Hacker News Reader

My perspective is a little bit different. If they want to kick me out, I'll go somewhere else.

I am Irish; the probability is high that my nationality will be treated differently owing to history. But if they want me to ask to stay, they can go fuck themselves.

I agree with your attitude in the long run (and am looking to move out myself), but in the immediate I think it's important for people to prepare so that they are not arbitrarily pressured into making immediate choices. Say you own a house, and the government says you don't have a right to live here anymore; you'll likely sell that house at a low price as you rush to relocate. History is full of this sort of profiteering following forced exodus (Spanish Jews, German Jews, Turkish Greeks and so on). If a bit if bureaucracy can save you from that, I think it's smart to do it.

> (Spanish Jews, German Jews, Turkish Greeks and so on)

And many more; as an American it immediately brings to mind WWII Japanese internment. Businesses and homes lost to pressure and profiteering as people were ripped out of society and dropped in open-air prisons.

"If they want me to ask to stay, they can go fuck themselves."

Swede living in London here. I've got exactly the same opinion.

Dane living in Nottingham here, I feel the exact same way.

I am working remote, so my job moves with me, and it might be back home, hopefully with my british girlfriend :) but I fear the future, and how much bureaucracy we will face.

Spoken like a true Viking: take their gold AND their wenches!

> If they want to kick me out

Did the article? This is about a cutoff date to stop a wave of last minute immigrants. Nothing about expelling current ones. Don't let clickbait headlines make you angry.

"Nothing about expelling current ones. "

Don't be so sure about that: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/feb/26/grandmother-...

This case is completely unrelated to the rights of EU citizens to live and work in the UK.

While slightly different laws may apply, it clearly shows the attitude of UK's officials.

For now. Presumably even if you were here for >5 years now as an EU citizen, if you went to europe for >2 years, you wouldn't be allowed in, the same as this lady.

They probably won't be expelling anyone, but the UK government has explicitly said that they'll use the rights of EU citizens in the UK as a bargaining chip, so if I were an EU citizen in the UK I'd be worried.

They've explicitly said they don't want to use them as a bargaining chip, but would be foolish to give it up uniliaterally.

A bit like "I don't really want to eat this delicious cake, but it would be foolish to leave it to rot."

How will border control at the airport distinguish between EU citizens who are allowed to come in, and those who need to fill out some paperwork and will be kicked out if they overstay their implied visa / waiver?

You don't seriously expect this government to actually think through their proposals, do you? /s

More seriously: permanent residency as a result of exercising treaty rights comes with a document, so some will carry that. For everyone else, you would hope the government will put in place some sort of registration scheme that is easier than treaty-rights (which currently requires 5 years of continuous settlement in UK).

As for prosecuting people who overstay... eh. They are already pretty overworked and incapable of tracking most illegals, I can only imagine things will get even worse after they add hundreds of thousands new cases. Like in the US, they will compensate for this structural deficiency by being extra-brutal with the poor few they do catch (like they already do). This will drive more and more people underground, which will do wonders for crime syndicates, human traffickers and the like.

> I am Irish; the probability is high that my nationality will be treated differently owing to history

Yes, I think you're allowed to stay.

Based on what exactly? If you have sources to cite there are many interested people. So far we've a general feeling of "people have been moving between these two countries freely since decades before the EU existed so they couldn't stop that... could they?" - could they?

Then again, isn't the EU supposed to bargain as a block?

Any firm comment on this by a party in a position to influence policy would be received with great interest.

Ireland is a special case; the Ireland Act 1949 provides that "Ireland is not a foreign country", and the Good Friday Agreement requires an open border between Eire and NI.

Like everything else, this is now subject to uncertainty. http://irishpost.co.uk/irish-government-attempts-calm-citize...

(The possibility of NI rejoining Éire has now moved from "unthinkable" to "maybe". If a border gets imposed as part of Brexit that moves to "likely")

There hasn't been a word from the UK government about how this could be achieved. There seems to be no realistic way to retain an open border with the Republic of Ireland while not having an open border with the rest of the EU. The mythical Romanian could just fly to Dublin, drive to NI and catch a ferry. The only solution that I can see is to move the border to the North Sea. An open border with the Republic, but border controls between NI and GB. I imagine that will go down like a cup of cold sick with a good proportion of the population of NI.

Indeed. I can't see Stormont agreeing to border posts (and Stormont is anyway in a mess over RHI corruption!), but if the British government starts unilaterally building them against the will of Stormont they've broken the GFA and the IRA may start blowing them up.

Internal quasi-border is a bit more likely - there are already some ID checks there - but will accelerate the decline of Unionism further.

"drive to NI and catch a ferry."

Of course, the implicit assumption there is that anyone going to NI is doing so to get to Britain. What about the mythical Romanian who just moves to Belfast and sets up a life there? Is that a failure of UK immigration policy? (Maybe it's not - I'm genuinely curious what people think). I'm not from NI, but it doesn't seem terribly polite of British politicians to suggest that people would go to NI just to get to the "real" UK (aka Britain), as though NI isn't a worthwhile destination on its own.

The options I've seen floated range from deputizing ROI immigration officers to enforce UK immigration policy, to imposing a hard land border between ROI and NI (I really, really, really hope we don't end up with that), to imposing document checks for travelers between Britain and NI, which seems to be suggesting that nobody from the EU would want to go to NI just to live in NI.

In my view, at least, all of these options are a bit shit.

(I use the term "Britain" here to refer to the island occupied by England, Wales, and Scotland, distinct from the UK, which is England, Wales, Scotland, and NI)

Irish citizens in the UK hold a more favourable status than EU citizens as is, the likelyhood of this changing is practically nil.

It doesn't make sense at all.

Until the end of the two years of the Article 50 negotiation (or before, if both the EU and the UK agree), the UK is a full member of the EU, with all the obligations that this entitles.

That includes the right to live and work of citizens of other EU countries.

Restricting that unilaterally is a gross violation of the treaties.

Yeah, many things seem kinda bogus regarding this mess, even the PM herself.

They're not violating the treaties, they are saying if EU citizens come after a certain date then their residency is not guaranteed.

EU citizens will be free to come right up until the UK exits the EU but those that came after said date will likely have to apply for visas. Those before will keep residency.

> If you are an EU citizen looking to move to the UK: just don't. This country has decided they don't need you and me, they don't deserve our labour, our ideas and our taxes.

Well, 52% of the people who voted kinda, sorta said that. The rest of us are just being dragged along at the moment.

"This country has decided they don't need you and me, they don't deserve our labour, our ideas and our taxes."

What about an EU citizen deciding to move to the US, Canada, Australia, Brazil or India? These countries were never in the EU. Did they therefore decide they don't need EU citizens? If not, why is the UK after it exits from the EU necessarily a less welcoming place for EU citizens than other non-EU countries?

The United States is not a welcoming place for EU citizens. Immigration is strictly limited, the procedures expensive and time-consuming. If that's the bar for the UK government, the grandparent poster is right: it's not going to be worth even looking at Britain.

To put it another way: if working in London, New York and San Francisco are going to be equally difficult to arrange, I'm not sure why anyone would prefer London. Housing is as expensive as NY or SF, yet wages are much lower. The weather isn't great either.

These can be valid points for some, and carry less weight for others (say, if you live in Paris and are offered a good job in London, and they help you deal with the visa stuff, for most it's probably also nice to be able to visit Paris much more easily than you could from NY or SF.)

At any rate, "not sure why anyone would prefer London with the post-EU laws" is very different from "they decided they don't want me because they're not in the EU (even though there might be an otherwise nicely sounding arrangement available for me)."

> if you live in Paris and are offered a good job in London, and they help you deal with the visa stuff

Note that the freedom of movement in the EU means there isn't any "visa stuff" to deal with.

An EU citizen moving to the UK needs to fill in a form, to get a "National Insurance" number. The same would be required of a British citizen that didn't have one, for example if they'd been born and lived overseas before moving to the UK.

There are no other requirements that don't also apply to British / resident people moving within the UK.

Well, yeah, but here the entire discussion is about UK's exit from the EU, at which point freedom of movement in the EU doesn't apply, I think. So I was describing a hypothetical future situation where you would have some "stuff" to deal with.

> It makes sense, I don't think anyone could realistically expect anything different

I might not expect it, but I do hope that a country that prides itself on the rule of law, and the historic influence it had in the world, would not break the terms of an international treaty.

> it's actually pretty good from my perspective

Are you familiar with the British expression, "I'm all right, Jack"?

> exercise your rights TODAY ... it's just a bit of bureaucracy

Ah, the 85 page form with the £65 fee, which many of my friends are worried they'll not be able to fill in correctly -- especially after all the stories in the British press of the long-term residents whose applications were rejected.

For comparison, the Danish form for permanent residency has 6 pages in English (and 6 in Danish, it's bilingual), no fee, and only requires copies of the last few tax returns and a current job contract. Unfortunately, even if Britain remains in the UK until, say, 31 March 2019, I'll still be a few months short of the 5 year requirement.

> If you are an EU citizen living in UK, you should absolutely ask to exercise your rights TODAY; do not delay, do not trust news reports, it's just a bit of bureaucracy but could make a big difference in your future. Make sure you send documents as recorded delivery and track each and every date.

Apparently my Dutch friend who has a PhD funded by the UK government can't apply for permanent residency because she doesn't earn enough to meet the £35k minimum earning set by the UK government. She's been here for almost 8 years. She's lucky that she's getting married and her now-fiance earns enough to make her qualify for spousal visa, but I know tons of others who are not so lucky.

That's wrong, the 35k threshold is for non-EU people only. I dearly hope she wasn't willingly misinformed by civil servants.

And I am pretty sure it isn't 35k, more like £18,600 without children.

Nonetheless, any amount above £0 makes my life a misery.

I'm British living in another EU country, with my non-EU spouse and British son. Who knows how my situation will resolve itself. This article holds out some olive branch of the offer of EU citizenship for people in my situation.

However, let's play the hypothetical situation that I am forced to leave due to negotiation breakdowns or whatever. I return to the UK, right? Unfortunately, my wife can't join me until I already earn above about a £22k threshold (additional for child). It isn't that I don't believe I can earn that amount, it is the elapsed time and enforced separation. Maybe it takes me a couple of months to find a job, it will then probably take several months for my wife's Visa application to be processed (she's already randomly had one visitor visa application denied, which we appealed against and won, but it was a 12 month process). And what's her status in our current EU country of residence if I have returned to the UK?

It's all a big old mess for those of us exercising our EU treaty rights.

Your Dutch friend is misinformed. She doesn't need any earnings to apply for permanent residency (talking from experience).

> If you are an EU citizen looking to move to the UK: just don't

I call BS on that. UK is quite open to LEGAL worker immigration from anywhere around the world. What's the big deal? I worked in UK for years and I'm not EU. Many Americans, Asians, Australians, etc. go through these channels without issue. After a few years they give you residentship. And shortly after that they give you citizenship.

It's crazy how this is all made to sound like UK is going to become Cuba or something. ALARMIST NONSENSE by radicalization and willful ignorance.

Didn't the Conservatives campaign in the last election about bringing legal immigration numbers down to <100K/year?

Net migration, if you discount returning British citizens it currently sits at around 200,000 a year (500,000 gross), so it would be an approximate 20% reduction in non-British immigration.

Or a 30% increase in emigration, but I doubt they're aiming for that.

UK is quite open to LEGAL worker immigration from anywhere around the world.

lol, no it isn't - legal immigration from the EU is the main pillar of Brexit: "Stop all these people coming to live in our country."

It's a simple distinction:

1. You want to come work in London? Fill out all these forms, pay fees, prove that you're going to be useful, and we might allow you to stay

2. You want to come work in Berlin? Sure, come along.

Do you see how the latter makes you feel much more welcome?

It seems the only way to execute your rights is to apply for residency and that requires 5 years.