1. Dear Ms Caulfield,

    Yesterday you voted against a motion that would guarantee the right of EU citizens already in the UK to continue to live and work here.

    I am one of a family of four of such EU citizens. My wife builds sewage treatments plants, a vital if often underappreciated service, for Southern Water. I teach economics at the University of Sussex, probably one of the largest exporters in the area. Our alumni quickly find well-paid and secure jobs. Our children attend the local primary school. We pay our taxes. My wife volunteers in the local PTA. I regularly volunteer my expertise in energy and environment to the Houses of Parliament. We spend most of our income in the local economy. Frequent visits by friends and family from abroad support the local tourist industry. We love Sussex and its people. To the dismay of their grandmother, our children speak English in a Southeastern accent.

    I can interpret yesterday’s vote in one of two ways. Either you think it is acceptable to play politics with other people’s lives, or you would like to see us leave this country. Could you kindly explain why you voted as you did?

    Best regards


    Richard

    -----------------

    Dear Richard

    I did not vote against EU citizens staying in the EU. This was an opposition debate that has no bearing on Government business. It would be wrong to quantify, as in the opposition motion yesterday, what movement of people will be allowed under our negotiated settlement which has only just started. That said the PM made it very clear yesterday that all existing EU citizens will be able to stay in the UK and that work is being done to ensure as many EU workers are able to move freely here once we leave.

    The vote yesterday was the SNP playing politics and deliberately undermining our ability to negotiate the best deal for Britain and ensuring we are able to have free movement of people from the EU. My family are also from the EU and so I have a particular interest in ensuring free movement continues.

    I hope that reassures you.

    Maria

    --------------

    Dear Maria,

    No, this does not reassure me at all.

    You argue that the motion reflects your position and the position of your party leader. Yet you voted against it. Please forgive me for finding that rather odd.

    Please also forgive me for taking offense that you intend to treat the rights of my children and my wife, and many others in similar positions, as cards to be negotiated with.

    Best regards

    Richard

    -------------


    It was an opposition day debate that has no legislative bearing but would undermine the position of the Government to negotiate if it had been seen as a fixed position of Parliament.

    If this had been a Gov motion which would have actually changed the laws in this country then I would have voted against it. It was just a debate. Opposition debates never hold more weight than just being a debate and never hold any legislative power.


    Maria 

    -------------

    Dear Maria,

    Thank you for clearing that up.

    To you and your friends in Westminster, this is just politics. To me, this is about the rights and future of my family.

    Best

    Richard

    -------------

    Dear Richard

    I am not a fan of opposition debates as they are just political debates that have no substance in terms of outcome but I appreciate that they send a message to constituents that does not reflect what will be the outcome of our negotiations but does in fact cause unnecessary anxiety and distress.

    I am hoping to go on to the Brexit select committee where we hold the Government to account on this process and I will very much be ensuring that EU residents who are here have the protection and reassurance they need when the repeal bill comes before parliament.

    Best wishes


    Maria

    ----------

    Dear Maria,

    May I point out that opposition is a crucial part of any democracy?

    Best

    Richard
    1

    View comments

  2. The news that the government is considering turning the Nissan plant into a bonded warehouse -- essentially ceding part of Sunderland to France, much like part of Calais is governed from the United Kingdom -- so that Single Market rules continue to apply, reminded me of a more radical but ultimately easier proposal.

    The Brexit vote was primarily about immigration. The Single Market has four Freedoms of Movement, for goods, capital, services and workers. Brexiteers want to end the FoM for workers. The EU says that the four Freedoms are inseparable.

    The EU is wrong. Liechtenstein and Georgia, Moldova & Ukraine* have three of the four Freedoms, Liechtenstein because it does not want its houses to be bought up by rich foreigners, Georgia, Moldova & Ukraine because the EU does not want another influx of workers willing to accept low wages.

    More pertinently, the Crown Dependencies (Guernsey, Isle of Man, Jersey) also have three of the four Freedoms.

    If those parts of the UK that want to leave the EU -- Mercia, Northumbria, East Anglia, Kent, Cornwall, Wessex, Wales -- are turned into Crown Dependencies, they will be free to control immigration. Article 50 does not need to be invoked, and the rest of the UK -- London, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Sussex -- remains in the EU.

    This proposal implies devolution. It is therefore unlikely that any Westminster politician will support this proposal.

    Update (16 Oct 2016):
    There are no border checks between the UK and the current Crown Dependencies, nor should there be for the proposed Crown Dependencies. With three Freedoms and free travel for tourism and business, border checks are not required. However, residency checks will need to be put in place for buying and renting properties, and for labour contracts.

    The Scottish National Party under Nicola Sturgeon have suggested that the powers to negotiate international treaties be devolved to Scotland. Constitutionally, that proposal is at least as far-reaching as the one above.

    *Update (18 Oct 2016)
    Added Georgia and Moldova. Note that the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area applies to selected sectors only. Note that the Association Agreement with Ukraine has yet to enter into force.

    Update (20 Oct 2016)
    London is now considering London-only visas, and giving serious thought to it.

    Update (23 Nov 2016)
    Sign the petition!

    Update (29 Nov 2016)
    MoneyWeek on exemptions to the Four Freedoms.

    Update (5 June 2018)
    I'm not alone, although some want the whole of the UK to be like Jersey.
    1

    View comments

Blog roll
Blog roll
Translate
Translate
Blog Archive
About Me
About Me
Subscribe
Subscribe
Loading
Dynamic Views theme. Powered by Blogger. Report Abuse.