EU Referendum and UK poverty
Assuming what the telegraph says is correct, then YES. And it seems quite reasonable to me. This whole issue of residence could have been settled by now if it wasn’t for the obstructiveness of the EU - particularly Germany - & their insistence on leaving it until Article 50 is triggered.
let the whiff whaff commence..
The Conservative government is likely to be defeated in the House of Lords over the issue of securing the rights of EU citizens living in the UK, despite a last minute plea from the home secretary, Amber Rudd.
Peers are lining up to support a Labour party amendment – which now has the formal backing of a Conservative, a Liberal Democrat and a crossbencher – calling on ministers to bring forward proposals to protect Europeans resident in Britain within three months of article 50 being triggered.
Guess for completion, we should add this here:
Hold onto your hats, here we go….
The UK’s Permanent Representative to the European Union, Sir Tim Barrow, has this morning informed the office of European Council President, Donald Tusk, of the UK’s intention to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty on March 29, 2017.
Whoops-a-daisy, they clean forgot to tell anyone in Scotland they were going to do this though allegedly…
Michael Russell, who is leading the Scottish government’s Brexit talks with Westminster, said he only found out the date when it was reported by the BBC.
Mr Russell, who is a member of the Joint Ministerial Committee (JMC) on EU negotiations, tweeted: “Thank you @BBCNews for letting JMC members like me know that #Article50 is to be triggered next week”.
He added that the UK government “somehow forgot to inform us”.
Ahead of the publication of the Great Repeal Bill white paper today ....
From the Guardian:
The government’s great repeal bill will create sweeping temporary powers to allow ministers to tweak laws that would otherwise not “work appropriately” after Brexit, David Davis is expected to announce.
According to a leaked copy of his statement to MPs, obtained by the Guardian, Davis will tell MPs that as well as transposing aspects of EU legislation into UK law, the bill, which will be tabled later this year, will create a new power to “correct the statute book”.
“Once EU law has been converted into domestic law, parliament will be able to pass legislation to amend, repeal or improve any piece of EU law it chooses – as will the devolved legislatures, where they have power to do so,” he is expected to say.
“However, further steps will be needed to provide a smooth and orderly exit. This is because a large number of laws – both existing domestic laws and those we convert into UK law – will not work properly if we leave the EU without taking further action.
To overcome this, the great repeal bill will provide a power to correct the statute book where necessary to resolve the problems which will occur as a consequence of leaving the EU ...”
Here we go .... The Great Repeal Bill: White Paper ..
Summary of main provisions ....
The Great Repeal Bill will do three main things:
a. First, it will repeal the European Communities Act 1972 and return power to UK institutions.
b. Second, subject to the detail of the proposals set out in this White Paper, the Bill will convert EU law as it stands at the moment of exit into UK law before we leave the EU, and ensure that it will be up to the UK Parliament (and, where appropriate, the devolved legislatures) to amend, repeal or improve any piece of EU law (once it has been brought into UK law) at the appropriate time once we have left the EU.
c. Finally, the Bill will create powers to make secondary legislation. This will enable corrections to be made to the laws that would otherwise no longer operate appropriately once we have left the EU, so that our legal system continues to function correctly outside the EU, and will also enable domestic law once we have left the EU to reflect the content of any withdrawal agreement under Article 50.
Re: Case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) -
- the Great Repeal Bill will not provide any role for the CJEU in the interpretation of new law passed by UK Parliament (and, as appropriate, the devolved legislatures), and the Bill will not require the domestic courts to consider the CJEU’s jurisprudence.
- any question as to the meaning of EU-derived law will be determined in the UK courts by reference to the CJEU’s case law as it exists on the day we leave the EU. (Although, insofar as case law concerns an aspect of EU law that is not being converted into UK law, that element of the case law will not need to be applied by the UK courts.)
- the Bill will provide that historic CJEU case law be given the same binding, or precedent, status in our courts as decisions of our own Supreme Court.
And re the need for new legislation:
Making sure domestic law works as we leave the EU will be a substantial challenge for both Government and Parliament in complexity and planning to deal with a number of scenarios. In the previous two Parliaments, an average of 1,338 (2005-10) and 1,071 (2010-15) statutory instruments were made per year. A proportion of this secondary legislation, as it has been every year, was implementing EU law. We currently estimate that the necessary corrections to the law will require between 800 and 1,000 statutory instruments. This is in addition to those statutory instruments that will be necessary for purposes other than leaving the EU.
... Given the scale of the changes that will be necessary and the finite amount of time available to make them, there is a balance that will have to be struck between the importance of scrutiny and the speed of this process.
Interesting post from Ian Dunt on politics.co.uk about Brexit and the draft EU guidelines about the forthcoming negotiations.
If you put a frog in boiling water, it jumps out. If you put it in cold water and slowly turn up the heat, it will sit there and boil to death without noticing. Looking at the reality of Britain’s EU predicament now, just a couple days into Article 50, everything feels a million miles away from where we were even a few weeks ago. It bears no comparison whatsoever with the fevered optimism of the referendum campaign.
Back then, the Brexiters promised free unicorns to everyone and a pot of gold at the end of every rainbow. There’d be more money for the NHS, more control for the British people, everyone would know their neighbours again and a friendly bobby would stroll on every street. Today, the conversation is, at the very best, about minimising the negative repercussions of Brexit. It has gone from a solution to everything to a problem for everyone.
House of Commons Library briefing paper on Legislating for Brexit: EU directives
What are EU directives and what will happen to them when the UK leaves the EU? This paper looks at EU directives in force and how they are implemented in the UK. This will give some idea of the task ahead for UK legislators.
Sometimes there are no words to describe the utterly idiotic and inhumane robots in the Home Office. I don’t think I want to live here anymore, let alone this poor family….
A Dutch and Spanish couple who have lived in Britain all their adult lives have told of their “devastation” after the Home Office refused their post-referendum application to have their two London-born children recognised as permanent residents of the country.
Jan-Dinant Schreuder and Monica Obiols, both 49, found themselves in a “bureaucratic nightmare” when they were told their 15-year-old son and 12-year-old daughter had to provide more evidence that they lived permanently with their parents.
Home Office has now published guidance on EU nationals etc on gov.uk.
Faisal Islam of Sky News claims this is to try and reduce the volume of applications for residence cards etc as HO currently overwhelmed.
From retired judge Henry Brooke - his assessment of the legal complexities around the costs of Brexit and how we seem to be caught between the devil and the deep blue sea…
The European Parliamanet has also issued estimates of how many EU citizens are in the UK ahead of a hearing this week to consider thier rights.