The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[Enda]

Just on the “reminiscent of the Nazis” thing, there’s two ways to interpret this. The first way is to think it means the UK is on the precipice of gassing millions of people, which is absurd.

The second way is to note a dramatic lurch to the right, complicity with the media, a significant reduction in democratic norms, and making scapegoats of/blaming everything on “them”. That’s absolutely happening.

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

54 minutes ago, snowychap said:

People from the EU moved to this country as EU citizens with treaty rights. They made their lives here, made their home, lived, loved, had families, &c. and now they are being required to apply for permission to remain in their own homes and continue in their jobs, &c. having been told over and over again that nothing would change and that they were guaranteed not to be in a worse position.

I agree it's not acceptable but I did it becasue of the uncertainty of the general politics of Brexit and my own position as an immigrant type person, also becasue sometimes you just have to play the game.  There are 1000's of things wrong at the moment and this is one of them.  But,  not filling in forms or not having the right stuff or forgetting or whatever is exactly what the Government want you too do at the moment.  It's hard and difficult for a reason.  They want to put people off.

[snowychap]

1 minute ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

I agree it's not acceptable but I did it becasue of the uncertainty of the general politics of Brexit and my own position as an immigrant type person, also becasue sometimes you just have to play the game.  There are 1000's of things wrong at the moment and this is one of them.  But,  not filling in forms or not having the right stuff or forgetting or whatever is exactly what the Government want you too do at the moment.  It's hard and difficult for a reason.  They want to put people off.

Indeed. Sorry if I seemed to be overly critical of your post.

I think that there's been quite a bit of dismissive talk about people's options and what they could have or should have done in order for them not to be in the position where they're at the mercy of the government's whims. I wasn't meaning to suggest that you were being like that as it wouldn't fit in with the nature of your posts.

As an aside, I assume you're married to a dutch national?

[snowychap]

I wonder whether the tweet from Shailesh Vara might make it in to evidence at next week's hearing:

 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

8 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Indeed. Sorry if I seemed to be overly critical of your post.

I think that there's been quite a bit of dismissive talk about people's options and what they could have or should have done in order for them not to be in the position where they're at the mercy of the government's whims. I wasn't meaning to suggest that you were being like that as it wouldn't fit in with the nature of your posts.

As an aside, I assume you're married to a dutch national?

No worries mate 100% really no problem. 

Yes,  I am married to a Dutch lady.  I got a nice (Multi generational) family now and I got here with nothing in 2001,  which I suppose is what the EU intended to happen all along ?

I mean EU freedom of movement and integration,  not that they were super interested in where the little bloke from Brum ended up,  like Merkel and that were holding meetings,  we hear he is in Holland.

[HanoiVillan]

2 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

What is an 'acceptable compromise' about No Deal!?!?!?!?

I was wondering the same thing. You can't describe the most extreme position available as a 'compromise', whatever you think of it. 

[tonyh29]

1 hour ago, bickster said:

Were you arguing with yourself over it? because no-one else said it

It has been said that every racist voted to leave but hey ho

you appear confused and think that VT  is the only place in the universe   , but indeed  hey ho

 

[snowychap]

5 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

No worries mate 100% really no problem. 

Yes,  I am married to a Dutch lady.  I got a nice (Multi generational) family now and I got here with nothing in 2001,  which I suppose is what the EU intended to happen all along ?

I mean EU freedom of movement and integration,  not that they were super interested in where the little bloke from Brum ended up,  like Merkel and that were holding meetings,  we hear he is in Holland.

I think you're right that it is very much what it's about. Creating multi-national and multi-generational ties across the EU.

Obviously, they didn't say let's think of Neil_D but rather let's think of all of the Neil_Ds.

Having looked through the Dutch website, I think that's why you can be a dual national (being married to a Dutch national). Otherwise, I read it as you'd have to renounce your British citizenship in order to acquire Ducth citizenship (though I accept I may be reading that wrongly).

[bickster]

1 minute ago, tonyh29 said:

you appear confused and think that VT  is the only place in the universe   , but indeed  hey ho

 

I'm fairly sure no one with more than half a brain in real world has said it either. I've seen it thrown back to the remain side often but never as a direct result of anything anyone has said

[StefanAVFC]

3 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I think you're right that it is very much what it's about. Creating multi-national and multi-generational ties across the EU.

Obviously, they didn't say let's think of Neil_D but rather let's think of all of the Neil_Ds.

Having looked through the Dutch website, I think that's why you can be a dual national (being married to a Dutch national). Otherwise, I read it as you'd have to renounce your British citizenship in order to acquire Ducth citizenship (though I accept I may be reading that wrongly).

Every country has a different criteria for getting that citizenship.

In Poland, you can only apply twice. Once per President, by writing a letter to him asking to become a citizen.

You cock it up twice and you're done.

My friend who's been here for 11 years only got his last year after being rejected the first time.

It's just shit.

[ml1dch]

10 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I was wondering the same thing. You can't describe the most extreme position available as a 'compromise', whatever you think of it. 

I'm guessing it's just badly worded, as the other options appear to be about the impact on the country rather than the result of the negotiation. 

As the other options range from very bad to very good, I'd guess that chunk of people think that it will be neither good nor bad.

[Dodgyknees]

 

[romavillan]

14 minutes ago, avfcDJ said:

 

Just finished reading that! Some people really need to go to jail over this sort of shit, clear links between BoJo, Trump, Farage and a group of paid MAGA trolls. Would be important to know where that money is coming from (*cough* Putin *cough*) and seeing as it's an internationally coordinated butt-fudging of the UK I guess only the complicit UK components could be brought to justice here even if Twitter could/would divulge details of these MAGA accounts.

[snowychap]

 

In that document, it says:

Quote

An effective remedy required the court to positively order the Government, if it insisted on proroguing Parliament, either to extend the 'article 50' time limit or formally revoke the notification as a matter of 'extreme necessity'.

I could see why such a remedy might be more than problematic (not least that it is not in the Government's power to unilaterally extend theA50 process) but it's interesting that this appears to be where they went and that they have left the bit regarding the order of prorogation in these terms:

Quote

If the court was satisfied that the advice to prorogue Parliament amounted to an abuse of power, then there was an obligation on the Sovereign to recall the resulting order of prorogation.

Both quotes above are from the documents contained in the linked tweet.

[romavillan]

7 minutes ago, snowychap said:

 

In that document, it says:

I could see why such a remedy might be more than problematic (not least that it is not in the Government's power to unilaterally extend theA50 process) but it's interesting that this appears to be where they went and that they have left the bit regarding the order of prorogation in these terms:

Both quotes above are from the documents contained in the linked tweet.

Not looking likely then, only hope is the "rebel alliance". Although it's all much more Spaceballs than Star Wars unfortunately. 

[tonyh29]

1 hour ago, snowychap said:

People from the EU moved to this country as EU citizens with treaty rights. They made their lives here, made their home, lived, loved, had families

I get  the  treaty rights saying  they are / were  protected , and the Dutch example complicates things a little for its citizens  but If I lived in a country for xx years I think at some point I'd have applied for dual citizenship , common sense might not be the right word but surely having made roots in a country  , having children in a country  its a logical step ? if nothing else it protects you going forward in the event of such things like we are now witnessing 

Mrs H moved here with me when I came back from Hungary , she had Hungarian citizenship but having decided the UK was the best place to start a family thus  making her roots here , the second she was eligible to apply for British citizenship she did  , it didn't cost much (at that time maybe a few hundred if that)  , she had to do a  British citizen test , that involved questions about father Christmas and then went to a joint ceremony held by the mayor of Kingston where she had to sing God save the Queen  and that was it   ..I only lived in Hungary for 12 months but had we decided to stay there and raise a family there  , I'd have applied for dual nationality , it would have been illogical for me not to have done so

not trying to say "it's their own fault" but i wonder if these people will also be suddenly filing PPI claims today !!

 

 

[snowychap]

Just now, romavillan said:

Not looking likely then, only hope is the "rebel alliance". Although it's all much more Spaceballs than Star Wars unfortunately. 

I don't know. Having read through that report, I can see there are effective arguments (to me) on both sides and this was only the emergency hearing.

The full hearing is likely to have more arguments put forward and more evidence produced so we can't know how the Court of Session will decide. As per comments in previous posts with @cyrusr, I'm not putting myself forward as anything other than someone reading the stuff that's put out there. I have no expertise in the matter!

[romavillan]

2 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

I get  the  treaty rights saying  they are / were  protected , and the Dutch example complicates things a little for its citizens  but If I lived in a country for xx years I think at some point I'd have applied for dual citizenship , common sense might not be the right word but surely having made roots in a country  , having children in a country  its a logical step ? if nothing else it protects you going forward in the event of such things like we are now witnessing 

Mrs H moved here with me when I came back from Hungary , she had Hungarian citizenship but having decided the UK was the best place to start a family thus  making her roots here , the second she was eligible to apply for British citizenship she did  , it didn't cost much (at that time maybe a few hundred if that)  , she had to do a  British citizen test , that involved questions about father Christmas and then went to a joint ceremony held by the mayor of Kingston where she had to sing God save the Queen  and that was it   ..I only lived in Hungary for 12 months but had we decided to stay there and raise a family there  , I'd have applied for dual nationality , it would have been illogical for me not to have done so

not trying to say "it's their own fault" but i wonder if these people will also be suddenly filing PPI claims today !!

 

 

You are missing the point massively, I've been in Italy for 14 years, free to live and work ANYWHERE in Europe as a European citizen. That meant at any point I could have gone to live and work, in France, Germany, Spain... If a no-deal happens my rights in Italy *should* be protected but I lose the right to then go and live and work in the other 27 member states unless I pay to go throught eh process of getting an Italian passport.

So, leave voters have cost me my right to live and work all across Europe, and they are making me have to pay for the chance of getting it back.

That's a whole big fat plate of **** bollocks right there my friend.

[snowychap]

15 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

I get  the  treaty rights saying  they are / were  protected , and the Dutch example complicates things a little for its citizens  but If I lived in a country for xx years I think at some point I'd have applied for dual citizenship , common sense might not be the right word but surely having made roots in a country  , having children in a country  its a logical step ? if nothing else it protects you going forward in the event of such things like we are now witnessing 

Mrs H moved here with me when I came back from Hungary , she had Hungarian citizenship but having decided the UK was the best place to start a family thus  making her roots here , the second she was eligible to apply for British citizenship she did  , it didn't cost much (at that time maybe a few hundred if that)  , she had to do a  British citizen test , that involved questions about father Christmas and then went to a joint ceremony held by the mayor of Kingston where she had to sing God save the Queen  and that was it   ..I only lived in Hungary for 12 months but had we decided to stay there and raise a family there  , I'd have applied for dual nationality , it would have been illogical for me not to have done so

not trying to say "it's their own fault" but i wonder if these people will also be suddenly filing PPI claims today !!

As per my previous comment, this argument is very weak.

Just because she chose to do this (or you would have chosen to do this) does not mean to say that it is the 'logical' or 'common sense' thing to do and, by implication, that people who didn't naturalise have brought this upon themselves (whether or not you add in the last, rather glib, line).

Even allowing for that, to make this argument now to people who didn't do it (for whatever reasons they might have had) is perverse. It implies that they didn't do so because they hadn't properly committed to living in this country. You may not have meant to say that but you have.

The cost issue is obviously different now than it was when your wife did it (but even so 'a few hundred' can be a lot of money to those of us who don't have 'a few hundred' just kicking about).

I won't go in to UK government policy on how secure British citizenship is for dual nationals.

Edit: Nor will I go in to the kind of people who may be completely left out of the whole process (the elderly, infirm, alone, unaware, &c.).

Edited August 30, 2019 by snowychap

[ml1dch]

15 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

I only lived in Hungary for 12 months but had we decided to stay there and raise a family there  , I'd have applied for dual nationality , it would have been illogical for me not to have done so

Assuming it was before 2011 that you lived there then you wouldn't have been able to. Before then Hungary didn't allow dual nationality and you'd have had to renounce your British citizenship.

According to this, anyway.

https://www.dualcitizenship.com/countries/hungari.html

Edited August 30, 2019 by ml1dch