What a weird policy

Labour says it would scrap Theresa May’s Brexit plans and unilaterally guarantee the rights of EU residents before talks start, if they win power.

The people that might matter to are EU nationals who are not UK or Eire nationals. Who don’t have the vote in this election.

57 comments on “What a weird policy

  1. I don’t have a problem with this. Same as unilateral declaration of free trade. Saves time. This is what we’re going to do , whatever you say dear EU, now shall we talk about how much you are going to charge your citizens for British goods?

  2. The aim is to remove EU nationals. The whole point of Brexit is about immigration. If Labour wishes to ignore the clearly expressed wish of the voters, that is on them.

    But those baristas, whores, muggers, rapists and the odd plumber need to go.

  3. SMFS – “The aim is to remove EU nationals”

    Remove? No– “assent to” would fit the case better. Why would we want to remove anybody that came here legally. And if you did want to reduce the number still you don’t need to remove people. If you control the flow of new entrants then the natural churn of previous migrants, returning home, going to new gigs, will reduce the overall number.

  4. Tim Newman – “Those with foreign spouses might be directly affected.”

    We should learn from the wisdom of Pericles and give British residency, much less citizenship, only to those born of two British parents.

    How many child rapes are worth putting up with in order to allow fat middle aged men to marry Thai hookers?

  5. I read this as a naked play to try to avoid electoral wipeout by giving the 16 million who voted remain a reason to vote Labour. After all, it’s not as though the Labour vote looks likely to increase any other way, is it?

    As for removing EU nationals, I submit that the sector of the population giving us the most societal issues and arguably most in need of being repatriated is emphatically NOT the EU citizens (though most of the Roma, Albanians and some of the the Bulgarians might merit it).

    The rest are generally less feral, better educated and harder-working than the lower deciles of our own yoof.

  6. The removal of EU immigrants is a long way from being the only point of leaving the EU. The supremacy of UK law, UK courts and the UK Parliament within the country is more important. Those who remain/come will have to accept that or leave. I suspect most will want to stay.

  7. Hasn’t May already offered the EU a quid pro quo on this issue but they refused? I’m with Hallowed Be, declare it unilaterally, claim the moral high ground now and remove it from the election agenda.

  8. BiND

    Yup. Having been arguing for this (even on this blog). We need to do this.

    The Brussels d+ckheads have been inflating their chests and saying how much vaseline thay ain’t going to use to do us up where the sun don’t shine.

    It is about the moral high ground but also because it should be done. No virtue signalling here.

  9. What Hallowed Be says – there’s no need to remove people: just stem the inward flow and let the outward flow continue. The danger is that all the bright & hard-working ones leave, while all the low-productivity ones stay behind. We used to call this the brain drain; now it goes by the less sexy term “human capital flight”.

    BiW,
    It’s not just virtue-signalling; there’s also some economic rationale in keeping EU workers here. As Tim Newman points out, we don’t really want Brits with foreign spouses to be forced to leave.

    SMFS,
    Since 2012 there have been new laws on foreign brides. You can’t marry your cousin from Punjab unless you earn at least £18,600. It won’t stop rich old men from marrying Thai hookers, but I haven’t seen a great many of them.

  10. We should learn from the wisdom of Pericles and give British residency, much less citizenship, only to those born of two British parents.

    How many child rapes are worth putting up with in order to allow fat middle aged men to marry Thai hookers?

    lol… better get my daughter her passport pronto!

  11. Moral high ground? Usually code for cultivating the claimer’s supposed morality at other people’s expense. Remember, in a military sense, the high ground is what you get shot off of by incoming machine gun fire & artillery. Unless you’ve heavily fortified with extensive entrenchments & defensive positions.

  12. Reduce/remove available benefits to new migrants. Problem will then take care of itself.

    As TW says often, incentives matter.

    @smfs, not sure what you are doing on this blog as you seem to be of the “tar everyone with the same brush for the sins of a few”.

  13. Stop government benefits for foreign nationals.

    Government distorts the labor market with benefits. How can a Bulgarian work in London when a Brit can’t afford to? Government is destroying the middle class. Should you complain, they call you racist. They use the word as Van Helsing’s cross, freezing any opposition. Government is destroying the country, yet one word is all it takes to get the people to accept it.

  14. We should learn from the wisdom of Pericles and give British residency, much less citizenship, only to those born of two British parents.

    That would deny my wife the right to live in Britain. Although last I heard she had no intention of even visiting, never mind living there. I’ve asked Maria Sharapova for her views on the subject but alas she’s not gotten back to me yet.

  15. As for removing EU nationals, I submit that the sector of the population giving us the most societal issues and arguably most in need of being repatriated is emphatically NOT the EU citizens

    This was always my objection to the immigration argument of the Leave voters: the ones causing the problem come mainly from outside the EU, and over which we are supposed to be exercising full control.

  16. Presumably this would include guaranteeing the rights of EU nationals in UK prisons, EU nationals with criminal records, and Roma gyppos who come over to beg/steal to name three groups. I don’t see any exclusions to Labour’s plan.

  17. No, it was the EU Nationals that caused the problem.

    Or rather, not EU Nationals per se, but the government’s cretinous lack of planning or understanding. Remember this goes back before rapey taxi-driving rings and Somali pirates.

    The issue with EU Nationals was that their numbers weren’t regulated, and government projections were out by a factor of 20+. After all, why would anyone come to ghastly Britain when the Dordogne and Tuscany are so much more agreeable, and closer by some distance?

    The result was large numbers of immigrants being dumped in various parts of the UK, including Sunderland as it happens.

    We’re talking about around 200,000 people a year for which infrastructure was simply not available. That’s quite a lot even if you spread them out across the whole nation.

  18. Tim N the ones causing the problem come mainly from outside the EU

    They originate outside the EU but are naturalised in, say, Sweden and Germany or simply sold a passport in Romania so while your point used to be a valid one, the distinction is not as powerful as it might once have been.

    On the other hand, SMFS’s suggestion that right of abode and citizenship should only be granted to people with two British parents is a bit extreme for my taste, not least because my mother would never have been naturalised British and I would be stateless though born in London.

    The end result may be two grades of EU passport. once Schengen has collapsed. Not many member states want a share of Berlin’s recent million incomers.

  19. Note: the idea that Labour used immigration to “rub the Tory noses in diversity” came later. It may have been factor, however the belief that the Britain would not attract immigrants was entrenched within Labour.

  20. Tim Newman touches on this above:

    It’s not really the EU nationals, it’s the non-EU mob that we should worry more about. Sadly, it seems that ‘allowing EU immigration specifically’ segued into ‘not challenging immigration generally’ in governmental minds from c1990 onwards

  21. “the ones causing the problem come mainly from outside the EU”

    The ones causing the problem are the UK government.

    “We have met the enemy . . . .”

  22. How many child rapes are worth putting up with in order to allow fat middle aged men to marry Thai hookers?

    Presumably you mean marry Thai hookers and take them back to the UK?

    Hardly ever happens. Thai birds dont travel well, can’t get the food, and once you take them back to civilisation they get the same rights over you as western birds, which defeats the purpose.

  23. “Who don’t have the vote in this election.” I think the point is that Labour wants them to cast illegal votes. For Labour.

  24. They originate outside the EU but are naturalised in, say, Sweden and Germany or simply sold a passport in Romania so while your point used to be a valid one, the distinction is not as powerful as it might once have been.

    That’s not really happened though, from what I can see. The French have problems with Belgian jihadists, but we don’t. Our nutcases seem to come direct from Pakistan, or at least their parents did.

  25. EU immigrants might not be the problem in terms of social cohesion but if they are working while Britons (willingly or otherwise) languish on the dole then it’s not good for UK plc.

    Once we are out, we need an immigration system that keeps out the goatfuckers and forces firms to prioritise employing British nationals. Just do what Singapore does.

  26. SMFS

    The aim is to remove EU nationals. The whole point of Brexit is about immigration.”

    Clickbait!

    Of the many people I know who voted Leave, not a single one of them would agree with you. And our economy would be pretty screwed if over 3 million people simply upped and left. Was it 84% in a poll that agreed that all those EU nationals currently here should automatically be given indefinite leave to stay.

    monoi

    Reduce/remove available benefits to new migrants. Problem will then take care of itself.

    +1.

    Job “mostly” done (for EU nationals). The idea of going to another country in order to receive benefits is where this all falls down; no one here (going to the EU) would expect to do that.

    Non EU, and Ropers, different approaches needed.

  27. “This was always my objection to the immigration argument of the Leave voters: the ones causing the problem come mainly from outside the EU, and over which we are supposed to be exercising full control”

    And yet barbarians continue to swarm into the country, while we are diverted worrying about Poles, Latvians and so on.

    Why one earth doesn’t the government ever consider the possibility of stopping immigration from Rapeistan? Good question.

    Stopping all benefits and special conditions for all immigrants is a very good idea. Stopping all immigration from dangerous (i.e. Islamic, African) countries is an even better one. But option one would go a long way to stopping the flow.

  28. The problem was that the EU workers dispersed themselves fairly evenly across the country. Migrants from other parts of the world are clustered: Indians in northwest London, Pakistanis in Bradford, Bangladeshis in east London, etc. The average Briton doesn’t live near a halal butcher, so they underestimate the dangers of the RoP; but they do live near a Polski Sklep, so they overestimate the numbers of Poles.

  29. EU foreigners here should be automatically given Leave To Remain exactly the same as any other foreigner, with all the commensurate rights and responsibilities of Leave To Remain, no recourse to public funds, kicked out if you break the law, lose it if you leave the country for more than two years, must understand English/Welsh/Gaelic, must be of good character, must be of sound mind, can upgrade it to ILTR after five years complying with the above.

  30. I don’t blame the Romanian family on Eur500 a month for coming to the UK to sell the big issue and thus be eligible for Eur3000 a month in benefits including the idiotic ‘tax credits’. I blame the UK government for providing the incentive and the EU for forcing us to give it to everyone in the EU who wants it. We can now change both, if we have a mind to.

  31. “declare it unilaterally, claim the moral high ground now and remove it from the election agenda”

    Absolutely Not!!!!

    This effectively says UK citizens living abroad are of less value than EU citizens living in the UK. We’d be letting EU immigrants stay with no guarantee our citizens will get the same treatment. Why should we worry more about the rights of a Pole living in the UK than a UK citizen living in Spain? What happens if the EU then says ‘We’re not allowing your citizens to stay under any circumstances’? How does your moral high ground help your fellow citizen then?????

  32. “EU immigrants might not be the problem in terms of social cohesion but if they are working while Britons (willingly or otherwise) languish on the dole then it’s not good for UK plc.”

    I’m pretty sure UK employers would rather employ UK staff. That said, as we are pretty much at full employment nowadays, there really is no excuse for anyone not to find a job or languish on the dole.

    Could it be the fact that those EU migrants have a different work ethics than the locals?

  33. Jim

    Why should we worry more about the rights of a Pole living in the UK than a UK citizen living in Spain?

    One view might be that we perhaps should?

    Ie, we don’t want all these people to up and leave, through uncertainty or for any other reason?

    That’s not to say that the likes of BiS aren’t important. It’s simply that Spain ultimately will take the same view, and want 0.5 million pension spending Brits on their costas very much to stay…

    I agree, we probably won’t do it unilaterally, but we might perhaps stop pretending which way the leverage is on this!

    We actually need them mostly to stay, as Spain and others do our ex-pats…

  34. Something I’ve not seen explained is why this is a UK-EU issue? Each EU country sets it’s own immigration policy when it comes to citizens of non-EU countries, which BiS, etc are soon to become.

    So, presumably, the rights of UK citizens in Spain will be purely a matter for Spain to decide, and that decision could be completely different to the approach taken by other EU countries.

  35. Jim- well if you think your going to be screwed over then i understand that, but overall Brexit could benefit from this not being an issue of hard negotiation. I have to admit I don’t really know which would be best on balance. Labour seem to think it’s the unilateral approach.

    On all aspects of Brexit , all EU members will have thier 2 cents worth before having a Franco German fudge foisted on them. It could be really messy and unless there are likely to be horrible outcomes for the Brit expats then i think the simpler the talks are the better.

  36. +1

    Throw in mandatory health insurance with that lot. If they can’t afford it, they don’t have a skilled enough job to warrant a visa.

    (I have a number of friends who had “no recourse to public funds”, but access to the NHS struck me as a big hole in that statement)

  37. I’d also say, while on a visa, no involvement in UK national politics. Get caught protesting outside an embassy, for example, visa revoked.

    (Yes, I also have a number of friends who abused their status as guests in that way)

  38. Mrs May offered and the EU refused.

    Best just to remind people of that. Make it clear that you expect a deal to be struck, but that we have to wait for Brussels.

  39. MattyJ, that’s what I was thinking too. As I understand it, it has nothing to do with the EU.

  40. And when immigration is sorted then the jobs previously done by willing foreigners are going to be done at the same total cost and with the same productivity by those who are currently on benefits?

    I can see a slight problem there – the reason why so many foreign nationals are wanted is because they are willing to work.
    There are plenty of home grown people who are not willing to work.
    And they get rather annoyed when benefits are cut….

  41. “there really is no excuse for anyone not to find a job or languish on the dole”

    If people are choosing dole over employment then the incentives are wrong. Perhaps the dole is too high. Certainly, importing millions of people has lowered wages.

    The old ‘immigrants do the jobs natives won’t’ is not correct. “Immigrants do shit jobs at wages the natives won’t or can’t accept” is more accurate.

    If you’re an employer of low wage staff it’s great. If you are a native trying to raise a family on minimum wage it is not. You cannot compete with kids who are prepared to sleep four to a room for a few years because the few grand they save goes a long way back in Warsaw.

    The taxpayer ends up on the hook for benefits and all the costs of an increased population. In return for tuppence tax paid by the low wage immigrant. But our flat white is 5p cheaper than it might have been and GDP is rising so we kid ourselves all is well.

  42. What is the current deal for immigration to the UK from Islamic countries like Pakistan and other 3rd world $hitholes?

    How does the government get away with wanking over the EU question when it is not EU immigrants who are likely to behead us, drive cars along pavements, and blow us up on public transport (yet)?

    Seems insane that this is never mentioned.

  43. The time to take the moral high ground is AFTER negotiations on a reciprocal deal have failed. If the EU refused to allow UK citizens the right to stay in the EU, then after that decision was made clear, and whose decision it was, then the magnanimous thing to do would be to allow the EU citizens to stay in the UK anyway. That would be taking the moral high ground, without potentially throwing one’s own citizens under the bus first. But doing it unilaterally only gives them a stick to beat us with.

  44. I don’t actually care about EU people already here as long as they’re not criminals or beggars, but it’s stupid to give away a negotiation point before talks begin.

    Also, have a look at how many Eastern Euros are on Crimestoppers’ Most Wanted.

  45. TiS – a side effect of an open door immigration policy. You get the bad with the good. In fact you get a higher proportion of the good.

    Just as an example, do we get the best of Pakistan moving to the UK? Who is more likely to move: the successful doctor, the up and coming executive or Mohamed the peasant, keen to swap a life of shit-shovelling and goatfucking for the easy life in the West?

  46. MC – Who is more likely to move: the successful doctor, the up and coming executive or Mohamed the peasant, keen to swap a life of shit-shovelling and goatfucking for the easy life in the West?

    Based on being in Birmingham recently, I’d say (d) All of the above

    Re: the Crimestoppers thing. It’s noteworthy that not one single mugshot on the front page belongs to an Englishman. Immigrants are mugging the old ladies British criminals are too lazy to batter and rob.

  47. The EU political scum don’t care about working people, so there’s little point trying to negotiate with them about this. Just unilaterally declare free movement for new workers and retained rights for those already here.
    The EU filth care about the money, and being able to dole it out to their landowning mates, and to themselves of course.
    We need a new phrase for a Brexit which is hard wrt to the money, but soft with respect to the people. Imv of course.

  48. “Just unilaterally declare free movement for new workers”

    Sounds like a bad idea when the EU is an Islamic failed state

  49. Europeans living in the UK have just been catapulted to the top of the lefty victim tree. We must all therefore demonstrate our wonderfulness by protesting on their behalf. Women, muslims, anything on the rainbow spectrum and the ‘liddle baybees’ are on hold for a moment. The evil Tory white male hate crime perpetrator is being accused of Xenophobia this week.

  50. “Clickbait ! Of the many people I know who voted Leave, not a single one of them would agree with you”

    Indeed. There are issues such as ; do we unilaterally grant amnesty or do we wait for a reciprocal agreement. I’m in favour of the latter, why give away bargaining chips, but I can see both sides.

    With regards to benefits, I’ve never quite grasped why we can’t do something similar to Spain. To get a Residential Card in Spain, which entitles you to the goodies, you now have to be self supporting or employed (properly) or the dependent of someone who is. So whilst we (currently) can go live in Spain any time we like, we’re on our own. No house ? No money ? Your problem.

  51. @JackC “Mrs May offered and the EU refused.”

    To be fair, I think everybody agreed except France and Germany.

  52. To be fair, I think everybody agreed except France and Germany.

    Seeing as everyone else in rEU are vassal states of the Franco-German core, then they get told what to do and the “EU” refused.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.