Should post Brexit EU migrants , new , or currently resident in the UK, have more rights than non- EU migrants in the UK?

When making a post, please ensure it complies with this site's Main Rules at all times.
  • Personally, i don't believe they should. Post Brexit, the UK will, ( in theory at least), be regaining 'Sovereign Nation' status, and as such ALL legal migrants to the UK, whether or not from the EU, should enjoy the same 'rights'. To provide additional rights to non-EU migrants would be 'discrimination', pure and simple.

  • Agree.

    Why should they be treated any differently? Whether EU or non EU, all immigrants should be treated the same. Who wants to bet that's what'll happen? No, me neither!

    I am sure along with handing buckets load of our dosh over, May will give EU immigrants preferential treatment too.

  • Agree.

    Why should they be treated any differently? Whether EU or non EU, all immigrants should be treated the same. Who wants to bet that's what'll happen? No, me neither!

    I am sure along with handing buckets load of our dosh over, May will give EU immigrants preferential treatment too.

    That is what I believe also - which is nothing more than discrimination......so shouldn't be allowed. Positive 'action' is of course legal in the UK, ( to get around being accused of being discriminatory), but I don't see how that can be applied to EU citizens.....unless of course, they have an ethnic minority background,

  • I think that EU citizens and other immigrants already here legally should have the right to stay as long as they are contributing and aren't found guilty of any criminal offence which carries a prison sentence. Which is not to say they should be given automatic citizenship.

  • The question posed puzzles me. Why qualify it with "post-Brexit? If the argument is about the fundamental fairness of not exercising a double standard, does that fundamental have a sell-by date? If we think there is a double standard before Brexit, surely it remains so after Brexit.

    Also, let's call a spade a spade here. We all know that to distinguish between EU and non-EU migrants becomes, in effect, to distinguish between ethnic groups (albeit with misleadingly blurred statistics due to EU citizens less than fully homogeneous).

    My answer to the question posted in this thread thread is "yes", let's give EU citizens more rights ....... or more sensibly, let's give them those rights automatically rather than by application and assessment.

    I vote yes not because I like the idea of a double standard but rather because:

    1) it will reduce the percentage of Muslims settling in Britain which, if left unchecked, will produce an increased imbalance in population profile which will significantly alter Britain's social fabric (such as it is!), threaten homeland security and drastically increase overcrowding (because the birth rate among Muslim's way above the British average - and it could take several decades of education and assimilation for that birthrate to fall into line with non-Muslims).

    2) It will humour those power-crazed fanatics who run the EU by paying lip service to some vestige of free movement, which might help us get a less kamikaze trade deal with the EU and persuade them to grant similar preferential treatment to UK citizens who have settled into the EU across the Channel.

  • In German media this topic was quite interesting for us. There was a documentation movie about UK citizens(for example, Jews) giving up their citizenship, only to apply for the German one, because their grandparents fled the country in World War II, but they now decide to remain in the EU.

    (Those were quite long, 1h30m.)

    Germany on the other side is accepting the decision, as long as the candidates can prove that they or their roots were German before.

    I found that pretty impressive.

    (A rather short movie:

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
    )

    German, with different opinions.

    Please correct my spelling and grammar mistakes ;)

  • The question posed puzzles me. Why qualify it with "post-Brexit? If the argument is about the fundamental fairness of not exercising a double standard, does that fundamental have a sell-by date? If we think there is a double standard before Brexit, surely it remains so after Brexit.

    Also, let's call a spade a spade here. We all know that to distinguish between EU and non-EU migrants becomes, in effect, to distinguish between ethnic groups (albeit with misleadingly blurred statistics due to EU citizens less than fully homogeneous).

    My answer to the question posted in this thread thread is "yes", let's give EU citizens more rights ....... or more sensibly, let's give them those rights automatically rather than by application and assessment.

    I vote yes not because I like the idea of a double standard but rather because:

    1) it will reduce the percentage of Muslims settling in Britain which, if left unchecked, will produce an increased imbalance in population profile which will significantly alter Britain's social fabric (such as it is!), threaten homeland security and drastically increase overcrowding (because the birth rate among Muslim's way above the British average - and it could take several decades of education and assimilation for that birthrate to fall into line with non-Muslims).

    2) It will humour those power-crazed fanatics who run the EU by paying lip service to some vestige of free movement, which might help us get a less kamikaze trade deal with the EU and persuade them to grant similar preferential treatment to UK citizens who have settled into the EU across the Channel.

    a)Well the question shouldn't puzzle anyone. The question is clearly addressing the EU's wish for 'retention' of EU citizen rights after the UK has left the EU......in other words, 'post Brexit'. That suggests that the EU are expecting 'more rights' for EU citizens resident in the UK that non-EU legal migrants, resident in the UK are entitled to....

    b) I would have thought that most people would realise that 'non-EU citizens' is a matter of different nationalities rather than races. After all, many countries are now multi -racial.......

  • I think that EU citizens and other immigrants already here legally should have the right to stay as long as they are contributing and aren't found guilty of any criminal offence which carries a prison sentence. Which is not to say they should be given automatic citizenship.

    Absolutely - as you say, non-EU citizens who have also contributed , and have not committed criminal activities should have the same rights as EU citizens resident in the UK. The 'race' of any individual is totally irrelevant.....and the reference to Paulette Wilson just epitomises the level of some of the 'jobsworths' in the Home Office.

  • Regardless of ethnicity, EU and non-EU immigrants should be treated the same.

    Just to backtrack on my comment here, because if anyone has read the main immigration thread, I said something very different which I'm sticking to here:

    The Great Debate on Immigration, Race and Religion in the UK

    Just going back to the OP, all migrants whether EU or not, should have the same rights in this country, otherwise that would be discrimination, but I would discriminate who comes into this country to begin with as I outlined in the immigration thread.

  • Stevlin's conclusion that the EU is expecting their citizen's right to prevail over non-EU citizens' is probably justified insofar as the EU is wedded to the concept of a "United States of Europe". That said, I still think that eligibility rights for citizenship in each country or "EU state" should be based on accepting and complying with that country's/state's rules of behaviour. I only refer to race or ethnicity or religion as a profile predictor, certainly not as a label in itself that should determine eligibility for an application of citizenship. It is the behaviour rather than the label that matters. If I balk at granting citizenship to people who, for example, want to broadcast a call for prayer 5 times a day, or have forced marriages, or hold street protests because a perfectly acceptable play offends their religious or life-style sensibilities, or whose women choose or are forced to wear masks or headgear that conceal their faces in public places, I am balking not because of who they are - I don't care if they are Muslims, Mormons or Martians - I just don't want to live in a society that chooses to accommodate an increasing number of people who behave that way and whose above-average birthrate over the next few decades will create new de facto norms for society.

  • Stevlin's conclusion that the EU is expecting their citizen's right to prevail over non-EU citizens' is probably justified insofar as the EU is wedded to the concept of a "United States of Europe". That said, I still think that eligibility rights for citizenship in each country or "EU state" should be based on accepting and complying with that country's/state's rules of behaviour. I only refer to race or ethnicity or religion as a profile predictor, certainly not as a label in itself that should determine eligibility for an application of citizenship. It is the behaviour rather than the label that matters. If I balk at granting citizenship to people who, for example, want to broadcast a call for prayer 5 times a day, or have forced marriages, or hold street protests because a perfectly acceptable play offends their religious or life-style sensibilities, or whose women choose or are forced to wear masks or headgear that conceal their faces in public places, I am balking not because of who they are - I don't care if they are Muslims, Mormons or Martians - I just don't want to live in a society that chooses to accommodate an increasing number of people who behave that way and whose above-average birthrate over the next few decades will create new de facto norms for society.

    Don't generally disagree with your comments - but other than EU citizens being able to be judged in terms defined by the EJC, ( which in itself should definitely NOT be allowed in ANY non-EU country), I cannot think of any other specific right that an EU citizen should wish to 'retain'......but in any event, ALL legal migrants in the UK should have the same rights, irrespective of their nationality........which clearly would rule out any 'additional' rights because of EU citizenship.

  • Mr Gove on TV stating that for a finite time EU citizens will have recourse to two courts, UK and ECJ, so which one will actually matter then Mr Gove ?

    Why no word on our expat communities Mr Gove?

  • Mr Gove on TV stating that for a finite time EU citizens will have recourse to two courts, UK and ECJ, so which one will actually matter then Mr Gove ?

    Why no word on our expat communities Mr Gove?

    Yes, I've just come in to all this after a morning of Christmas shopping, so already in a foul mood only to be met with all the back patting and smiles on the "deal."

    As you said, Michael Gove has said that the ECJ will have a time limited role for EU citizens in the UK post Brexit. That time limit will be for seven years. It's the case of which court is supreme in this matter. We voted for our court to be supreme, so which is it? No one is saying.

    Yes and yet again, no mention of our people in the EU, not that I particularly care much about them. They made their choice to move abroad, so they can get on with, but the silence on their rights is deafening.

  • Yes, I've just come in to all this after a morning of Christmas shopping, so already in a foul mood only to be met with all the back patting and smiles on the "deal."

    As you said, Michael Gove has said that the ECJ will have a time limited role for EU citizens in the UK post Brexit. That time limit will be for seven years. It's the case of which court is supreme in this matter. We voted for our court to be supreme, so which is it? No one is saying.

    Yes and yet again, no mention of our people in the EU, not that I particularly care much about them. They made their choice to move abroad, so they can get on with, but the silence on their rights is deafening.

    Well we appear to have that answered now. As posted on anotherbthread - https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/…sk-markets-live

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!