If we vote for Brexit what happens

TrickyTree83

wotsthat wrote: »

Get a grip kid.

The right thing to do (IMO of course) was for the UK and EU to guarantee the rights of citizens. Why on Earth do two parties need to negotiate with each other to do the right thing? How does that work - I'll do the right thing but only if you do?

It's regretful they didn't so ex-pats can join the long queue of other people who don't have a scooby doo how their lives are going to be affected.

Doing the right thing yourself and hoping others do too is village politics. Look at how your interpretation of unilaterally doing the right thing worked for Germany during the migrant crisis and how others have responded. Instead of negotiating and getting consensus on how to deal with issues ahead of time. Which is what the UK government were asking of the EU, who denied the ex-pats the opportunity.

If the rights have to be part of negotiations, and negotiations cannot take place according to the EU before A50, and the EU is deaf to the requests from the UK government to negotiate this issue outside of that arrangement, who is putting up the roadblocks as Herzlos says?

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Austrian President Van Der Bellen and Slovenian President Pahor today called for EU reform.
Translated for you here: https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://orf.at/stories/2374476/&prev=search

It is intended to resume the efforts to create an effective and democratic EU that failed in 2005 in France and the Netherlands, but not in the form of a "superstate".

Van der Bellen said that the proposal "should be seriously discussed at European level". In view of the "difficult situations facing the EU", it is clear: "As before, it can not go on."

It also looks like the EU may "shake up, simplify and detoxify" the way it funds itself.
Some though will no doubt see this as implementing some new taxes to make up (in part at least) for the loss of the UK's contributions post-Brexit.

The U.K’s departure, the Monti reports says, “provides a unique window of opportunity to review how we measure the real costs and benefits of the EU.”


The idea sounds attractive, but it is bound to trigger a fight over whose money it is in the first place, with accusations that European grandees are quietly dreaming up a dreaded “EU tax,” or trying to siphon off revenue sources that should flow to member governments.

http://www.politico.eu/article/eu-spots-opportunity-in-brexit-to-fix-funding-wars-budget-tax-contributions/

wotsthat

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Doing the right thing yourself and hoping others do too is village politics. Look at how your interpretation of unilaterally doing the right thing worked for Germany during the migrant crisis and how others have responded. Instead of negotiating and getting consensus on how to deal with issues ahead of time. Which is what the UK government were asking of the EU, who denied the ex-pats the opportunity.

If the rights have to be part of negotiations, and negotiations cannot take place according to the EU before A50, and the EU is deaf to the requests from the UK government to negotiate this issue outside of that arrangement, who is putting up the roadblocks as Herzlos says?

I don't care about roadblocks and I don't really care much about ex-pats to be honest - most of the ones I know were big Brexit fans so I fear we're worrying more on their behalf than they were themselves.

I'm skeptical of the governments motives here (trying to gain the moral high ground after a faux pas I think) but, that said, we knew the exit methodology before the vote. If the EU wish to keep to that agreement so be it and that is 'bad' then so be it.

If we're oh so bothered about ex-pats then article 50 needs to be triggered asap so we can get negotiating about it. Of course, I'm aware this causes great offense to people who also want article 50 to be triggered asap but still like to think 'remoaners' are doing everything possible to delay Brexit.

Time to get on with it and stop making excuses for the government.

TrickyTree83

wotsthat wrote: »

I don't care about roadblocks and I don't really care much about ex-pats to be honest - most of the ones I know were big Brexit fans so I fear we're worrying more on their behalf than they were themselves.

I'm skeptical of the governments motives here (trying to gain the moral high ground after a faux pas I think) but, that said, we knew the exit methodology before the vote. If the EU wish to keep to that agreement so be it and that is 'bad' then so be it.

If we're oh so bothered about ex-pats then article 50 needs to be triggered asap so we can get negotiating about it. Of course, I'm aware this causes great offense to people who also want article 50 to be triggered asap but still like to think 'remoaners' are doing everything possible to delay Brexit.

Time to get on with it and stop making excuses for the government.

I'd rather we took our time and got our ducks in a row before triggering A50. It seemed as though Cameron didn't have a plan for the leave option he gave us on the ballot, the remain option didn't need a plan, so his government, and the MP's who voted for the referendum were woeful in discharging their duties to the electorate in that respect.

If we're going to continue to bleat on about the plight of EU citizens in the UK then I'd like us to be clear where the blame lies for their rights having not already been dealt with. It's certainly not with me, you and the rest of the electorate as Donald Tusk would have us believe.

Herzlos

I agree that we should definitely have a plan before we trigger A50. But then that's nothing to do with the EU and the blame for that lays squarely with Cameron and the Leave campaign. How you can campaign for something that serious without even a post-it note plan is beyond me.

That said, we've stuffed that part up now, so we need to get on as best as we can. We should have something resembling a plan by March, so we should trigger it and then start doing the work instead of wasting everyone's time.

gfplux

wotsthat wrote: »

We had a referendum in the knowledge that article 50 would need to be triggered for exit negotiations to begin. The status of ex-pats was always going to be part of these negotiations. No secret.

People weren't concerned enough about the worry ex-pats would doubtless face to vote to remain and spare them the anxiety. No, we decided, on balance, that we thought it would be better for the ex pats to be anxious because the gains from Brexit trump their concerns.

Like everyone else ex pats will have to wait and see what effect brexit will have on their lives. Of course, like everyone else they'll be arguing that their pet subject should be a special case and to think otherwise makes you a bad person.

Personally I think the government should've unilaterally granted EU citizens their rights in the UK. Sometimes 'the right thing to do' shouldn't need to be negotiated. The EU should encourage their members to do the same.

Nearly 7 months on from the vote this expat is happy to wait. No negotiation before triggering Article 50 sounds good to me.

gfplux

Herzlos wrote: »

Not at all, it's only the EU that isn't using the ex-pats as bargaining chips. EU has guaranteed their status as members of the EU right up until the UK changes the deal. The EU has literally nothing to assure about, because they aren't the ones producing the situation that will put them in jeopardy. They can't make further assurances beyond what they have, because they have no idea what crazy ideas May will suggest.

What do you want both the EU and May to say?

I know you hate the EU and foreigners, but you need to at least pretend to look at these things impartially.

Nearly 7 months on from the vote this expat is happy to wait. No negotiation before triggering Article 50 sounds good to me.

gfplux

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

But lets not pretend that the UK government didn't plead with the EU to guarantee bi-lateral rights of citizens and the EU shut down the discussion saying no negotiation until Article 50. So by implication the EU is already using UK ex-pats as bargaining chips themselves, since they acknowledged the fact that there is a need for negotiation.

Nearly 7 months on from the vote this expat is happy to wait. No negotiation before triggering Article 50 sounds good to me.

gfplux

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Has the EU said that once the UK leaves the EU that the rights of UK ex-pats will be honoured?

To my knowledge (and I would assume the UK governments), no they have not.

The UK has come out and publicly stated that it wants to discuss the rights of EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the EU so they need not worry, that they will be protected and their lives will not have to be bargaining chips. The EU declined to enter into discussions about either set of people. So their lives are now bargaining chips.

As much as you may hate the UK at the moment, the UK government did make the first move to make this happen. The only thing stopping it from happening is the EU.

Nearly 7 months on from the vote this expat is happy to wait. No negotiation before triggering Article 50 sounds good to me.

gfplux

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Moral high ground doesn't matter to the people who are in the balance does it?

The EU should have had the discussion.

You could argue that the language used was a faux-pas on our politicians part, blown out of all proportion because it genuinely is the situation these people are in due to the EU being unwilling to negotiate.

We could go out on a limb and unilaterally grant EU citizens their rights in the UK as some appear to want us to do, although that would be a virtue signalling exercise (like Merkel's "refugee" invitation) that is neither pragmatic nor helpful to the citizens the UK is actually responsible for who reside in the EU. We could well be leaving the UK ex-pats high and dry by unilaterally granting EU citizens their rights prior to negotiating the rights of our own citizens in EU countries. Virtue signalling for one set of people at the expense of another set of people (modus operandi of the left it appears) is not the way decisions should be taken.

The EU should have agreed to discussions on the bi-lateral agreement of rights. That's the long and short of it.

Nearly 7 months on from the vote this expat is happy to wait. No negotiation before triggering Article 50 sounds good to me.