguest of terms - no less vague now than six months ago. I can see no reason why they can't give us their plan for this (apart from them not having one, of course).

No doubt the Tories will also want to allow the stinking rich to come and live here too (hoping they will spend some of their money here and benefit our economy).

On that we can all agree. Nothing, in Tory Party hearts and minds, takes priority over the London property market, to which the global uber-rich are crucial contrubutors.

The EU proposal seems more regressive than that - it's basically saying, 'if you can afford the payments then you can come and live and/or work in the EU' I hope Britain adopts a better system than that for people who want to come and live here.

It will require some form of visa, and those aren't free.

Also, the proposed British system will allow other migrants, from outside the EU, the same opportunity to come and live here as migrants from EU countries. If this EU proposal doesn't allow people in Africa or Asia or wherever to apply for associate membership the same as a UK citizen, then it's less fair and equitable than the proposed British system.

I'm touched by your concern for the rights of would-be immigrants, but this is something between Brits and the EU.

No doubt you'll be calling the proposed EU policy 'racist' if it doesn't apply equally to all countries?

I won't. You seem to be, and it strikes me as weird.

 

[CapelDodger]

Out means out or in means in. Not an half hearted process with a little bit of money so that a few banker can keep a few folk they deem necessary.

There's more to it than that, I think. I'd take them up on it purely on principle.

You either take the freedom of movement, or you are out. In my view it is a fundamental point of EU. Dropping it for UK means on short or medium term possibly everybody will drop it.

Only if they become former members of the EU, and I can't see it having much influence on that decision.

That may be the wish of many xenophobe in many part of the EU, but if it happen I simply view the EU as an utter failure.

This, I think, is why the EU won't bend on the principle. Hopefully it won't break instead.

 

[ceptimus]

You're saying that after Britain has left the EU, the EU should offer preferential rights to British citizens compared to citizens of, say, India.

You seem to think that's fair - and that strikes me as weird.

 

[CapelDodger]

Why would it be racist? GB citizens are already EU citizens.

Presumably freedom of movement for EU citizens as it currently exists is equally racist by whatever logic applies.

 

[CapelDodger]

You're saying that after Britain has left the EU, the EU should offer preferential rights to British citizens compared to citizens of, say, India.

As they do now, yes.

You seem to think that's fair - and that strikes me as weird.

I'd prefer global freedom of movement within a global union but that's not yet practicable.

 

[CapelDodger]

Poll suggests public will not accept a Brexit that leaves them worse off
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...exit-worse-off-tim-farron-ukip-lib-dem-yougov

The British public will not accept a Brexit deal that leaves them worse off financially, a new poll suggests.

In a sign that a majority of the public would be unwilling to accept an economically damaging hard Brexit, half of those who voted to leave the EU in June, including 62% of Labour voters and 59% of those in the north, would not be willing to lose any money at all as a consequence of Britain’s withdrawal.

Well there's a thing. When Project Fear turns out to be Project Fact there'll be some powerful buyer's remorse out there. Nothing concentrates the mind so much as a definite threat to the wallet.

 

[ddt]

Is there such a thing presently as "EU citizenship" separate from the concept of "citizenship of a member country of the EU"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_of_the_European_Union:

Citizenship of the European Union was introduced by the Maastricht Treaty, which was signed in 1992, and has been in force since 1993. European Union citizenship is additional[1] to national citizenship and affords rights such as the right to vote in European elections, the right to free movement, settlement and employment across the EU, and the right to consular protection by other EU states' embassies when a person's country of citizenship does not maintain an embassy or a consulate in the country in which they require protection.[2]

It's like German citizenship in the period 1870-1933: you get (or lose) it automatically when you become (stop being) a citizen of one of the constituent states.

 

[ddt]

Depending on the size of the annual fee, could that count as reciprocation enough? Or do you believe there would necessarily have to be a symmetric arrangement?

Primarily, it was the proposal of the Luxembourgish guy that there was reciprocity in the arrangement, in that it would also confer freedom of movement of EU citizens to the UK. But it was not clear how he envisaged that; would they also have to pay a fee for that?

And personally, I think such a symmetric arrangement would only be fair.

It's just a sort of glorified travel/work visa. If it becomes a reality it should allow those rich enough to afford it to reside and work in EU countries indefinitely (as long as they keep on paying).

No-one's yet proposed how much this annual fee would be. If it would be something like a US ESTA costs ($14 for two years) it would be not something only for the rich.

 

[Craig B]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_of_the_European_Union:


It's like German citizenship in the period 1870-1933: you get (or lose) it automatically when you become (stop being) a citizen of one of the constituent states.

But imagine if Bavaria had seceded from the German Empire, and Bavarian citizens, on payment of a few Mark a year, could remain "associate subjects" of the Empire, without having that status in any constituent state of the Empire. Could that happen? Perhaps that was the status of inhabitants of Elsass-Lothringen between 1871 and 1911?

 

[Degeneve]

Poll suggests public will not accept a Brexit that leaves them worse off
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...exit-worse-off-tim-farron-ukip-lib-dem-yougov


Well there's a thing. When Project Fear turns out to be Project Fact there'll be some powerful buyer's remorse out there. Nothing concentrates the mind so much as a definite threat to the wallet.

From the same article:

Even among Ukip supporters – whose party has demanded May reject the article 50 process and instead leave the EU immediately by repealing the 1972 European Communities act – a substantial number, 39%, do not want to incur a financial loss because of Brexit.

So they wanted to get "le beurre et l'argent du beurre" as say the Frenchs (which seems to translate into "You can't have your cake and eat it").

I am just wondering what their reactions will be when they face a reality check. I guess they will accuse the Government of messing up the Brexit rather than acknowledge the fact that the Brexit is an expensive adventure.

 

[Andy_Ross]

From the same article:



So they wanted to get "le beurre et l'argent du beurre" as say the Frenchs (which seems to translate into "You can't have your cake and eat it").

I am just wondering what their reactions will be when they face a reality check. I guess they will accuse the Government of messing up the Brexit rather than acknowledge the fact that the Brexit is an expensive adventure.

No, thry will accuse the EU of messing it up.

 

[katy_did]

Primarily, it was the proposal of the Luxembourgish guy that there was reciprocity in the arrangement, in that it would also confer freedom of movement of EU citizens to the UK. But it was not clear how he envisaged that; would they also have to pay a fee for that?

There's nothing in the Luxembourg guy's original amendment about reciprocity:

Motion for a resolution, Paragraph 37a (new)

37a Advocates to insert in the Treaties a European associate citizenship for those who feel and wish to be part of the European project but are nationals of a former Member State; offers these associate citizens the rights of freedom of movement and to reside on its territory as well as being represented in the Parliament through a vote in the European elections on the European lists.

 

[ddt]

There's nothing in the Luxembourg guy's original amendment about reciprocity:

Thank you for quoting that text. The article previously linked to said:

The right of freedom of movement and to reside on EU territory should be maintained thanks to this associate citizenship, bringing with it not only rights, but also obligations such as the commitment to European values. This associate citizenship could be optional and could only be obtained by introducing a formal request.

At the same time, the authors of this amendment are asking for reciprocity from the UK.

Or did I misunderstood what was meant with reciprocity?

In any case, the proposal seems to have struck a chord:

Goerens said he had been taken aback by the level of support he had received for the proposal. “This has clearly struck a chord,” he said. “A lot of people from Britain have got in touch with me to ask what they can do to make sure it happens.”

And in other news, the German Green Party has asked the government to fast-track citizenship applications by Britons living there, as well as to relax the conditions.

 

[Craig B]

Thank you for quoting that text. The article previously linked to said:

Or did I misunderstood what was meant with reciprocity?

In any case, the proposal seems to have struck a chord:

And in other news, the German Green Party has asked the government to fast-track citizenship applications by Britons living there, as well as to relax the conditions.

The Brexiteers will be perfectly at ease with that, on condition that they can continue to exclude foreigners from the UK. UKIP doesn't care about Brit quants in Luxembourg finance houses. It cares about Bulgarian or Romani migrants in U.K. Cities, and things of that kind.

If foreigners are kept out of the UK, but British people remain permitted to work in the EU, the Brexiteers will be ecstatic. It will be like the restoration of the Empire. Will the EU permit this arrangement?

 

[The Don]

From the same article:



So they wanted to get "le beurre et l'argent du beurre" as say the Frenchs (which seems to translate into "You can't have your cake and eat it").

I am just wondering what their reactions will be when they face a reality check. I guess they will accuse the Government of messing up the Brexit rather than acknowledge the fact that the Brexit is an expensive adventure.

I agree that they won't face reality but I think they will blame the EU - regardless

 

[ddt]

But imagine if Bavaria had seceded from the German Empire, and Bavarian citizens, on payment of a few Mark a year, could remain "associate subjects" of the Empire, without having that status in any constituent state of the Empire. Could that happen? Perhaps that was the status of inhabitants of Elsass-Lothringen between 1871 and 1911?

Good point about Elsaß-Lotrhingen; that land was not a state in the Empire, and its citizens were directly German citizens, not Alsatian-Lorranian (?) citizens first. Apart from them, to put a fine point on it, there wasn't even a German citizenship law until 1913, so that was more like the EU before the Lisbon Treaty.

I don't think you can compare the question of secession. First of all, we're more than a century later and ideas evolve. Second, I don't think the German Empire had a clause about secession and thirdly, Prussia wouldn't allow it; they had made that clear in 1866 when they annexed all of Austrian allies north of the Main.

 

[Aepervius]

The Brexiteers will be perfectly at ease with that, on condition that they can continue to exclude foreigners from the UK. UKIP doesn't care about Brit quants in Luxembourg finance houses. It cares about Bulgarian or Romani migrants in U.K. Cities, and things of that kind.

If foreigners are kept out of the UK, but British people remain permitted to work in the EU, the Brexiteers will be ecstatic. It will be like the restoration of the Empire. Will the EU permit this arrangement?

I hope not. For reason I mentioned above keeping the EU block would mean keeping the issue of freedom of movement linked. Allowing that bypass open the gate of every nationalist xenophobe wanting out of the freedom but in the economical area.

 

[McHrozni]

The Brexiteers will be perfectly at ease with that, on condition that they can continue to exclude foreigners from the UK. UKIP doesn't care about Brit quants in Luxembourg finance houses. It cares about Bulgarian or Romani migrants in U.K. Cities, and things of that kind.

If foreigners are kept out of the UK, but British people remain permitted to work in the EU, the Brexiteers will be ecstatic. It will be like the restoration of the Empire. Will the EU permit this arrangement?

With enough genetic engineering, sure.

Mmmm, pork wings

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

But imagine if Bavaria had seceded from the German Empire, and Bavarian citizens, on payment of a few Mark a year, could remain "associate subjects" of the Empire, without having that status in any constituent state of the Empire. Could that happen?

Chechnya tried something like that back in the 1990s. I suspect Prussian response would be similar to what the Russian response was, albeit much more efficient, quicker and possibly more brutal.

McHrozni