Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Advice sector issues  →  Thread

EU Referendum and UK poverty

‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 >  Last ›

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3069

Joined: 14 April 2010

New Work and Pensions Secretary: Damian Green

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3069

Joined: 14 April 2010

Mr Green’s voting record on welfare and benefits:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10241/damian_green/ashford/votes#welfare

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3069

Joined: 14 April 2010

Priti Patel leaves DWP .... appointed international development secretary

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

shawn - 14 July 2016 04:14 PM

Priti Patel leaves DWP .... appointed international development secretary

The very department that she said should have been abolished 3 years ago apparently.

Leadsom in charge of the farmers and the fishermen who she reassured would be fine if we voted Leave.

Johnson in charge of foreign affairs.

Do you think Theresa May has done some of these appointments for a laugh?

SarahJBatty
forum member

Money Adviser, Thirteen, Middlesbrough

Send message

Total Posts: 345

Joined: 12 July 2012

How many times have you uttered the phrase ‘you couldn’t make this up’ in the last 2 weeks?

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

Right to reside will become even more fun than it is at the moment….

The government could set a retrospective cut-off date for permitting overseas EU nationals to remain in the UK after the country leaves the union, the minister responsible for the negotiations, David Davis has warned.

Appointed last week to the new role of secretary of state for exiting the European Union, Davis said it might not be possible to warn in advance when this date might fall, as the “sheer generosity” of rights granted to EU nationals could prompt a surge in new arrivals.

“One way of dealing with it could be saying: ‘OK, only people who arrived before a certain date get this protection,’” he told Sky News’s Murnaghan show on Sunday. “There are other ways too.”

More from the Guardian UK may impose cut-off date on EU migrants, says Brexit minister

1964
forum member

Deputy Manager, Reading Community Welfare Rights Unit

Send message

Total Posts: 1711

Joined: 16 June 2010

Love the expression ‘sheer generosity’....

Great. An arbitrary cut-off date. Yep- that’s really going to work isn’t it? Idiots.

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

Guardian report that “Theresa May will not trigger article 50 of the Lisbon treaty initiating the UK’s departure from the European Union before the end of 2016, the high court has been told.

At the opening of the first legal challenge to the process of Brexit, government lawyers conceded that the politically sensitive case was likely to be appealed up to the supreme court.”

Theresa May does not intend to trigger article 50 this year, court told

In for the long haul by the look…..

BC Welfare Rights
forum member

The Brunswick Centre, Kirklees & Calderdale

Send message

Total Posts: 1121

Joined: 22 July 2013

Aww, the poor mites, having to go into work in August. How horrible for them.

Stuart
Administrator

rightsnet editor

Send message

Total Posts: 772

Joined: 21 March 2016

Department for Exiting European Union responsibilities are set out in explanatory notes deposited in the House of Commons Library on 18 July - including responsibilities for -

‘the policy work to support the UK’s negotiations to leave the European Union and to establish the future relationship between the EU and the UK; and

leading and co-ordinating cross-government work to seize the opportunities and ensure a smooth process of exit on the best possible terms.’

http://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2016-0638/DEEU_Explanatory_Note.pdf

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

BBC report that EU nationals with a right to permanent residence can stay in the UK after it leaves the EU and enjoy the same rights, a top civil servant has said.

Mark Sedwill said the rights of those granted residence after five years were “quite clear” in law and it amounted to a guarantee of their future status. But he told MPs the rights of other EU nationals were subject to negotiations on Brexit and the “will of Parliament”.

Brexit: EU nationals with permanent residence ‘can stay in UK’

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

The Emergency Brake lives again!!!!!

Guardian report that Plans to allow the United Kingdom an exemption from EU rules on freedom of movement for up to seven years while retaining access to the single market are being considered in European capitals as part of a potential deal on Brexit.

Senior British and EU sources have confirmed that despite strong initial resistance from French president François Hollande in talks with prime minister Theresa May last week, the idea of an emergency brake on the free movement of people that would go far further than the one David Cameron negotiated before the Brexit referendum is being examined.

If such an agreement were struck, and a strict time limit imposed, diplomats believe it could go a long way towards addressing concerns of the British people over immigration from EU states, while allowing the UK full trade access to the European market.

More here, including speculation that for the Brake to be agreed to, the UK would have to guarantee the right of EU migrant workers in this country over the same period, Brexit: EU considers migration ‘emergency brake’ for UK for up to seven years

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

Came across this blog which I thought was very powerful and on point. Also worth reading the longer John Lanchester essay that he links to at the start of this piece.

Suddenly, people had power in their hands. The sort of decision that was usually reserved for politicians had been handed to the electorate. They could make a choice which would have a direct effect on the future of the country. That, only one month later, that choice has already lead to a complete change of government ministers and has had repercussions around the world, shows just how much power the voters were given. They voted so that something, anything, might change. Briefly, people who had seen their control over their lives ebb away were granted immense power. And they used it.

Whether it will make their lives any better in the long run remains to be seen. I think it unlikely. The damage caused by leaving the EU will almost certainly hit the poorer areas hardest. That said, I retain just enough optimism to hope that, rather than shrugging off the anger, our shaken up political establishment might pause and reflect. Rather than condemning people for doing something so destructive, shouldn’t we be asking why they were so angry in the first place?

Taking back control – if only for a day

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

FT Blog from David Allen Green, lawyer and journalist.

In the days after the Brexit vote, a favourite taunt of Leavers was to tell those who were warning of the difficulties of Brexit that such critics were “in denial” and were indulging in “wishful thinking”. Brexit meant Brexit and it was now inevitable. But it is now evident that it is the Brexiteers who are denying the challenges of reality and wishfully thinking away the problems they now face.

The Canadian diplomat Jeremy Kinsman has a scathing phrase for the predicament of the pro-Brexit UK government. The Brexiteers, the former high commissioner to the UK and ambassador to the EU, observed, “are the dog that caught the bus: they hadn’t thought what to do next”.

Brexit and the challenges of reality

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

Another good blog from Flip Chart FairyTales on some of the complexities of Brexit, with comments below the line comparing this to Universal Credit….It’s worth reading the whole thing but here’s one choice section to start you off.

We start from the point, then, that there is no consensus in the UK about what Brexit should look like. Going into a negotiation without knowing what you want and hoping it will become clear as you go along is really not a good place to start. Ideally, to satisfy everyone, we would need to have Norway’s single market rules and Canada’s right to restrict migration from the EU. It is very unlikely that other EU countries would agree to that.

Even if we can agree a starting point which a majority of people in the UK might accept and which would not trash our economy, the negotiations are likely to drag on for some time.

As Bloomberg reported earlier this week, each EU country is drawing up a shopping list of the things it wants and doesn’t want from Brexit. Some positions are defensive, others are looking at exploiting the opportunity, such as Luxembourg going after London’s financial trade and Spain grabbing Gibraltar. Against this background, just agreeing an EU-wide position will be difficult enough and it is something over which the UK has very little control. There will be negotiations nested within horse-trading nested within more negotiations.

Brexit: Enough David Brent, this is serious!

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 2756

Joined: 14 March 2014

New House of Commons Library briefing - Brexit: impact across policy areas - considers effect of Brexit in a number of areas including social security, employment and human rights

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

Thanks Daphne.

Interesting how this bit has been phrased: Whatever the solution, decisions would have to be made on how to protect social security rights already accrued at the point of withdrawal from the EU.

I’d predict this government looking to undo social security rights accrued rather then protecting them sadly.

Stuart
Administrator

rightsnet editor

Send message

Total Posts: 772

Joined: 21 March 2016

New Open Europe briefing - Giving meaning to Brexit - expressing views of Treasury Committee Chair, Andrew Tyrie. -  on freedom of movement he says -

‘The Government needs to state clearly that stronger controls on free movement are likely to compromise the rights that UK nationals presently enjoy to live and work in the rest of the EU, and may also carry an economic and fiscal cost for the UK, controversial though saying this remains. A reasonable interpretation of the evidence would suggest that inward migration from the EU has provided a substantial fiscal dividend (around £20bn during 2001-11) with very little effect on wages or living standards.’

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 2756

Joined: 14 March 2014

High Court rule that Government do not have power to trigger Article 50 under royal prerogative! - https://twitter.com/JudiciaryUK/status/794119208846163968

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 2756

Joined: 14 March 2014

ikbikb
forum member

LSD WB supervisor - Bury District CAB, Lancashire

Send message

Total Posts: 144

Joined: 17 June 2010

If they lose at the Supreme Court I asume they will go to the ECHR.

1964
forum member

Deputy Manager, Reading Community Welfare Rights Unit

Send message

Total Posts: 1711

Joined: 16 June 2010

Ironic isn’t it?

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

ikbikb - 03 November 2016 05:02 PM

If they lose at the Supreme Court I asume they will go to the ECHR.

European Court of Justice I think with brilliant irony.

nevip
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Sefton Council, Liverpool

Send message

Total Posts: 3027

Joined: 16 June 2010

ikbikb - 03 November 2016 05:02 PM

If they lose at the Supreme Court I asume they will go to the ECHR.

            The ECHR nor the ECJ has no jurisdiction in this case as its about UK constitutional law

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 2224

Joined: 7 January 2016

ClairemHodgson
forum member

Solicitor, SC Law, Harrow

Send message

Total Posts: 1222

Joined: 13 April 2016

nevip - 03 November 2016 11:15 PM
ikbikb - 03 November 2016 05:02 PM

If they lose at the Supreme Court I asume they will go to the ECHR.

            The ECHR nor the ECJ has no jurisdiction in this case as its about UK constitutional law

this is true.  the ECHR is certainly irrelevant, since the ECHR is nothing to do with the EU.

BUT there is in fact a legal question.

This is an extract from yesterday’s judgement, re the Treaty on European Union (which is the relevant bit of EU legislation)

Article 50 states:
“1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.
A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.”

and i draw your attention in particular to point 1.

Given that TEU is the european law on the topic, and thus justiciable in the ECJ, is the question of whether we comply with point 1 justiciable in the ECJ?  there is a strong argument that it is.  Given that EU law is imported into UK law by the 1972 act (which in turn now, by amendment, refers to the act that brought this treaty into effect in the UK).

nevip
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Sefton Council, Liverpool

Send message

Total Posts: 3027

Joined: 16 June 2010

That’s true Claire.  Immediately after the referendum I argued that Article 50 could only be triggered by Parliament, as the phrase “in accordance with its constitutional requirements” indicates.  And certainly a reference by the Supreme Court to interpret what article 50 means is certainly a possibility and that matter is, of course, justiciable in that court.  But what I was really meaning (although I could have been clearer on the point) was that what I don’t think is justiciable in that court, is to decide just what our constitution is, particularly with that part of the Bill of Rights that states “laws should not be made or suspended without the consent of Parliament”, or what it means.  The interpretation of the Bill of Rights is, to my mind, no business of the ECJ.

1964
forum member

Deputy Manager, Reading Community Welfare Rights Unit

Send message

Total Posts: 1711

Joined: 16 June 2010

Yes, but it would be such fun if it was wouldn’t it?

nevip
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Sefton Council, Liverpool

Send message

Total Posts: 3027

Joined: 16 June 2010

1964 - 04 November 2016 01:30 PM

Yes, but it would be such fun if it was wouldn’t it?

Oh God yes!  If the brexiteers are frothing at the mouth now, just think what they would be like then