The ever loving EU again

[scooterscot]

Driver B calls the police, problem solved you utter buffoon.

The insult. The last hiding place for a lost argument.

[Mordac]

Like imagining that you could be sane and not smell of wee

And you wonder why some of us don't take your arguments seriously...

[scooterscot]

Maybe a member of our esteemed Remnant community could explain what the benefit of us giving certainty without reciprocation would be to the UK?

The question EU nationals living in the UK should now really be asking themselves is why wasn't this the UK's position from the outset?

Indeed, why is it even a subject. Why was a proposal not put forward for the quashing of a future debate on their status before the referendum? Simply because it was seen as an opportunity by the protagonists. It really lays in thick as to how resented EU nationals are living in the UK by the indigenous neanderthals. From the top table to the man on the street. You might jest, SC is talking nonsense. There is no hatred. Yet I've witnessed it first hand, couples filing for divorce because the now partner is seen less favourable due to the immigrant backgrounds. Which smacks of hypocrisy considering the UK is a nation built on imagination. The hate has laid quietly for many years. And now like a jack in the box has escaped with a PM at the helm only too happy to fame the flames.

You'd think history would have taught us something.

[d000hg]

We have said all along.

Saying "we'll do it if you do it" is not saying that at all. We used it as a political point.

Last week's amendment was to guarantee EU citizen's right regardless of what the EU did for our people. We will do it on a like for like basis.

Those two sentences appear to be contradictory. Which is it, or can you clarify?

The fact that the EU is now saying countries can agree on an individual basis shows how they bend the rules as they want and demonstrate our Government has been absolutely correct not to guarantee anything without reciprocation.

I don't want a government that only treats people properly if they do the same. I want it to treat people properly and set an example.
It's still hilarious that when the EU gives member states the freedom to make their own choices, people use that to attack the EU when that's exactly what we wanted ourselves.

The UK Government is there to protect UK people first. Not those of the EU.

Maybe a member of our esteemed Remnant community could explain what the benefit of us giving certainty without reciprocation would be to the UK?

It's called not being a ****, treating people with respect rather than as bargaining chips. We're not even talking about would-be immigrants but people already living here.

[darmstadt]

And you wonder why some of us don't take your arguments seriously...

But you take sb's

[GB9]

Saying "we'll do it if you do it" is not saying that at all. We used it as a political point.

Those two sentences appear to be contradictory. Which is it, or can you clarify?

I don't want a government that only treats people properly if they do the same. I want it to treat people properly and set an example.
It's still hilarious that when the EU gives member states the freedom to make their own choices, people use that to attack the EU when that's exactly what we wanted ourselves.

It's called not being a ****, treating people with respect rather than as bargaining chips. We're not even talking about would-be immigrants but people already living here.

We are saying we will if they do. That seems sensible and reasonable. To do anything else would put our position and that of UK nationals at a disadvantage. As usual the Remnant case is that we should give in to the all powerful EU. People, trade etc.

Setting a good example is one thing. Being self-righteous is another thing. In no sensible negotiation would you give away part of your bargaining position.

The reason that posters such as yourself get labelled at Brit haters is because you are bashing our government for defending our position. At no point have you bashed the EU for refusing to discuss the matter. If they want to wait until the A50 trigger then that's fine. But as usual, both sides get hit.

As for countries having the choice, we have constantly seen warnings from the EU that we shouldn't try to split the member states, they should negotiate together, and
that there must be a common position. Strangely, when it suits them, the Commission seems to forget that and tells everyone to do their own thing. Complete hypocrisy.

Thank Heaven we are getting out.

[chopper]

And your position:

Two drivers driving down the motorway. Drive A deliberately crashes into driver B. Driver A refuses to show their insurance details until driver B presents his insurance details first. Driver B is like WTF? Driver A takes umbrage and complains endlessly at the unfair treatment towards them.

FFS.

28 drivers driving down the motorway. One wants to turn off at the next junction, but the other 27 can't agree on that. So therefore, the turning is missed. In fact, they all end up hogging the middle lane because consensus can't be had as to which lane to drive in. Individual drivers cannot even decide that lane 3 suits them more.

One of the drivers decides that a car crash is imminent and so decides to leave the pack of 28. It is now freeee.

For sure, sometimes we'd like to drive with the other 27, but sometimes we'd like to drive with other drivers. Just a shame that the 27 are a very inward looking pack of drivers. They talk about removing barriers, to, err, driving, but in fact they just build a barrier around them all.

[WTFH]

The example of divorce is a better analogy, except at this stage the lawyers aren't involved all that has happened is that the government has said we want a divorce.
Until they start divorce proceedings, all the bickering, name calling and fact avoidance on here is pointless.

[NotAllThere]

Switzerland isn't in the EU...

Switzerland has written into its laws already that any citizen of a country that pulls out of the EU will be allowed to stay with the same T&Cs that they had when they arrived.

In other words the British government have decided to use people as bargaining chips. I think any attempt to claim the moral high ground has been lost.

Why can't the UK government state

"We will grant continued residency to any currently resident EU citizen whose home state will continue to grant British citizens resident in those states the same rights".

[Chuck]

Why can't the UK government state

"We will grant continued residency to any currently resident EU citizen whose home state will continue to grant British citizens resident in those states the same rights".

That is a very fair question, and one which, until now has not been possible, as the EU has stated that they will only negotiate en bloc.

Now the EU seems to be saying that it is up to individual member states what they do wrt UK nationals, then I believe that is exactly what we should be doing.