Westminstenders: The 3 Million get their first offer.

[RedToothBrush]

The UK have finally put forward their proposals for EU citizens living in the UK. These 'bargaining chips' have been offered a 'generous deal' which is nothing of the sort.

For an in depth look at what it means this is a good summary:
Analysis: what is the UK proposing for EU citizens in the UK and EU citizens in the EU?
This is written by a leading immigration law blogger.

What they suggest, is this is probably what will happen in the event of a no deal situation and that hopefully there can be a better final deal. That does seem to be backed by the comments about EU citizens not needing to do anything now (including apply to remain under existing rules under the 85page document) although they are telling the civil service to prepare for a no deal situation. But who knows? Who can trust them?

What we should all be paying close attention to is not just the detail of this, but the language around it.

Numerous politicians have said that they will wait and see what the EU proposal is, even though it has been out for a couple of weeks. This is an effort to discredit and smear the EU.

This comes after Davis had suggested that the UK had achieved a 'victory' by getting the EU to 'agree' to put citizens rights at the time of priorities to be dealt with, even though it was also the top priority for the EU who refuse to talk about anything else until the matter is settled. Everything is being couched as a victory, even if its merely agreeing with the EU and constitutes a compromise by the UK and a row back from previous comments.

Also flying about a lot is confusion over the ECJ and the EHCR. Some of it is ignorant. Some of it is an effort to discredit and smear the ECJ to force a harder Brexit.

The EU position can be found here: EU proposals for post Brexit EU/UK citizens
It is essentially to preserve ALL current rights.

The UK position is to reduce EU citizens rights. This would also enable them to reduce UK citizens rights in the longer term, so what happens here, isn't just about EU nationals rights its also about UK nationals living in the UK.

Of course the proposals also have more significance for UK citizens living in the EU. The UK government have frequently suggested their use of bargaining chips was to help UK citizens living abroad. What has been put on the table could not be further from the truth. The government is quite happy to screw over UK citizens living in the EU. Probably because they are traitors.

Perhaps the biggest stumbling block to a deal is who oversees it all. The UK want it all done purely by UK courts. This is NOT going to happen (unless we have a no deal). There is no way the EU will compromise on this, due to our dreadful track record in deportations with unlawful behaviour and lack of regard for family life. (Thanks Theresa). Systems on the table as an alternative to the ECJ are a new court system - perhaps even merely one with the same judges but with a different name to appease a ignorant British public - or arbitration which is unlikely as it tends to be for states and not businesses or individuals.

It will be interesting to see how this progresses as it should give a good idea of how much we will compromise.

Its also been pointed out that the paper on EU citizens have been the first public document on Brexit which has had any substance. If I was a cynic I might say that Davis is sitting on his arse waiting for the EU to publish their proposals before and merely copying the EU's homework and making changes to it. If that happens to really be the case, then its perhaps a good thing, as our lot really are bloody useless and have no idea what they are talking about.

Not officially dragons. They have been rather fuzzy about the whole business, just saying they want to prioritise jobs and the economy. Many have interpreted this as meaning they would stay in the single market, but it is not in their manifesto to do so. I think they are trying to stay neutral and leave everything on the table. Hence abstaining rather than voting for or against. However, I think taking such a harsh line on the rebels may be a mistake. I think Corbyn would have done better to let MPs vote as they pleased while abstaining himself.

I know TAAT are bad form, but thanks to these forums there is at least one person who is surprised to learn that ending FoM means for UK citizens too ...

Neatly illustrates the quality of debate we had prior - and since - June last year .

No, neatly illustrates that some people can't recognise when someone is pulling your leg, presumably in response to your patronising post LH

As much as I disagree with the sackings I also think Chukka Umunna takes some blame here. He knows full well what the labour manifesto says and that it contains no clear promise about staying in the single market. Even if I would have loved labour to support this I can't see how they could really. It would have been changing the manifesto and I think it is too early in the negotiations to make that commitment. He put forward an amendment he knew would split the party.

If you leave the EU, not possible to stay in the single market as we know it now. Access to the 'benefits' (which I understand is the Labour view) could mean any number of things...

Bigchoc I agree with you (for once ) on EU stance which is why I think Chuka's amendment made no sense.

Only 49 rebels out of 262 looks like a decent result for JC. He was much criticised for not doing a post election proper reshuffle. A few sackings gives him an ideal opportunity now.

Once Brexit is a done deal I struggle to understand why anyone would be seeing it as a single issue to vote against Labour on?

So QS has gone through and DUP would have voted for it anyway but they now get 1.5 billion bonus. Someone's good at negotiating.

Good point about reshuffle. I wonder who he will bring in howabout? I think they are all junior shadow cabinet roles, so big names might not want them.

Paul Johnson‏Verified @paul__johnson
Breaking: Media including Guardian wins order preventing Kensington & Chelsea holding Grenfell meeting behind closed doors

Good stuff.

Once Brexit is a done deal I struggle to understand why anyone would be seeing it as a single issue to vote against Labour on?

I don't forget easily, nor will many of the young who came out for Corbyn. If May had got her landslide, Brexit would have been inevitable but the Labour revival put it back in play. If Corbyn ignores that opportunity, he and Labour Party would be squandering their advantage.

many of us won't vote again for a Labour Party that nods through Brexit.

I have made that quite clear to my MP.
Chuka followed his conscience. At least he has some.

Sir martin moore-bick said grenfell inquiry limited to the cause, his it spread, and preventing future blaze. Well all push for inquest then cos this bloody Humpty planted by the Tories to not give justice to grenfell needs to resign now. Government stitch up. This is getting reeeeal bad now. There will be riots.

Oh dear there is an update to that. Two secs, will post

A bit of good news Red. Bloody labour party couldn't they just hold together for once. Bloody disaster. I can't bear another 7 years of Tories.

Reaches for a stiff drink (strawberry shake).

Party politics vs national interest

If Labour are looking at this from a purely party political view, it makes sense for them to remain neutral and let the Tories take the full blame for any Brexit recession.

If they acquiesce to the belief that a "cake and eat it" deal is possible,
then after Brexit they can rucify the Tories as incompetent for not achieving it, for ruining the Uk economy
Then get a landslide while the Tories are out of power for a generation

Cynically, it is in Labour's interests NOT to moderate the Tory approach to Brexit, because a Tory hardline increases the chances of the UK crashing out

If Labour do anything, they risk the Tories pushing some or all off the blame onto them.

Of course, for the country, it would be much better for the govt and the Official Opposition to work together on an matter of such importance, for both to have input and then agree jointly on an approach.

However, the govt have made no such offer to any party - except the tiny DUP -
and Labour would probably not accept anyway - at least while JC and McDonnell are in charge.

Hence why JC, despite his own record of rebellion, would penalise those who don't follow his policy of neutrality:

moderate MPs of all parties are tentatively talking about blocking some bills and forcing the govt towards an EEA / EFTA Brexit, to avoid their own constituents suffering in an economic downturn.

JC wants to stop any such crossparty approach.
He and May agree strongly on this.
She wants a hardline Brexit to keep the Tory party together
Both put party above country and ordinary people.

That's right Red ruin my day! (Slurp).

Bigchoc I have a knife ready at my throat I might as well end it now with all this bad news. And wtf did whatshername not present amendment anyway to make abortion thingy legal and binding? (Has brain freeze now).

I want to emigrate!

So much for transparency

Peter Walker‏ @peterwalker99
Judge says @RBKC does have to allow media into council meeting on Grenfell fire after legal application by Guardian & other media orgs
Council can challenge the order, and can limit media numbers if it's too full. Meeting starts in 20 minutes....
Challenge was made by Guardian, Times, Sky News, Associated Newspapers, FT and Press Association.

Tigertim‏***@asmallteaser*
Is there a legal basis for allowing them??

Peter Walker‏****@peterwalker99
The high court judge seems to think so....

Tigertim‏***@asmallteaser*

...but didn't elude to what it was

Peter Walker‏****@peterwalker99

V brief order, given time constraints. Presume full points of law explained later. Just says K&C "restrained" from barring media.

Tigertim‏***@asmallteaser*
Time constraints shouldn't come into it

Peter Walker‏****@peterwalker99

Our updated story on a judge imposing a bit of sense amid some frankly baffling decisions by @RBKC

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/29/grenfell-survivors-barred-from-council-meeting-about-fire
Judge orders council to allow media into Grenfell Tower meeting
Court overturns Kensington and Chelsea council’s attempt to hold meeting in private, after challenge from Guardian and other media

Jack Hardy‏*@JackHardy9* (in reference to a couple of photos)
Left, High Court order permitting press access to tonight's @RBKC cabinet meeting. Right, journalists still being denied entry

Gareth Davies‏******@Gareth_Davies09

UPDATE: Judge tells RBKC it must allow press to attend first cabinet meeting since #Grenfell disaster
It's nice to bang on about something on Twitter all day then see something actually get done about it

Susana Mendonça‏*@susana*_mendonca

Press had to get a court order to get us in to @RBKC cabinet meeting. Residents protesting outside. I've made it in. #Grenfell
Bizarre paget-brown just said its a private meeting. Other councillors asking why the press is here then #Grenfell

Nick Wallis‏ @nickwallis
Meeting dissolved. Shouting and tears.

Gareth Davies‏******@Gareth_Davies09
I'd say unbelievable but I've already said that several times today. Utterly depressing.

Nick Wallis‏**@nickwallis**

Blazing row now going on - leader says he let journalists in on legal advice and is now closing the meeting because they can't...

Gareth Davies‏******@Gareth_Davies09
RBKC barred reporters from meeting, that ban was overturned by high court judge, reporters attend, RBKC dissolves the meeting. Staggering

Laura Hughes‏*@Laura*KHughes

Extraordinary. @RBKC Cabinet leader Paget-Brown just announced meeting closed because the media are in the room #Grenfell

Gareth Davies‏******@Gareth_Davies09
RBKC has effectively defied a ruling by a high court judge. Who do these people think they are? Total contempt for accountability
Well that lasted long

Press Association‏ @PA
#Breaking @RBKC cancels cabinet meeting after press were allowed to attend, claiming it would "prejudice" forthcoming public inquiry

Gareth Davies‏******@Gareth_Davies09
Total and utter rubbish. @RBKC is clearly not fit for purpose and needs urgent intervention

Gareth Davies‏******@Gareth_Davies09

This is a must watch video. @RBKC, the council primarily responsible for responding to #Grenfell, is a total shambles
Of course, it's more than ironic for journalists to howl about being barred from meetings reporters barely ever attended in the past
Scrutiny extends far beyond this one meeting, and it's clear there hasn't been any of @RBKC for a long, long time

Jim Waterson‏ @jimwaterson
Full report on what happened at the (very brief) Grenfell Tower council meeting by BuzzFeed's @Fi_Rutherford.

www.buzzfeed.com/hannahalothman/grenfell-tower-residents-and-journalists-have-been-banned?utm_term=.heDXQRwDE#.mrJJB8xLa
twitter.com/ConnorGillies/status/880485304410546181

[RTB: starts whistling. 'There may be trouble ahead...' I wonder if the police are scratching their arses watching this.]

That word is not in the Tory vocabulary.

Sorry the must watch video:
twitter.com/ConnorGillies/status/880485304410546181

Buzzfeed article:
www.buzzfeed.com/hannahalothman/grenfell-tower-residents-and-journalists-have-been-banned?utm_term=.heDXQRwDE#.mrJJB8xLa

Gareth Davies‏**@Gareth**_Davies09

I've just been sent this statement by @RBKC leader @NickPagetBrown1 following tonight's aborted cabinet meeting #Grenfell