Remainers - What do you want? When do you want it?

[optionalrationale]

We had the referendum, we had the legal challenge, we had the Supreme Court ruling, Article 50 has been triggered. The United Kingdom will no longer be part of the European Union.

So my questions to Remainers are
What do you want? When do you want it?

Here's what I want..

I want the negotiations to go well. I want future relations with our neighbours to be cordial. I want a good deal for UK and the EU. I want us to walk away if their demands are unacceptable (and stem from vindictiveness and to deter other members from following our lead). I want the UK to be free to make good trade deals with any country it wants. I want the UK to lead in creating a new model of trade without excessive interference in each partner's social and political arena.

Donostia I have a DD now aged 16 who has 2 British parents both born in the UK and has lived all but the first 3 months of her life in the UK. She does not have UK citizenship which she can automatically pass on unless her children are born in the UK. She was not born in the EU and so staying in or leaving the EU has absolutely no effect on this.

I think part of the blame for the UK's ever more limited definition of citizenship can be laid at the EU's drive towards protected EU citizenship.

I think part of the blame for the UK's ever more limited definition of citizenship can be laid at the EU's drive towards protected EU citizenship.
This is utter, utter drivel. All EU countries establish their own rules regarding citizenship.

Misti if it were that straightforward then there would not be 3 million rEU Nationals in limbo in the UK and 800,000 UK Nationals in limbo in rEU.

They are in limbo because of Brexit. It's very straightforward.

Howabout the rules about citizenship for children with British parents born abroad have not changed in many years, so laying them at the foot of the EU is absolute nonsense.

The difficulties that people are having with claiming PR are an entirely British phenomenon - UK citizens claiming the equivalent of PR in other EU countries face no such difficulties. Usually the form runs to one or two pages, and there is no charge. My kids acquired French citizenship on the basis of a form that was one side of A4 (they didn't use the PR process, but one or two page forms are typical of such procedures here).

To go back to the original question...

I want the UK to remain in the EU. The country voted to leave by a narrow margin, in an advisory referendum, on the basis of lies and deceit.

The "experts" pointed out that withdrawal, on whatever terms, would leave us in a worse position than we had been. Withdrawal without a deal would be a disaster. Some of the people chose to ignore that and voted to leave in order to get more money for the NHS and fewer immigrants. Neither of those things is going to happen - if anything, immigration will rise as the price of putative trade deals. No-one voted to get poorer, to have fewer opportunities to work and live abroad, to see the break up of the UK and to see Britain's remaining influence in the world ebb away. But that IS what will happen.

The vast majority of our MPs from all political parties believe this is the wrong decision for the UK. Yet they are marching like lemmings to the precipice ...hoping perhaps that at some stage before March 2019 this awful mess can be reversed.

I want common sense to prevail and for someone, somewhere to be able to lead us back from this mess.

What's the relationship betweenrule re citizenship DM immigration laws??

I mean eu citizens in limbo in the Uk is an issue of immigration law (same with Brits in the eu).
Citizenship, as in the case in this thread, has nothing to do with the eu but is an internal issue with defining what is a British citizens.
I'm still at the idea that there are different level of citizenship in Britain and that some aren't really as British as others TBH...

This is the nub of the issue Blue. Were it not for EU FoM only citizens would have unrestricted residency rights in the UK or any other EU country without procedure and form filling and everyone would know where they stood.

As it stands, because of FoM people have moved and formed families and had children all over Europe without ever being aware that they were potentially affecting their children's citizenship. The underlying assumption seems to have been that as long as they were "EU citizens" there would be no issue.

Immigration laws do have a knock on effect to citizenship rules because acquiring citizenship requires establishing a legal basis for residing in the UK, which is inherently linked to immigration status.

The UK is not unusual in having different statuses of citizenship. According to wiki Germany is similar and in some respects worse as it restricts dual nationality.

quite, it's unconnected to the EU in a sense, but on moving abroad and having him abroad the issue of citizenship was a lot less important if there was an alternative on offer which afforded him and his children th same rights.

"I'm still

at the idea that there are different level of citizenship in Britain and that some aren't really as British as others TBH..."

Oh good grief. British 'levels' (for want of a better word) of citizenship are just the same any other nation. Indeed, many are far far worse. Take Spain, not only do you have all the complexities described earlier, but they have a whole raft more. Shepardi Jews for example, get a special mention. Dual nationality is available, unless youre from the Phillipines, or Equatoral Guinea (and others) for example. Not also missing their criteria of 'dormant eu citizenship' and so on and so on. Portugal, Germany, have reams and reams on immigration criteria, that makes the UKs system look like an Enid Blyton easy read. This is migration in the world as it is. A mass of rules, regulations and criteria. Get over your shock.

Theres still a misunderstanding, on my point earlier. EVEN, if an agreement were made with the EU regards status of EU/former EU citizens living in host nations, the host nation can, and does, overide the EUs position, with their own national criteria.

Hit send too early, just finishing that last post......

What is probably an inexplicable circumstance that all of us are scratching our heads over, is why, all these issues and concerns were NOT specified in the EUs treaties. Any other 'contract' in any other sphere in the world, must define clearly, how to exit that contract and what your obligations are. If you enter into a tenancy, you must agree to all the obligations spelt out in that tenancy to a/ terminate it and b/ practically exit from it.

The EU have a treaty in force that yes, may define Article 50 (though clearly that wasnt exactly clear cut either) but brought in a treaty that makes no provision for a nation or its peoples on leaving. Its quite unbelievable when you view the amount of legalese and legislation they have managed to produce regards any other issue within the EU.

To not have any mention, of the status of eu citizens becoming non-eu status, is utterly unfathomable. If you believe the UK were unprepared, the EU were 28 times as unprepared, yet they all signed the contract.

Caroline I'm sorry I seem to have offended yu by saying I find it shocking that there are different toe of citizenship in the UK.

I have no idea how it works in Spain. I do know that in Germany it's much harder to get the citizenship (something to do with needing to prove that you're ur garden parents were German was what an ex told me at the time - he was born in that part of Germany which moved from being German to polish etc...)
However, I am french and in France you do NOT have different type of citizenship and yes it would be seen as as one type not being good enough compare to the other. And therefore unacceptable.
I'm sorry you feel offended but you might have to get over yourself that not everyone sees the word like you.
Maybe a bit of politness, you know the well know British phlegm, would be nice too.

Re why is the citizenship and what would happened to said citizens isn't in the treaty.
You might want to ask the British government about that. They signed the treaty didn't they? And they are part of the EU, aka they are as responsible for it than any other country. If it wasn't good enough, the uk government was able to say NO and made it happen.
The EU isn't an entity that the UK had no power in at all, quite the opposite.

Fwiw, the reason why nothing like this has ever been specified is because no one ever dreamt that a country would leave the EU. It was created in case one country came under some sort of dictatorship. Not what we're are going through now.

Ill take that Blue Peppers, theres such a wash of negative nasty posts, I do get carried away that one particular post is simply an extension of another. I should try harder, and apols for my tone. I now understand your 'shock' isnt quite the 'shock' Id interpreted you meant.

Heres a little blast from the past.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/thatcher-roasting-for-major-on-maastricht-prime-minister-put-his-head-in-the-fire-by-signing-treaty-2321325.html

Here are my questions to you Mr Major. In representing the peoples of the United Kingdom, in signing the Maastricht Treaty to commit us to the EU (as we pretty much now know it), did you not at any one moment think, what will happen to the british peoples if we leave? How do we leave? How do I assure the status and security of our citizens? Not once? Not even chewing toast with Norma over the breakfast table?

And have you signed any other such treaties/contracts with such utter disregard for exit/termination obligations, that we havent found out about yet?

The EU isn't an entity that the UK had no power in at all, quite the opposite.

You'd never think so, the way some Leavers go on. The funniest example to me was someone challenged to name an EU law they objected to. They named one to do with fishing, and it turned out that it was one promoted by the UK to prevent overfishing. Whoops!

John Major is being blamed for Brexit now?

He was too concerned about hard boiling eggs with Edwina Caroline

So Margaret Thatcher clearly foresaw the clusterfuck that John Major unleashed with the Maastricht Treaty.

Quelle Surprise.

1993 was when we should have had the ref, just as Maggie said.

John Major is being blamed for Brexit now?

John Major absolutely has to shoulder some blame for what has become Brexit, yes.
And Gordon Brown too with the Lisbon Treaty.

From what I've read Thatcher was opposed to referendums.

Did you even bother to read the article linked?

Margaret Thatcher was pushing for a referendum on Maastricht.

Maastricht treaty was a internal Tory struggle. Some People are dogmatically opposed to the EU whatever it's form so blaming x, y or z is abit of a red herring.

Interesting to see how blame is shifted around. Do you think Brexit voters played any part in Brexit?