New EU immigration regulations may lead to deportations

[Mistigri]

Article on new HO regulations concerning the rights of EU citizens in the UK:

www.freemovement.org.uk/briefing-legal-status-eu-citizens-uk/

On the face of it, these new rules would appear to give the HO the right to deport any EU citizen without permanent residency rights, who is not currently exercising treaty rights and who does not have private health insurance. This will include many EU spouses of UK citizens who are not currently working and cannot document a 5 year period during which they exercised treaty rights - regardless of the amount of time they have spent in the UK.

This gives a whole new slant to those HO letters suggesting that EU citizens make plans to leave. Might be time for affected EU citizens to consider legal advice :-/

(Weird and hostile way of opening negotiations with the EU27 over migrants' rights - I am coming to the conclusion that May may actually want the negotiations to fail).

Thanks for the thumbs up. It would be the humane course of action, and a straightforward one that would be cheap and easy for everyone.

Does Theresa May do humane?

I think she will probably try...

I am not holding my breath! Does a leopard change its (her) spots?

It would be the humane course of action, and a straightforward one that would be cheap and easy for everyone.

And it would be rich with unintended consequences.

What about unmarried partners? What about those who have separated or divorced and who are now raising their British children as single parents? What happens when the HO starts asking intrusive questions and deciding on slim evidence that the marriage is not genuine?

Mistigri - I gave an example of what an amnesty case might be. It wasn't comprehensive.

I only trust what I see our politicians doing atm. The rest is only words there to either win votes on British politics grounds or to try and get a 'better position' to negotiate the exit from the EU.
What I can see is someone who has always refused to make immigration laws easier.
And someone who has out together this new directive at the beginning of the month.
That's not the sign of someone who will do the 'humane' thing of letting married couples stay in the uk with no questions asked.

It wouldn't be an "amnesty". These people are not criminals.

An amnesty is a decision that a group of people will not be punished.

A mouse can sound like a lion in the dark.

An amnesty is a decision that a group of people will not be punished.

That was my point. Why would you punish law-abiding people in the first place?

The word amnesty or immigration amnesty has been used in the past to allow illegal immigrants rights to remain.(usually in the USA)

Obviously it is a poor choice of words, but in principle it could be extended to people, who have lost the right to remain.

I think you are dramatically over offended by what is in principle a good solution suggested by bobo.

These people have as much right to be in the UK as you or I. An amnesty is a terrible choice of words for people who are not criminals and have done nothing wrong.

I'm not offended by bobo's "solution" (though I think it is a bad one for practical reasons), but by the idea that it is acceptable to make people criminals via retrospective law changes and then offer them an "amnesty".

Losing a right does not make you a criminal, if you live in a democracy. Committing a crime makes you a criminal. And if you do live in a democracy, rights, especially human rights are defended.

These people are not even "losing a right"; to be completely accurate, they are having it taken away from them.

I still can't believe this is the same country I was living in 12 months ago.

A government which removes residency rights.

Nobody has "removed" anything. We have not even left the EU yet. Thanks for the update re. "these people". I am worried for the fate of my best friend here and I know for a fact she would not be giving a shit what it was called so long as she could continue living in this country.

Well I can tell you yer that my EU friends living in the U.K. would be far less inclined than your best friend to welcome the tag of temporary "illegal" just to be able to stay until such time as proposed amnesty took place when they have done nothing that wasn't 100% compliant with the law. This implication that they should somehow be grateful for whatever crumbs they are thrown is abhorrent and the insinuation that they have done something wrong and are being forgiven is just another step down the road of othering them.

Presumably if it was offered before we actually leave the eu then that would be fine and they never would need to be "illegal" though.

My friend is very roolz n roolz and would probably end up going back to poland if it is not sorted before then.

The terms 'Casualties' comes with the territory I am afraid as like all matters of any policy which is introduced there will always be elements where there are categories of society to which there circumstances would lend it to be unfair.
Like I said, people need to stop jumping on the racial/Nazi overtones of the leavers decision making process.
My OH employs more Eastern Europeans than UK Natives. For people in business European migrants are a useful labour force.
It's nice not to have prepective employees who all they want to do Is tailor their employment prospects around their benefits- such as working minimal hours , not wanting overtime and all the tail of woe of childcare needs.
You don't hear that from the European workforce, they have that all in hand. to have to have a reliable stream of labour is a basic need of any future growth in the UK.
I certainly would not want to see anyone have to leave an established life but policy affects everyone. I don't like having to keep paying large tax bill every year only to see IMO the money being unfairly distributed in the country- but I accept it like everyone else, so I guess that makes me a casualty as well.

Corruption in tory party and leave campaign may jeopardise their coup.

www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/vote-leave-the-canadian-it-company-and-the-ps725000-donation?utm_term=.xro49LzEO#.wq9B2DoaP

The terms 'Casualties' comes with the territory I am afraid as like all matters of any policy which is introduced there will always be elements where there are categories of society to which there circumstances would lend it to be unfair.

^^

Nope, still cruel and offensive in the context of people's livelihoods and families being held to ransom.

Like I said, people need to stop jumping on the racial/Nazi overtones of the leavers decision making process.

Or maybe people need to either think about the cold-blooded language they are using, when there are plenty of other ways to express their sentiments. Or people need to own when they've chosen to use inhumane language, and not come over all delicate and aggrieved if other people find it offensive.

As for bracketing "not being terribly keen the amount of tax one pays", with the treatment of EU citizens and their families as units to be bartered (in a situation which we created, not the EU and certainly not the EU citizens)...

It's also part of a lexicon like 'illegals', 'bias' used incorrectly etc.

This policy is plain wrong.

Whinging about the 'tax one pays' in what is a low tax country, is also part of the othering. 'Why should I pay for anyone but myself' is really what it reads like. Not 'I am part of a civilised society and of course I pay taxes for the benefit of the whole of society'.