Westministers: The Lords Strike Back

[RedToothBrush]

This needs no fanfare or lengthy post. Just this:

The Lords are demanding amendments unilateral protection for EU citizens.

Labour was split 358 for an amendment to 256 against.

This is after Amber Rudd had tried to reassure the Lords by writing a letter assuring peers that EU citizens would be treated with the utmost respect.

Utmost respect = an amendment to guarantee unilateral support.

Today is a good day. It should have been done in the first place.

I don't think the EU will ask the Brits to leave, they are the ones suggesting EU passports for those that want them.

Exactly. Also, most countries in the EU recognize the positive contributions (social, cultural as well as of course financial) that migrants bring. Their governments haven't spent the last couple of decades blaming declining investment for pretty much everything on the EU whilst running their education systems so far down the drain that people actually believe what they believe in vile hate rags like the Daily Mail and Sun. So, yeah, turns out that migrants aren't all evil sponging criminals after all and will be very welcome to stay, teach, nurse, do academic and science and banking stuff too or just chill out and pay a big bunch of tax

Thanks Red, and a glimmer of good news for EU citizens who have made their lives here.

big many thanks red

Muted response from 3 million too:

The Lords have voted in favour of amendment 9B. This is our reaction at the3million.
Firstly, a massive thank you to the 1,000s EU citizens and UK citizens who have lobbied the Parliament over the last month. You are the unsung heroes of tonight's vote and you deserve the full credit for this welcome decision by the House of Lords.
It is a relief that for the first time since the referendum, a majority was found in Parliament to support the rights of the 3 million EU citizens who came in good faith to live and work in the UK.
However, what concerns the3million the most is that, instead of restoring fairness by unilaterally granting EU citizens their right to remain, the Lords’ amendment conditions these rights to lawful residence. This could be interpreted by the Home Office as permission to leave a large number of EU citizens worse off than they currently are. We are also concerned about the cut-off dates and we ask all political parties to listen to our concerns and consult the3million before tabling any legislation affecting our human rights. Finally, we would have liked to see a reference to confirming the rights of UK citizens living in the EU.

This is after Amber Rudd had tried to reassure the Lords by writing a letter assuring peers that EU citizens would be treated with the utmost respect

It's almost as if they didn't trust her ...

Thanks for the new thread, red

The govt has now vowed to overturn this amendment in the HoC.

If they just wanted to protect UK expats, they could easily propose their own amendment to say they'll allow all E27 citizens to stay, provided the E27 countries allow UK expats the same.

I think May wants to keep them as bargaining chips for the trade talks.
Also, if she doesn't get her desired EU trade deal with cake, she wants to show the public that at least she got tough - kicking out thousands of EU expats could become popular after her govt blames "EU punishment beatings" for their failure to get unicorns.
Scapegoats.

I haven't heard of any of the E27 govts telling UK expats "prepare to leave"
The civil servants in Germany helped me with the forms and were very friendly
There's a complete difference in attitude, which stems from the different orders given to their civil servants by the 2 govts.

Something the UK needs to learn, especially when it comes to views on immigrants:
Don't judge others by your own low standards

What happens if may does this as she has wanted too, then eu says sorry, thanks for assuring eu citizen rights but all UK people need to leave? MAY has upper moral hand but she has in that case failed her citizens. As some one on tv said other day, as supposed bastion of liberal values chortle why didn't eu do this when may asked

Please someone correct me if I am wrong, but I don't see how it would be in the EU's power to do this. Once we have left, our citizens' rights in EU countries will be dictated by the individual countries, not by the EU. The EU would have no more control over our citizens' rights in those countries than they currently have over non-EU migrants in this country.

What a relief - both the Lords vote and the return of Red. Thanks for the new thread, Red.

Does anyone know if there is any likelihood of the Lords supporting an amendment for a meaningful vote at the end of negotiations?

Pleased about the lords vote...and the new thread

Even if the Commons try to remove the amendment again, at least it's put a spanner in for May's mad timetable. Treating humans as bargaining chips is wrong.

(And I'd protest just as much in the unlikely event that the EU27 treat UK citizens as such)

iirc, the EU incorporated for all its members the UN regs about rights of residence.

So, citizens of any non-EU country, which the UK will be after Brexit, have right to permanent residence if they have been legally resident for 5 or 7 years (can't remember which)
I know for Germany it's 5 years qualifying residence, because Indian & Korean colleagues said that's what they have.

'A number of dairy farmers in Northern Ireland have received 'exit' letters from their banks asking them to pay back their loans and leave the bank.

As the future of EU farm subsidies - which accounts for around £260m in Northern Ireland - is in doubt, banks are asking farmers to take a forensic look at their businesses to see if they could survive if the subsidies were removed.'

www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/northern-ireland-dairy-farmers-asked-to-repay-loans-and-leave-banks-35494195.html

Andrea and Johnson had better move on the promise farmers would receive as much support, if not more , outside the EU as inside.

Doesn't food security and farming require subsidy? I know nothing about the economics of this, but my impression is that most British farmers can't exist financially independently?

Bertie Ahern warns of danger of 'hard' NI border
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39133930

Crikey, I hadn't thought of that - I wonder if there may be a number of small farms in Scotland, Wales, SW England etc too, that depend on EU subsidies to survive

www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n12/james-meek/how-to-grow-a-weetabix
I remember this from last year. Long but good, on the consequences of leaving for farming.

Farming and local press on brexit:
www.fwi.co.uk/news/sheep-producers-voice-fears-hard-brexit.htm
www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/welsh-farmers-could-face-perfect-12479747

There are almost certainly hill farmers in Wales who will go under if subsidies are removed. No doubt some Leavers will come on and say, no pain, no gain. Besides which, it doesn't matter - instead of getting fresh Welsh lamb we will buy more frozen NZ lamb.

Am I the only one who is angry and the way TM and the whole HoC are behaving? At the moment Gina Miller (and her pro - Leave co - applicant) gained even the High Court ruling, TM should have woken up and said that of course we had Parliamentary democracy - there would be no question of not putting decisions to Parliament. Similarly, the Lords amendment should have been totally unnecessary, never mind the resolution to vote it down.

Thanksrhu
£350 million figure is a lie. Not an exaggeration, or a question of interpretation, or a misleading claim, but a lie. It ignores the rebate Margaret Thatcher negotiated. When you factor that in, the EU actually ‘takes’ about £250 million a week from Britain. Deepening the dishonesty of the original lie, even that figure overstates Britain’s contribution by more than half, because the EU gives much of the country’s membership fee straight back. Subsidies to British farmers make up the biggest element of the money that’s returned, at £61 million a week.

A very cautious welcome to this news from me.
I really don't think Brexiters who oppose the amendment understand the very different approach to UK citizens in EU from European countries. UK citizens have not suffered any hassle, are not portrayed as scroungers in the press and are not even referred to as immigrants. They are EU citizens. Very different rhetoric, so groups representing UK citizens in EU have said repeatedly that they support EU citizens demands for an assurance from the British government. These citizens are not being threatened but EU citizens are being threatened here. I am an EU citizen and have asked for my Residence Permit, I am working and I'm quite sure I qualify but I'm still nervous as they're rejecting 30% of claims. Also, even if the amendment does through it would offer no assurances to many people who, it now turns out, do not qualify. I know so many cases of decent people, mainly women, who are worried sick.

Disgusted at the brexiters going around saying that they disagree with the Lords because they are standing up for people like me. I don't want small-minded people and racists purporting to represent my interests, thank you very much.

They can all fuck right off with the concern-trolling.

Anyway, this is totally off topic, but I just saw this and though others on here would like it too. Anti-shilling/ anti-trolling mechanism thought up by the Norwegian national broadcaster for their on-line edition: you have to actually read the article before commenting!

The team at NRKbeta attributes the civil tenor of its comments to a feature it introduced last month. On some stories, potential commenters are now required to answer three basic multiple-choice questions about the article before they’re allowed to post a comment.

I think the farmers finally got the message about Leadsom.

Thanks Misti that sounds great. Would make a big difference to comment sections.

The team at NRKbeta attributes the civil tenor of its comments to a feature it introduced last month. On some stories, potential commenters are now required to answer three basic multiple-choice questions about the article before they’re allowed to post a comment.

I suspect any UK approach will be based around a law to required websites to validate identity before publishing comments.

We already have the infrastructure (remember the over-18 opt-in adult content database ?) so it'll just be mission creep.

Admittedly there is no precedent in the UK for a law to be misused - it's never happened - so that hurdle needs to be overcome.

Re: farming

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38510423

Personally I don't think this is cut and dried as is being implied by the some of the headlines. The subsidies are paid by amount of land the landowner has - the racehorse owner of Frankel, Khalid Abdullah gets £400,000 per year, Lord Iveagh gets £900,000 per year. I think subsidies should be paid depending what is done with the land and to support those who work on the toughest landscapes, but which we all love and are iconic for the English countryside.

Here is a transcript of her speech to the Oxford Farming Conference
www.gov.uk/government/speeches/environment-secretary-sets-out-ambition-for-food-and-farming-industry