Latest on EU citizens

[nemerkh]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.bbc.co ... oid-h3g-gb#

That article came out yesterday giving assurances to PR holders but putting other eu citizens in limbo.

[Casa]

Why do the media constantly fail to report the full facts?
"EU citizens who had obtained permanent right to residence by virtue of living in the UK for five years" makes no mention that permanent residence requires the EU citizen to complete 5 years of exercising Treaty rights (or by the sponsor for non-EU nationals). There's a brief suggestion in 'and other factors'.

[rooibos]

Why do the media constantly fail to report the full facts?|

[Manchester171]

Mr Sedwill said EU nationals in the UK could be sure that their rights would be protected UNTIL the moment the UK leaves the EU So, it would be a matter of time. The PR is a right under EU laws while ILR is under UK law. When the UK officially exit the EU. The PR probably will be invalid after a certain time or cut off date, similar to any immigration visa. The Home Office can't announce what will happen as they afraid thousands of EU citizens will enter the UK before any cut-off date. Any tourist on a visitor visa has the right to live. But rights to work or to study need a different category.

The government has declined to give a firm guarantee about the status of EU nationals currently living in the UK, saying this is not possible without a reciprocal pledge from other EU members about the millions of British nationals living on the continent.

This shows that any negotiation in the future between the UK and EU about free movement rights. Will be based on how big community of British people are living in every EU country. A full free movement will be done with France, Spain, Germany, Italy and Holland where there are big communities of British and limited free movement without the right to work with Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia....etc where are very few number of British people are living and working there.

[rooibos]

The PR is a right under EU laws while ILR is under UK law. When the UK officially exit the EU. The PR probably will be invalid after a certain time or cut off date, similar to any immigration visa..

This is why I think that, apart from for the purpose of naturalization, there's little point in applying for a DCPR now.

[noajthan]

EU docs may prove invaluable to invoke any transitional arrangements that may be put in place (assuming British sense of fair play hasn't been worn out already).

[Richard W]

The PR is a right under EU laws while ILR is under UK law. When the UK officially exit the EU. The PR probably will be invalid after a certain time or cut off date, similar to any immigration visa..

This is why I think that, apart from for the purpose of naturalization, there's little point in applying for a DCPR now.

On the other hand, I can see a 'right-to-work' regulation in 2019 making a DCPR issued before, say, 13 February 2017, an 'acceptable document', or the core of an acceptable combination.

The other option is to force PR holders onto BRPs evidencing ILR.

[DFDS.]

The PR is a right under EU laws while ILR is under UK law. When the UK officially exit the EU. The PR probably will be invalid after a certain time or cut off date, similar to any immigration visa..

This is why I think that, apart from for the purpose of naturalization, there's little point in applying for a DCPR now.

On the other hand, I can see a 'right-to-work' regulation in 2019 making a DCPR issued before, say, 13 February 2017, an 'acceptable document', or the core of an acceptable combination.

The other option is to force PR holders onto BRPs evidencing ILR.

I am not sure, but I can't see this as a reciprocal to the millions of British workers with in the 27 remaining members, who will be allowed to stay unconditionally

[Richard W]

I am not sure, but I can't see this as a reciprocal to the millions of British workers with in the 27 remaining members, who will be allowed to stay unconditionally

Fair point, with two caveats:
1) We've only got reciprocity with France (and that may be retracted)
2) We've only got reciprocity for workers - what about students and the self-sufficient?

[Manchester171]

According to the United Nations Population Division, the number of British people living in the EU is 1.2 million. (The largest communities are in Spain – 309,000, Ireland – 255,000, France – 185,000 and Germany – 103,000)

These counties probably will have a free movement deal with the UK and no dramatic changes than pre Brexit. The other countries may have different limited free movement or visa free ( rights to live) but no rights to work.
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/354

[chimerka]

Reaction to Manchesters post, the article you mentioned is from March 2016, it is article about what could happen, if people will vote to go out of EU. After Brexit there was made clear by government , that there will be no difference in right for EU citizens based on which country they came from. Just because Spain or Italy have more UK citizens, that doesn't mean that Italians will have more right to stay than people from Czech republic. Forgive me, but writing something like that here will only scare people from certain countries and it is based on no fact, only on some old article written before Brexit. I read 1000s articles after Brexit , readings from parliament debates, speech of politicians, but not once someone said, that right of people will depend on which country they came from. If something, then few times it was mentioned that people with PR status have at this moment little bit better positions, or it seems so. However, I am firm believer there will be no deportation and splitting up families at all. Lets be more positive and write more about reality..

[Obie]

I am not sure, but I can't see this as a reciprocal to the millions of British workers with in the 27 remaining members, who will be allowed to stay unconditionally

Fair point, with two caveats:
1) We've only got reciprocity with France (and that may be retracted)
2) We've only got reciprocity for workers - what about students and the self-sufficient?

There is no reciprocity with France . This is simply wrong.

France has simply taken a unilateral and humane action of allowing Brits living in France to continue doing so .

UK never said they will do likewise.

[Richard W]

France has simply taken a unilateral and humane action of allowing Brits living in France to continue doing so .

UK never said they will do likewise.

The report you found says

At a joint press conference with new Prime Minister Theresa May following a meeting at the Élysée Palace, Mr Hollande said: "There is no doubt that French people in the UK will be able to continue to live and work there, and equally British people who are in France can continue to work and spend as much time as they want here."

There is no report of Theresa May demurring. Qui tacet consentit.

Alternatively, this is merely a French offer - note the word 'equally'. It might even imply a threat - 'If you mess with our people, we'll mess with yours'. Whatever it is, it is reciprocal.

[Basti86dd]

Sorry to interrupt, but it's unlikely that there will be seperate deals with countries of the EU. It simply could lead to a further desintigration of EU. It's simply not the policy of EU to do such deals (and I doubt that this would be according to EU law). Frankly, I expect that they will come to a deal which limits the freedom of movement either for a longer period of time (e.g. they could implement a "migration break", the permission to work could be linked to an job offer which is issued before the person get a NI-No). I don't think that EU nationals in UK (and vice versa) need to be afraid. A hard brexit is rather unlikely, since it could lead to a break up of UK (departure at least of Scotland) - and Torries are Unionists at the end of the day. There will be a deal nobody likes (neither hard-ramainer nor hard-leaver) but satisfy the ones with a rather flexible soft position.

At the end of the day both EU could play hardball and seriously harm UK economy (e.g. indirectly interfere in trade negotiations of UK and third countries). And in order to maintain peace between the EU member states EU would agree for a reciprocal deal. Therefore there will be a strong incentive on both sides to come to a deal which doesn't leave to much anger and frustration. With regards to that I don't think they will trigger A50 too soon. They will wait until there is a common position which doesn't lead to an immidiate break up of the Union and which strenghts the UK position (that the main parties, basically Torries and devoluted regions are not too unhappy). That also means that they will probably wait until the elections in France next year (likely that Hollande needs to go, what might change the negotiation position of France - since this could have a major impact on the negotiations itself they won't risk that valuable month become redundant because they didn't wait until the the GE there is over). It could be that they wait until the German GE (since Conversatives and Merkel are under pressure it might be worth to wait but it's rather unlikely that there will be a new government after GE).

[Petaltop]

I am not sure, but I can't see this as a reciprocal to the millions of British workers with in the 27 remaining members, who will be allowed to stay unconditionally

Some of these "reciprocal" deals within the EU, aren't reciprocal. Brits in other EU countries have to wait to claim that countries benefits, while their citizens in the UK claim UK benefits after 3 months. The NHS is also free for them to use, but it doesn't work like that in other EU countries. Often the NHS gives more cover than they can get in their own country.

Just look at how many decide to move their "dependant" elderly to the UK and then decide that their elderly can be "dependant" on the UK's welfare state instead. Or they don't want to work much to keep their own children and claim the UK's welfare payments, Tax Credis and Housing Benefits. Or they suddenly get sick and want to live on the better benefits the UK will give them. It's not inthe UK's interest to keep any of these. It wasn't that long ago that social housing was only given to those born in Britain as were some other income based benefits.

This "coming to the UK for benefits" via free movement has always been something the Brits are (quite rightly) fed up with and want stopped. Maybe the new deal with the EU will have to actually be "reciprocal"? And the benefit rules can be changed again now the the EU won't be saying "they must all have the same as Brits".

[Richard W]

Sorry to interrupt, but it's unlikely that there will be seperate deals with countries of the EU. It simply could lead to a further desintigration of EU. It's simply not the policy of EU to do such deals (and I doubt that this would be according to EU law).

There probably won't be separate deals, but it's not impossible. I'm not aware of anything that prevents Britain and France giving more favourable treatment to one another's nationals as regards immigration status. Indeed, there are already some notable examples, such as the Nordic countries and the hodge-podge of the Common Travel Area.

[secret.simon]

I'm not aware of anything that prevents Britain and France giving more favourable treatment to one another's nationals as regards immigration status. Indeed, there are already some notable examples, such as the Nordic countries and the hodge-podge of the Common Travel Area.

Crucially both those arrangements you have cited predate the European Union.

At the moment, the EU is playing hard-ball with the US and Canada about Polish, Romanian and Bulgarian citizens requiring visas to enter those countries, while their citizens can enter the whole of the EU visa-free. The EU is trying to ensure that all EU citizens are treated equally abroad, whether they come from Romania or Germany.

So, it is unlikely to take kindly to bilateral arrangements between EU states and the UK (or any other country for that matter).

[Richard W]

Crucially both those arrangements you have cited predate the European Union.

<snip>The EU is trying to ensure that all EU citizens are treated equally abroad, whether they come from Romania or Germany.

So, it is unlikely to take kindly to bilateral arrangements between EU states and the UK (or any other country for that matter).

Indeed, your example is why I think bilateral deals are unlikely. However, they don't seem to be unlawful.

Now, what we've seen in the CTA is not bilateral deals, but rather unilateral tweaking. For example, the Irish change from jus soli to jus sanguinis had no impact on the children of Britons, but did potentially affect the children of other EEA nationals. From c. 2002 to c. 2009, the CTA entitlement only enabled Irishmen to be settled in the UK if they were allowed residence by the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2000 (which were replaced in 2006). The change came from giving statutory meaning to the phrase "in breach of the immigration laws". Now, in 2014, eligibility for the CTA entitlement was extended to those with amn enforceable EU right of entry - affecting immigration status - but it was not made a qualifying CTA entitlement, so beneficiaries could still be left, or become, "in breach of the immigration laws", which is relevant for the acquisition of nationality.

So, perhaps you're right in one way. Immigration status has been made less discriminatory, while discrimination still allowed in nationality law. However, Irish citizens are still privileged for changing planes airside in the Republic of Ireland - such a flight to the UK would grant a Dane nothing but would grant an Irishman a qualifying CTA entitlement. I think this doesn't happen routinely, but I could be wrong.

[secret.simon]

A useful guide from Jonathan Portes on the LSE Brexit blog about just how complicated the issue of which EEA citizens can stay in the UK is.

How will we decide who can stay? The fate of EU migrants post-Brexit

And in other news;
An overview of the alternatives to the Article 50 process for Brexit - and why they are unlikely.

A very interesting article by a Norwegian lawyer about the subtle differences between EU law and EEA (Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein) law when it comes to free movement.

And more on the EEA from a Norwegian.

[SarahM1972]

Some of these "reciprocal" deals within the EU, aren't reciprocal. Brits in other EU countries have to wait to claim that countries benefits, while their citizens in the UK claim UK benefits after 3 months. The NHS is also free for them to use, but it doesn't work like that in other EU countries. Often the NHS gives more cover than they can get in their own country.

The above makes no sense to me. Sorry if I try to correct this misinformation. I only speak from my experience in my own country, Italy, but Brits cannot claim welfare benefits because Italians cannot claim benefits.... You need to prove you've minimum two full years of tax contributions (104 weeks) into the state work/pension system to claim benefits, whether you're Italian or British. Furthermore, if you've been unemployed one year, you only get 6 months of JSA and then it's over, no more benefits.
When you read about 40% of youth unemployment in Italy, most of the financial burden is shouldered by the parents and not the state, because the majority of youngsters unlikely has the tax contributions needed to claim benefits.

The NHS in Italy is also organised as the British NHS, after three months you can register at a local GP (ASL) and receive a temporary card if you are EEA and want to be a resident.

[secret.simon]

"Reciprocal" can mean different things to different people.

I think PetalTop interprets it to mean as being the same terms on which an EEA (such as Italian) citizen would get the same benefit in the UK.

Your interpretation is that the UK citizen would be treated on the same terms as a citizen of that country in that country (the conventional EU interpretation).

But you can see the difference. Mind the gap please, when it come to the interpretation of language.

[noajthan]

"Reciprocal" can mean different things to different people.

Indeed.
And there's a fine line between a numerator and a denominator. Only a fraction of people appreciate that.

[DFDS.]

"Reciprocal" can mean different things to different people.

Indeed.
And there's a fine line between a numerator and a denominator. Only a fraction of people appreciate that.

I think we have to understand the nature of the community on this discussion board. We are discussing immigration, which is a broad issue that has to deal with many more factors like integration, education just to mention a few. So for us to assume that all members are at the same level of understanding or should be able to interpret the jargons used by industry professionals on this board, is a matter of regret.

[secret.simon]

there's a fine line between a numerator and a denominator. Only a fraction of people appreciate that.

That is a really good one. I must try it out on somebody soon.

[Casa]

"Reciprocal" can mean different things to different people.

Indeed.
And there's a fine line between a numerator and a denominator. Only a fraction of people appreciate that.

I think we have to understand the nature of the community on this discussion board. We are discussing immigration, which is a broad issue that has to deal with many more factors like integration, education just to mention a few. So for us to assume that all members are at the same level of understanding or should be able to interpret the jargons used by industry professionals on this board, is a matter of regret.

If we didn't have a little light relief on the forum (in the form of humour), the forum would be a very boring experience.