Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[Drifter]

Threat to end freedom of movement overnight is reckless, say EU citizens

Priti Patel’s reported aim contradicts the PM’s promises, says the 3million campaign

Ending freedom of movement for EU citizens immediately after a no-deal Brexit would be reckless and could create a hostile environment for European nationals, a campaign group has said.

The3million, a citizens group that represents the rights of EU nationals in the UK, was responding to the news that the home secretary, Priti Patel, intended to impose new border restrictions overnight on 31 October if Britain left the EU without a deal, despite reports that an internal government discussion paper had warned that doing so could present “legitimate concerns of another Windrush”.

The document also set out details of an alternative plan to maintain freedom of movement until January 2021 and to allow EU immigrants who came to the UK in the meantime to apply to stay under existing “settled status” rules.

But Home Office sources told the Times that the document did not reflect government thinking and that freedom of movement for people from EU countries would end “on October 31 should we leave without a deal”.

Amid reports that the government wishes to make the change through a statutory instrument – meaning that MPs would only be required to endorse the move after its implementation – the3million said the plan could open the way to mass discrimination.

The group renewed its call for all EU nationals to be automatically granted settled status and accused the prime minister, Boris Johnson, of undermining his promise to guarantee the rights and protections of EU citizens.

“The idea of ending freedom of movement abruptly on 31 October in case of no deal is reckless politics,” said Nicholas Hatton, the group’s founder. “It hollows out the prime minister’s unequivocal guarantee to EU citizens he has given only three weeks ago.

“Ending freedom of movement without putting legal provisions in place for those EU citizens who have not yet successfully applied through the settlement scheme will mean that millions of lawful citizens will have their legal status removed overnight.

“We have been calling for the settlement scheme to be a declaratory registration scheme, so all EU citizens who have made the UK their home are automatically granted status, as promised by those in government.

“Otherwise this will open the door to mass discrimination under the hostile environment, with employers, landlords, banks and the NHS unable to distinguish between those EU citizens with the right to live and work in the UK and those without.”


A Home Office spokesperson: “The home secretary has been clear in her intention to take back control of our borders and end free movement after 31 October.

“Ending free movement means we are no longer required to give unlimited and uncontrolled access to those from EU countries when they are coming here seeking to work.”

The Home Office minister Brandon Lewis said last week that more than 1 million people had been granted settled or pre-settled status through the scheme, after 1,038,100 people applied by 31 July. It was unclear how many other EU nationals have since had their applications received.

The deadline for applying to the EU settlement scheme if the UK leaves the bloc without a deal is 31 December 2020.

 

[Klopper76]

In Holland there I a period of grace once brexit happens, in the grace period you can apply for residency, passport and nationality. I have my residency permit. Once the grace period expires and you haven't applied to stay, the military police will round everyone up and feck them off.

Jesus. All sounds nice at first with a grace period, then boom it's military police and rounding people up.

I wonder how it'll be enforced in the UK.

 

[Stanley Road]

Don't forget to apply for your visa the next time you visit Portugal after Brexit.

I wont forget, will be happy to

 

[Stanley Road]

Jesus. All sounds nice at first with a grace period, then boom it's military police and rounding people up.

I wonder how it'll be enforced in the UK.

That was tongue in cheek, not sure how they will expel people but they will. Applying for residency is simple and cheap, I certainly do not want to change nationality.

 

[Rams]

Sweet baby Jesus. You lot are a bunch of pessimists. When did the internet become negative?

Please excuse my positivity.

I’m a glass half full person. But I’m negative about all the lies, spin doctoring and falsehoods of the remain campaigners.
The World will not stop at a hard Brexit and of course Britain will continue trading and daily life will continue. However, most Brits will be worse off and lots of people will have their lives disrupted in some way or form. There’s a lot of the EU to criticize, but the UK will be worse off outside the EU especially in case of a hard Brexit.

 

[Wumminator]

Sweet baby Jesus. You lot are a bunch of pessimists. When did the internet become negative?

Please excuse my positivity.

Every single expert and person who knows about these matters has said it will be a disaster. The governments own papers talk about it being a disaster. Sticking your hands over your ears and shouting “it’ll be ok” doesn’t make you positive, it makes you an idiot.

 

[nickm]

I'm just saying where does the cost hike to the consumers come from? My bananas come from Kenya they will have an import tariff from the EU, but under WTO that will be 0. Or look at the TV from China 14% with the EU, but under WTO 0%. I'm not bothered anymore weather in or out.

I just don't like being bullied into thinking we are substandard, incapable people by the media or the European Union.

Those tariffs won’t stay. The moment our exporters start getting priced out of markets, retaliatory tariffs will be applied, because politics.

We aren’t substandard or incapable, but we are fecking naive as a country and about to get a lesson in what happens when small countries feck with an economic superpower.

 

[WensleyMU]

My biggest concern isn't what will happen with Brexit, but the impact this very unsavoury chapter will have on the future. Irrespective as to how you voted, should Brexit not happen then there isn't any possible way back for all of us. At the same time should it happen, then the most aggressive voices on the remain side are hardly going to accept it.

Imagine for a second, that it didnt happen. The biggest vote in British history gets ignored. Imagine then the SNP holds another referendum on independence and wins. Would the UK government then have to accept it or, would there then be a precedent to ignore it? Quite clearly the latter.

Every future election will be undermined. We will end up with powerless governments (this laughable idea of a Government of National Unity being a prime example of a powerless government being proposed, to replace the current powerless government.... ). Hung parliaments will become the norm and coalitions are in general, ineffective. The losing side(s) will simply take to the streets in anger at their unjust defeat.

The reality is, a vote occurred and therefore it must be implemented. Everything possible should be done to ensure both the UK and EU are impacted to a minimum. If we end up with no deal, then the blame falls on all sides. All sides will suffer the consequences.

 

[WensleyMU]

Every single expert and person who knows about these matters has said it will be a disaster. The governments own papers talk about it being a disaster. Sticking your hands over your ears and shouting “it’ll be ok” doesn’t make you positive, it makes you an idiot.

The experts are speculating based on an event which has no precedent in history. They are guessing, just like everyone else because these are new frontiers.

While the "experts" advise should be considered along with numerous government assessments (this is literally what the government is meant to do, plan for the worst case and all eventualities) none of it can be presented as fact, because it is entirely unknown.

Personally I cannot see major industries spiting their own faces to prove a point. It will not happen, the desire for profit will not allow it to happen. Goods will be traded, and whether immediately, or in the near future, rates will be basically as they are now. We may end up in recession, but then so will the EU, and ikt would have happened regardless of being members or not. Once the dust has settled, and the noisy minority on both sides have shut up or fecked off, things will largely be the same.

 

[JPRouve]

The experts are speculating based on an event which has no precedent in history. They are guessing, just like everyone else because these are new frontiers.

While the "experts" advise should be considered along with numerous government assessments (this is literally what the government is meant to do, plan for the worst case and all eventualities) none of it can be presented as fact, because it is entirely unknown.

Personally I cannot see major industries spiting their own faces to prove a point. It will not happen, the desire for profit will not allow it to happen. Goods will be traded, and whether immediately, or in the near future, rates will be basically as they are now. We may end up in recession, but then so will the EU, and ikt would have happened regardless of being members or not. Once the dust has settled, and the noisy minority on both sides have shut up or fecked off, things will largely be the same.

The only way for rates to be as they are now is through an FTA, it has very little to do with major industries and everything to do with UK governements refusing to come back in reality.

 

[WensleyMU]

The only way for rates to be as they are now is through an FTA, it has very little to do with major industries and everything to do with UK governements refusing to come back in reality.

I'm not so naive to think major industries don't lobby for this sort of stuff.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

My biggest concern isn't what will happen with Brexit, but the impact this very unsavoury chapter will have on the future. Irrespective as to how you voted, should Brexit not happen then there isn't any possible way back for all of us. At the same time should it happen, then the most aggressive voices on the remain side are hardly going to accept it.

Imagine for a second, that it didnt happen. The biggest vote in British history gets ignored. Imagine then the SNP holds another referendum on independence and wins. Would the UK government then have to accept it or, would there then be a precedent to ignore it? Quite clearly the latter.

Every future election will be undermined. We will end up with powerless governments (this laughable idea of a Government of National Unity being a prime example of a powerless government being proposed, to replace the current powerless government.... ). Hung parliaments will become the norm and coalitions are in general, ineffective. The losing side(s) will simply take to the streets in anger at their unjust defeat.

The reality is, a vote occurred and therefore it must be implemented. Everything possible should be done to ensure both the UK and EU are impacted to a minimum. If we end up with no deal, then the blame falls on all sides. All sides will suffer the consequences.

In what possible way would it be the EU's fault because the UK won't ratify the WA. The UK chose to leave and the UK won't accept to acknowledge citizens rights, pay what they owe and also want to break the GFA and won't agree to the backstop which they themselves instigated to cover the whole of the UK.

 

[JPRouve]

I'm not so naive to think major industries don't lobby for this sort of stuff.

If they had any lobbying power it would have been done a long time ago. This issue is a lot more complicated than major industries, what Tory leaders are aiming for doesn't suit most industries and in particular major ones, it only suits the finance service industry.

 

[WensleyMU]

In what possible way would it be the EU's fault because the UK won't ratify the WA. The UK chose to leave and the UK won't accept to acknowledge citizens rights, pay what they owe and also want to break the GFA and won't agree to the backstop which they themselves instigated to cover the whole of the UK.

Because the EU, like the UK is playing politics.

Also, are we sure the UK wants to break the GFA or is it actually the case that the EU requires a hard border between member states and non-member states?

The UK, Ireland and Northern Ireland are all opposed to a hard border, so who exactly is it that is insisting on it?

If you think the EU is blameless entirely, then Sir, I have this wonderful bridge in a prime location that's perfect for you...

The WA was voted down 3 times. Compromise is needed or we leave without a deal and nobody wins, everyone loses.

 

[Buster15]

My biggest concern isn't what will happen with Brexit, but the impact this very unsavoury chapter will have on the future. Irrespective as to how you voted, should Brexit not happen then there isn't any possible way back for all of us. At the same time should it happen, then the most aggressive voices on the remain side are hardly going to accept it.

Imagine for a second, that it didnt happen. The biggest vote in British history gets ignored. Imagine then the SNP holds another referendum on independence and wins. Would the UK government then have to accept it or, would there then be a precedent to ignore it? Quite clearly the latter.

Every future election will be undermined. We will end up with powerless governments (this laughable idea of a Government of National Unity being a prime example of a powerless government being proposed, to replace the current powerless government.... ). Hung parliaments will become the norm and coalitions are in general, ineffective. The losing side(s) will simply take to the streets in anger at their unjust defeat.

The reality is, a vote occurred and therefore it must be implemented. Everything possible should be done to ensure both the UK and EU are impacted to a minimum. If we end up with no deal, then the blame falls on all sides. All sides will suffer the consequences.

Yes there was the referendum.
And yes the majority voted to leave the EU.
Those are the basic facts.
But....
There were proven to be major irregularities with the leave campaign.
It was based on promises that were proven to be lies.
It was subsequently found that the leave campaign broke electoral rules. Specifically related to funding.
It is also now perfectly clear that what is termed Brexit is simply an illusion.
A figment of peoples imagination that is un-deliverable.
We live in a global world. And so the mantra of 'taking back control of our borders' in reality means nothing. Apart from rhetoric.
And proof of this is the total inability of parliament to agree on anything.
All they have been able to do is to disagree with everything.

So I don't hold with the 'we had a vote so we have to leave'.
We are being used by far right wing politicians to implement policies that are going to damage this great country and it's people for the sake of a pipe dream.

 

[WensleyMU]

If they had any lobbying power it would have been done a long time ago. This issue is a lot more complicated than major industries, what Tory leaders are aiming for doesn't suit most industries and in particular major ones, it only suits the finance service industry.

They have enormous lobbying power.

The financial industry is one of the UK biggest and most influential so would be considered a major industry.

 

[WensleyMU]

Yes there was the referendum.
And yes the majority voted to leave the EU.
Those are the basic facts.
But....
There were proven to be major irregularities with the leave campaign.
It was based on promises that were proven to be lies.
It was subsequently found that the leave campaign broke electoral rules. Specifically related to funding.
It is also now perfectly clear that what is termed Brexit is simply an illusion.
A figment of peoples imagination that is un-deliverable.
We live in a global world. And so the mantra of 'taking back control of our borders' in reality means nothing. Apart from rhetoric.
And proof of this is the total inability of parliament to agree on anything.
All they have been able to do is to disagree with everything.

So I don't hold with the 'we had a vote so we have to leave'.
We are being used by far right wing politicians to implement policies that are going to damage this great country and it's people for the sake of a pipe dream.

There were irregularities on both sides, advantages gained through various means. Let's not pretend one side was rosey and the other was not. After all, its politics.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Because the EU, like the UK is playing politics.

Also, are we sure the UK wants to break the GFA or is it actually the case that the EU requires a hard border between member states and non-member states?

The UK, Ireland and Northern Ireland are all opposed to a hard border, so who exactly is it that is insisting on it?

If you think the EU is blameless entirely, then Sir, I have this wonderful bridge in a prime location that's perfect for you...

The WA was voted down 3 times. Compromise is needed or we leave without a deal and nobody wins, everyone loses.

The EU does not need a hard border if the UK retains the same regulations and standards and retains the same legal status, it's the Uk that want to change that.
What happened to taking back control of our borders or was that only the ones that suit us, why doesn't the UK open up all their borders?

The WA was agreed to and signed by the UK government , the WA was voted down 3 times by the HoC so it was not ratified. Why was it not ratified, because it didn't suit the far right of the Tory Party, it wasn't a Corbyn unicorn agreement and it wasn't remain.

What exactly do you think the EU has to compromise on?

 

[Buster15]

There were irregularities on both sides, advantages gained through various means. Let's not pretend one side was rosey and the other was not. After all, its politics.

What were the irregularities of the remain campaign ?

 

[Pexbo]

Great folk on both sides

 

[nickm]

Because the EU, like the UK is playing politics.

Also, are we sure the UK wants to break the GFA or is it actually the case that the EU requires a hard border between member states and non-member states?

The UK, Ireland and Northern Ireland are all opposed to a hard border, so who exactly is it that is insisting on it?

The UK, assuming we are serious about no deal - if there's no deal, then there will be a border, bet on it. And if you think we somehow wouldn't put up a border on our side... wait until the first truckload of illegal immigrants gets smuggled over and the Daily Mail go big on it, or a tent city goes up in ireland with all those immigrants usually camped out in Calais. We'll stick a border up all right.

We are the ones refusing the backstop, which is expressly designed to keep the border as-is until a full deal is agreed.

If you think the EU is blameless entirely, then Sir, I have this wonderful bridge in a prime location that's perfect for you...

The WA was voted down 3 times. Compromise is needed or we leave without a deal and nobody wins, everyone loses.

May's red lines severely limited the space for compromise. If you want compromise, what red lines would you give up?

 

[WensleyMU]

The EU does not need a hard border if the UK retains the same regulations and standards and retains the same legal status, it's the Uk that want to change that.
What happened to taking back control of our borders or was that only the ones that suit us, why doesn't the UK open up all their borders?

The WA was agreed to and signed by the UK government , the WA was voted down 3 times by the HoC so it was not ratified. Why was it not ratified, because it didn't suit the far right of the Tory Party, it wasn't a Corbyn unicorn agreement and it wasn't remain.

What exactly do you think the EU has to compromise on?

Everything. The WA is dead, people with all views voted it down. Its done. Pretending otherwise will again, only send us towards no deal.

In fact, with all things considered, it wouldn't be all that surprising if all sides were actually pushing for no deal, because they are doing jack to prevent it.

And again, it is nether the UK or Ireland insisting on a hard border. It is the EU, and only the EU who require such a border between members and non-members. If the EU wants the UK to retain the regulations, then its going to have to come back and negotiate. It is that simple.

Or its No Deal.

 

[WensleyMU]

What were the irregularities of the remain campaign ?

Spending irregularities just as with Leave. Fined £19000 in 2017, and £2000 in 2018.

 

[WensleyMU]

The UK, assuming we are serious about no deal - if there's no deal, then there will be a border, bet on it. And if you think we somehow wouldn't put up a border on our side... wait until the first truckload of illegal immigrants gets smuggled over and the Daily Mail go big on it, or a tent city goes up in ireland with all those immigrants usually camped out in Calais. We'll stick a border up all right.

We are the ones refusing the backstop, which is expressly designed to keep the border as-is until a full deal is agreed.



May's red lines severely limited the space for compromise. If you want compromise, what red lines would you give up?

May is dead (figuratively speaking). Her red lines died with her.

 

[nickm]

Personally I cannot see major industries spiting their own faces to prove a point. It will not happen, the desire for profit will not allow it to happen. Goods will be traded, and whether immediately, or in the near future, rates will be basically as they are now. We may end up in recession, but then so will the EU, and ikt would have happened regardless of being members or not. Once the dust has settled, and the noisy minority on both sides have shut up or fecked off, things will largely be the same.

If everything will largely be the same, then what is the point of this ridiculousness? If you believe in Brexit, then you have to believe things won't be the same, and if brexiters were honest, they would have to concede that in any transition, there's always the chance things could go as much wrong as right.

For example, on a 50 year view, if Brexiters were being honest, they would concede there's a risk - maybe a small one but a risk nonetheless - we could end up as Venice of the 21st century - a state that withered as its trading partnerships and routes changed - rather than the Singpore.

 

[Buster15]

Spending irregularities just as with Leave. Fined £19000 in 2017, and £2000 in 2018.

Thank you. I will check on that.

 

[nickm]

May is dead (figuratively speaking). Her red lines died with her.

I'm afraid that's not the way the EU sees it at all. The EU would be entitled to think at minimum the UK was untrustworthy and unable to deliver its commitments, given this WA was arrived at in good faith. If you want a renegotiation on a different 'May's deal is dead' basis then you have to extend A50 again, or revoke, and renegotiate from scratch in good faith. There simply isn't time to pull the entire deal, attempt to cherry pick and start from scratch from no deal. Trying to threaten the EU - a larger and more powerful bloc whose good will we'll need in future whatever the outcome here, is stupidity.

 

[JPRouve]

They have enormous lobbying power.

The financial industry is one of the UK biggest and most influential so would be considered a major industry.

And yet, as you said the WA is dead. You can't have it both ways, if they were that influential they would have moved some of their services inside the EU and they would have influenced politicians into making a deal.

 

[Buster15]

Spending irregularities just as with Leave. Fined £19000 in 2017, and £2000 in 2018.

OK. That was the Liberals and not the official Leave Campaign.

 

[Mr Pigeon]

With the multitude of people saying "just get it over and done with" and showing a severe lack of understanding about the intricacies of Brexit, I don't think that we should have had a referendum at all.

I had someone tell me today that the EU was standing in the way of democracy. I wish I had the energy to tell them that the "EU" isn't a single entity. It's made up of political scientists, scholars, financial and economic experts and so forth. Which seems like a damn bit more impressive than Dave the white van man.

 

[sullydnl]

Everything. The WA is dead, people with all views voted it down. Its done. Pretending otherwise will again, only send us towards no deal.

In fact, with all things considered, it wouldn't be all that surprising if all sides were actually pushing for no deal, because they are doing jack to prevent it.

And again, it is nether the UK or Ireland insisting on a hard border. It is the EU, and only the EU who require such a border between members and non-members. If the EU wants the UK to retain the regulations, then its going to have to come back and negotiate. It is that simple.

Or its No Deal.

The issue for the UK is that nobody except the UK will blame anyone else for the hard border. As far as the EU are concerned it will be the UK's fault, as far as Ireland are concerned it will be the UK's fault and as far as the likes of Nancy Pelosi are concerned it will be the UK's fault.

Which is a big problem for the UK as, in the event of a no deal, it will be left to negotiate trade agreements with people who blame them for the hard border and will demand they fix it before they agree to anything.

 

[sun_tzu]

The issue for the UK is that nobody except the UK will blame anyone else for the hard border. As far as the EU are concerned it will be the UK's fault, as far as Ireland are concerned it will be the UK's fault and as far as the likes of Nancy Pelosi are concerned it will be the UK's fault.

Which is a big problem for the UK as, in the event of a no deal, it will be left to negotiate trade agreements with people who blame them for the hard border and will demand they fix it before they agree to anything.

Pretty sure trump will blame Europe (especially if pelosi blames the UK)

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Everything. The WA is dead, people with all views voted it down. Its done. Pretending otherwise will again, only send us towards no deal.

In fact, with all things considered, it wouldn't be all that surprising if all sides were actually pushing for no deal, because they are doing jack to prevent it.

And again, it is nether the UK or Ireland insisting on a hard border. It is the EU, and only the EU who require such a border between members and non-members. If the EU wants the UK to retain the regulations, then its going to have to come back and negotiate. It is that simple.

Or its No Deal.

What are you talking about. The only way to avoid a hard border is for the UK, or at least Northern Ireland to stay in the Customs Union and the Single Market - this has been ruled out by the UK , it is 100%the problem and fault of the UK no question, no doubt whatsoever. It's straight out of the Brexit Leave nonsense book.

 

[Silva]

the major reason why a no deal exit is even thinkable is because the level of civil disobedience required to stop it is practically impossible given the demographics, the people who most oppose it own all the fecking windows

all the talk of potential post brexit riots misses the simple difference that people won't be protesting that we left the EU, they'll be protesting because they're hungry

they had hundreds of thousands of people marching in london and if you were illiterate you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between their show of political will to a giant jubilee party

 

[4bars]

Everything. The WA is dead, people with all views voted it down. Its done. Pretending otherwise will again, only send us towards no deal.

In fact, with all things considered, it wouldn't be all that surprising if all sides were actually pushing for no deal, because they are doing jack to prevent it.

And again, it is nether the UK or Ireland insisting on a hard border. It is the EU, and only the EU who require such a border between members and non-members. If the EU wants the UK to retain the regulations, then its going to have to come back and negotiate. It is that simple.

Or its No Deal.

UK signed the World Trade Agreement, that is were you going to go if you go for No Deal. So as I understand that had been said in this thread, under the WTA, the UK has to enforce through a hard border the entrance of the goods. SO if the UK doesn't want to break an international treaty (another one after the GFA, good reputation and so for future trades and treaties), the UK has the obligation to put a hard border.

Please, experts on the matter, correct me if I am wrong

 

[Abizzz]

Everything. The WA is dead, people with all views voted it down. Its done. Pretending otherwise will again, only send us towards no deal.

In fact, with all things considered, it wouldn't be all that surprising if all sides were actually pushing for no deal, because they are doing jack to prevent it.

And again, it is nether the UK or Ireland insisting on a hard border. It is the EU, and only the EU who require such a border between members and non-members. If the EU wants the UK to retain the regulations, then its going to have to come back and negotiate. It is that simple.

Or its No Deal.

This is pure bull shit and one has to wonder how much propaganda one has to consume to believe and regurgitate it?


And it's been shown to be bull shit at least 20 times in this thread, so spare me the complaints.

 

[Smores]

This is pure bull shit and one has to wonder how much propaganda one has to consume to believe and regurgitate it?


And it's been shown to be bull shit at least 20 times in this thread, so spare me the complaints.

It is spoken like a man who heard a tory say it on skynews but doesn't really understand the issue but likes the line. My dad does the same and i have to deconstruct it everytime, it's exhausting.

The idea of the Tories championing open borders now is hilarious

 

[JPRouve]

It is spoken like a man who heard a tory say it on skynews but doesn't really understand the issue but likes the line. My dad does the same and i have to deconstruct it everytime, it's exhausting.

The idea of the Tories championing open borders now is hilarious

The problem with Brexit is that some people don't understand what the legal standards are, they seem to think that outside of the EU there are no rules to follow or that the EU make all the rules. That fact was obvious when people were talking about the ECHR in relationship to Brexit, some people didn't realize that the Council of Europe was "above" the EU and that leaving it wouldn't change a thing. Now they seem to not realize that WTO and many other international agreements have to be respected by EU members.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

As a gesture and for France to save some money, Macron should arrange a convoy of buses to take all the immigrants that want to get to the UK on a ferry to Ireland pass through the border and get a ferry to mainland England and disembark them at the entrance of the HoC.

 

[WPMUFC]

The UK will have a “historic opportunity” to strike a trade deal with Malaysia, the Asian country’s prime minister has suggested — provided it relaxes restrictions on imports of palm oil imposed by the EU because of the crop’s environmental impact.

https://www.ft.com/content/fd1b1a96-c29c-11e9-a8e9-296ca66511c9

Destroying the environment to own a remoaner. Keep it classy UK.