EU negotiators will offer Brits an individual opt-in to remain EU citizens, chief negotiator confirms

Exclusive: Guy Verhofstadt has fast-tracked the plan and will include it in his mandate

EU negotiators will offer British people the chance to individually opt-in and remain EU citizens as a proposal in Brexit negotiations, the European Parliament’s chief negotiator has confirmed.
The plan, first revealed in its early stages by The Independent last month, was being considered as a long-term aim by the European Parliament – but has now been fast-tracked to the negotiating table by Guy Verhofstadt, who is in charge of thrashing out a post-Brexit deal.
Mr Verhofstadt said the “very important” proposal had “captured the imagination and hopes” of many British people who wished to retain their rights as EU citizens and would be in his negotiating mandate.

The plan would see Brits offered individual “associate citizenship”, letting them keep free movement to live and work across the EU, as well as a vote in European Parliament elections.
The proposal could potentially give Brits who live and work across borders a workaround to the disruption caused by the Leave vote – and young people looking to flee an increasingly isolated UK greater choice over where to move to.
Depending on the approach taken by EU negotiators, the idea would likely be subject to approval by the British Government.
Mr Verhofstadt is drawing up a report with the European Parliament’s Committee on Constitutional Affairs about proposed long-term changes to the EU’s structure. The plan was originally proposed by Luxembourg MEP Charles Goerens for inclusion in the report, but will now bypass that process and be taken forward independently.

The chief negotiator told the committee’s members: “We come to the vote of this important amendment 882, tabled by colleague Charles Goerens. It is an important amendment that has captured the imagination and hopes of many of the 48 per cent of Brits that have voted to remain in the EU. You will all have received many emails about this – and there has been many articles about this.

“It has therefore become a very important issue that cannot await treaty change – as envisaged by Charles when he first tabled it.
“I am therefore proposing to remove it from my report – which after all is concerned with Treaty change – and to include it in the negotiations we will have with the UK Government. I as Brexit negotiator for the Parliament will ensure that it is included in the parliament’s negotiating mandate.”
In a statement, Mr Goerens said: “Today I decided together with Guy Verhofstadt to withdraw my amendment on associate EU citizenship. We realised that this has become a very important issue that cannot await treaty change – as was my intention when I first tabled my amendment – since this might take years.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-citizenship-keep-freedom-of-movement-guy-verhofstadt-chief-negotiator-opt-in-passports-a7465271.html



Been talking to my grandchildren about this, it's something they definitely want to take up.

That will not go down well with the Leaver brigade

The whole thing is a bloody shambles for no other reason than the Tories screwed up the 2015 Referendum Act.

They only have themselves to blame for the mess it is all in now.

Yawn...!

sassy wrote:Been talking to my grandchildren about this, it's something they definitely want to take up.

Why be a citizen of just one state when you can be a citizen of 28? Makes no sense.

Depends if you want to be British or a Mongrel .

nicko wrote:Depends if you want to be British or a Mongrel .

British is mongrel.

We're leaving the eu... get over it!!!

I'm not - see above.

thats OK..you wanna stay...you can pay....

and we can have the same deal for those "E.U citizens" wishing to come here...

then that is the whole freedom of movement problem solved....

Lord Foul wrote:thats OK..you wanna stay...you can pay....

and we can have the same deal for those "E.U citizens" wishing to come here...

then that is the whole freedom of movement problem solved....

I never had a problem with freedom of movement.

well thats what the whole thing is about....

Ziz wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:thats OK..you wanna stay...you can pay....

and we can have the same deal for those "E.U citizens" wishing to come here...

then that is the whole freedom of movement problem solved....

I never had a problem with freedom of movement.

Well... 75% of British people want an end to it...


http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBREA0600F20140107

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ziz wrote:

I never had a problem with freedom of movement.

Well... 75% of British people want an end to it...


http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBREA0600F20140107

Tough on them.

No... in a democracy, the tail does not wag the dog... so tough on you and the rest of the minority who support it.

Tommy Monk wrote:No... in a democracy, the tail does not wag the dog... so tough on you and the rest of the minority who support it.

Just wait and watch the tail have the last laugh.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ziz wrote:

I never had a problem with freedom of movement.

Well... 75% of British people want an end to it...


http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBREA0600F20140107

That would be 75% of the people polled who want that.

How many people did they poll?
Where were they polled? In the street? Outside of UKIP head office?

nicko wrote:Depends if you want to be British or a Mongrel .

Watch your use of terms like "mongrel" that imply that someone of mixed European ancestry, like every American and Australian on this site, are not "pure."

Spindleshanks wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Well... 75% of British people want an end to it...


http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBREA0600F20140107

That would be 75% of the people polled who want that.

How many people did they poll?
Where were they polled?  In the street? Outside of UKIP head office?

Do you think all polls are wrong...?

Or is it just the ones that show a result that you don't like that you think are wrong...?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:

That would be 75% of the people polled who want that.

How many people did they poll?
Where were they polled?  In the street? Outside of UKIP head office?

Do you think all polls are wrong...?

Or is it just the ones that show a result that you don't like that you think are wrong...?

I don't have a lot of faith in polls, no.

Ziz wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:No... in a democracy, the tail does not wag the dog... so tough on you and the rest of the minority who support it.

Just wait and watch the tail have the last laugh.

So you support a form of 'democracy' where the will of a minority is enacted, instead of the will of the majority being enacted...!?


How bizarre!!!


Doesn't sound like democracy to me... but more like a fascist dictatorship...!


Are you in favour of democracy or are you admitting that you support the imposition of a fascist dictatorship!?

Spindleshanks wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:

That would be 75% of the people polled who want that.

How many people did they poll?
Where were they polled?  In the street? Outside of UKIP head office?

Do you think all polls are wrong...?

Or is it just the ones that show a result that you don't like that you think are wrong...?

I don't have a lot of faith in polls, no.

Regardless of your political leanings , it is a trueism that the ONLY poll you value is the one that supports your bias opinion.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ziz wrote:

Just wait and watch the tail have the last laugh.

So you support a form of 'democracy' where the will of a minority is enacted, instead of the will of the majority being enacted...!?


How bizarre!!!


Doesn't sound like democracy to me... but more like a fascist dictatorship...!


Are you in favour of democracy or are you admitting that you support the imposition of a fascist dictatorship!?

Don't fret Tommy, I think you will be perfectly free to decide for yourself if you want to take up this offer or not.

Isn't freedom and democracy grand

Lord Foul wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:

I don't have a lot of faith in polls, no.

Regardless of your political leanings , it is a trueism that the ONLY poll you value is the one that supports your bias opinion.

How do you get that out of me stating I don't have a lot of faith in polls

Spindleshanks wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Well... 75% of British people want an end to it...


http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBREA0600F20140107

That would be 75% of the people polled who want that.

How many people did they poll?
Where were they polled?  In the street? Outside of UKIP head office?

"...Seventy seven percent of people wanted to see a reduction in immigration, the survey on Britain's social attitudes showed, matching the previous high in the 30-year data series from 2008..."


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Social_Attitudes_Survey

Tommy Monk wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:

That would be 75% of the people polled who want that.

How many people did they poll?
Where were they polled?  In the street? Outside of UKIP head office?

"...Seventy seven percent of people wanted to see a reduction in immigration, the survey on Britain's social attitudes showed, matching the previous high in the 30-year data series from 2008..."


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Social_Attitudes_Survey

How many people did they survey Tommy?

1000, 1000,000, 53,000,000?

Oh, 3,300.

Very small sample then.

Advantages

Relatively easy to administer

Can be developed in less time (compared to other data-collection methods)

Cost-effective, but cost depends on survey mode

Can be administered remotely via online, mobile devices, mail, email, kiosk, or telephone.

Conducted remotely can reduce or prevent geographical dependence

Capable of collecting data from a large number of respondents

Numerous questions can be asked about a subject, giving extensive flexibility in data analysis

With survey software, advanced statistical techniques can be utilized to analyze survey data to determine validity, reliability, and statistical significance, including the ability to analyze multiple variables

A broad range of data can be collected (e.g., attitudes, opinions, beliefs, values, behavior, factual).

Standardized surveys are relatively free from several types of errors



Disadvantages

The reliability of survey data may depend on the following factors:

Respondents may not feel encouraged to provide accurate, honest answers

Respondents may not feel comfortable providing answers that present themselves in a unfavorable manner.

Respondents may not be fully aware of their reasons for any given answer because of lack of memory on the subject, or even boredom.

Surveys with closed-ended questions may have a lower validity rate than other question types.

Data errors due to question non-responses may exist. The number of respondents who choose to respond to a survey question may be different from those who chose not to respond, thus creating bias.

Survey question answer options could lead to unclear data because certain answer options may be interpreted differently by respondents. For example, the answer option “somewhat agree” may represent different things to different subjects, and have its own meaning to each individual respondent. ‘Yes’ or ‘no’ answer options can also be problematic.

Respondents may answer “no” if the option “only once” is not available.

Customized surveys can run the risk of containing certain types of errors

http://www.snapsurveys.com/blog/advantages-disadvantages-surveys/

Spindleshanks wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


"...Seventy seven percent of people wanted to see a reduction in immigration, the survey on Britain's social attitudes showed, matching the previous high in the 30-year data series from 2008..."


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Social_Attitudes_Survey

How many people did they survey Tommy?

1000, 1000,000, 53,000,000?

The Rolls Royce of opinion surveys.' - The Times

'...an important barometer of opinion...' - The Telegraph

'...invaluable surveys of the national mood...' - Guardian

'...examines who we think we are, what we think, and how self-perceptions have changed over the past 25 years.' - Financial Times

The annual British Social Attitudes survey is carried out by Britain's largest independent social research organisation, the National Centre for Social Research. It provides an indispensable guide to political and social issues in contemporary Britain, summarising and interpreting data from the most recent nationwide survey, as well as drawing invaluable comparisons with the findings of previous years to provide a richer picture and deeper understanding of changing British social values.

The 27th Report focuses on the national mood after three terms of a Labour government. It includes analysis of the reaction to Labour's policies in health and education and explores people's perceptions of social mobility and inequality. It also examines the extent to which the banking crisis and MP's expenses scandal have shaped public attitudes and values

The British Social Attitudes survey report is essential reading for anyone seeking a guide to the topical issues and debates of today or engaged in contemporary social and political research.

https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/british-social-attitudes/book235675

Right, so the result of this poll wouldn't have had anything to do with this then?

The issue has been brought into sharp relief by the lifting of restrictions on Romanian and Bulgarian citizens' right to work in Britain on January 1

If you notice that article is dated Jan 7th 2014, the above took place on Jan 1st 2014, hence given that the survey will have been held at a point prior to Jan 1st 2014 did it not occur to you that this might have played a big part in the result? That a large part of the 3,300 people who responded to that survey might have done so based on the opening of the borders to these people?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ziz wrote:

Just wait and watch the tail have the last laugh.

So you support a form of 'democracy' where the will of a minority is enacted, instead of the will of the majority being enacted...!?


How bizarre!!!


Doesn't sound like democracy to me... but more like a fascist dictatorship...!


Are you in favour of democracy or are you admitting that you support the imposition of a fascist dictatorship!?

I am not a nationalist and not unreasonably I actively support measures to thwart Brexit - it's how democracy works.

Spindleshanks wrote:Right, so the result of this poll wouldn't have had anything to do with this then?

The issue has been brought into sharp relief by the lifting of restrictions on Romanian and Bulgarian citizens' right to work in Britain on January 1

If you notice that article is dated Jan 7th 2014, the above took place on Jan 1st 2014, hence given that the survey will have been held at a point prior to Jan 1st 2014 did it not occur to you that this might have played a big part in the result?  That a large part of the 3,300 people who responded to that survey might have done so based on the opening of the borders to these people?

"...Seventy seven percent of people wanted to see a reduction in immigration, the survey on Britain's social attitudes showed, matching the previous high in the 30-year data series from 2008..."

Ziz wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


So you support a form of 'democracy' where the will of a minority is enacted, instead of the will of the majority being enacted...!?


How bizarre!!!


Doesn't sound like democracy to me... but more like a fascist dictatorship...!


Are you in favour of democracy or are you admitting that you support the imposition of a fascist dictatorship!?

I am not a nationalist and not unreasonably I actively support measures to thwart Brexit - it's how democracy works.

So you support measures to thwart the return of democracy of the british people...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:Right, so the result of this poll wouldn't have had anything to do with this then?

The issue has been brought into sharp relief by the lifting of restrictions on Romanian and Bulgarian citizens' right to work in Britain on January 1

If you notice that article is dated Jan 7th 2014, the above took place on Jan 1st 2014, hence given that the survey will have been held at a point prior to Jan 1st 2014 did it not occur to you that this might have played a big part in the result?  That a large part of the 3,300 people who responded to that survey might have done so based on the opening of the borders to these people?

"...Seventy seven percent of people wanted to see a reduction in immigration, the survey on Britain's social attitudes showed, matching the previous high in the 30-year data series from 2008..."

Yawn.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ziz wrote:

I am not a nationalist and not unreasonably I actively support measures to thwart Brexit - it's how democracy works.

So you support measures to thwart the return of democracy of the british people...!?

I do not recognize it as such - but give me a shout if and when the Head of State, the PM and the House of Lords are elected by the people.

Spindleshanks wrote:Right, so the result of this poll wouldn't have had anything to do with this then?

The issue has been brought into sharp relief by the lifting of restrictions on Romanian and Bulgarian citizens' right to work in Britain on January 1

If you notice that article is dated Jan 7th 2014, the above took place on Jan 1st 2014, hence given that the survey will have been held at a point prior to Jan 1st 2014 did it not occur to you that this might have played a big part in the result?  That a large part of the 3,300 people who responded to that survey might have done so based on the opening of the borders to these people?

You post article speculation waffle...


I posted the fact that this poll has previously found that an equally high percentage of uk people felt exactly the same on immigration in the past too!


And I bet that if you looked at the actual poll results for all years... you would find a similar result every year.

Not this one:

A majority of voters now want the UK to remain in the EU, a poll has suggested.

Remaining is now backed by an extremely slim majority of 51 per cent, versus 49 per cent who wish to leave the EU.

This suggests a small number of voters have changed their views since the UK voted to leave the EU by a margin of 52-48 on 23 June.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-poll-majority-uk-remain-eu-theresa-may-article-50-second-referendum-latest-a7395811.html

Tommy Monk wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:Right, so the result of this poll wouldn't have had anything to do with this then?

The issue has been brought into sharp relief by the lifting of restrictions on Romanian and Bulgarian citizens' right to work in Britain on January 1

If you notice that article is dated Jan 7th 2014, the above took place on Jan 1st 2014, hence given that the survey will have been held at a point prior to Jan 1st 2014 did it not occur to you that this might have played a big part in the result?  That a large part of the 3,300 people who responded to that survey might have done so based on the opening of the borders to these people?

You post article speculation waffle...


I posted the fact that this poll has previously found that an equally high percentage of uk people felt exactly the same on immigration in the past too!


And I bet that if you looked at the actual poll results for all years... you would find a similar result every year.

Yeah, a high percentage of 3,300 people.

So what about the other 60 odd million people?

Ziz wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


So you support measures to thwart the return of democracy of the british people...!?

I do not recognize it as such - but give me a shout if and when the Head of State, the PM and the House of Lords are elected by the people.

Maybe you can explain how a vote in 1973 on staying in a simple trade arrangemet (on coal and steel) was permission for what we have now?

Spindleshanks wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


You post article speculation waffle...


I posted the fact that this poll has previously found that an equally high percentage of uk people felt exactly the same on immigration in the past too!


And I bet that if you looked at the actual poll results for all years... you would find a similar result every year.

Yeah, a high percentage of 3,300 people.

So what about the other 60 odd million people?

The Rolls Royce of opinion surveys.' - The Times

'...an important barometer of opinion...' - The Telegraph

'...invaluable surveys of the national mood...' - Guardian

'...examines who we think we are, what we think, and how self-perceptions have changed over the past 25 years.' - Financial Times

The annual British Social Attitudes survey is carried out by Britain's largest independent social research organisation, the National Centre for Social Research. It provides an indispensable guide to political and social issues in contemporary Britain, summarising and interpreting data from the most recent nationwide survey, as well as drawing invaluable comparisons with the findings of previous years to provide a richer picture and deeper understanding of changing British social values.

The 27th Report focuses on the national mood after three terms of a Labour government. It includes analysis of the reaction to Labour's policies in health and education and explores people's perceptions of social mobility and inequality. It also examines the extent to which the banking crisis and MP's expenses scandal have shaped public attitudes and values

The British Social Attitudes survey report is essential reading for anyone seeking a guide to the topical issues and debates of today or engaged in contemporary social and political research.

https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/british-social-attitudes/book235675

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ziz wrote:


I do not recognize it as such - but give me a shout if and when the Head of State, the PM and the House of Lords are elected by the people.

Maybe you can explain how a vote in 1973 on staying in a simple trade arrangemet (on coal and steel) was permission for what we have now?

Were the governments since 1973 not elected by the people.

None were given public consent to anything more than just a trade arrangement on coal and steel with Europe.

Tommy Monk wrote:None were given public consent to anything more than just a trade arrangement on coal and steel with Europe.

None were refused it either. Government's govern - the clue is in the name.

To govern... not to give away without consent.

Ben Reilly wrote:

nicko wrote:Depends if you want to be British or a Mongrel .

Watch your use of terms like "mongrel" that imply that someone of mixed European ancestry, like every American and Australian on this site, are not "pure."

The Brit's themselves aren't purebred,  despite what Stormee & co. may like to imagine...

First off, let's remember some of their "foreign" visitors over the centuries :
Celts,     Romans,     Vikings
Saxons,     Normans..        

Then there were all of those countries that they colonised over the last 400 years  :
India, Pakistan and Nepal
Canada and the USA
Several Caribbean countries
Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, New Guinea, the Solomons       
Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia
And plenty of African countries;

Which in turn allowed a lot more ethnic groups to intermingle with British society.

The current infux of modern day "immigrants" from Eastern Europe and the Middle East is just the latest phase in a history of regular migration going back over 2,000 years..                   

According to Ziz I am a Mongrel, and you are as well !!

NOT ALL dictionary meanings of the word "mongrel" are derogative,  nicko...

One of it's original meanings simply has "of mixed breeds", i.e. a crossbreed,  as in a hybrid between two or more different breeds of dogs..

While my ancestry is probably 75-->>80% Irish and British,  there is also 1/8th Aboriginal (via one great-grandfather..),  and some have suggested maybe a smattering of Italian as well in there somewhere.

So yes, nicko,  technically  someone could call me of a 'mongrel heritage'.  As are quite a few Aussies and Kiwis, Cannucks and Yanks, Brazilians and Argentinians..   And even a few Brits...

It is is only when someone looking for a fight chooses to use the word 'mongrel' in a derogative and abusive manner, that trouble starts..        

Understand that Wolfie.

nicko wrote:According to Ziz I am a Mongrel, and you are as well !!

We all are - there is no such a thing as purebred Brit or purebred anyone else.

Ziz wrote:

nicko wrote:According to Ziz I am a Mongrel, and you are as well !!

We all are - there is no such a thing as purebred Brit or purebred anyone else.

Ain't that the truth.   I think it would stop a lot of problems if everyone was DNA'd as to their backgrounds and the results given to them in public lol