Theresa May’s government has vowed to overturn a demand by the House of Lords to guarantee the rights of EU citizens living in the EU.
Our readers – some of them EU citizens in the UK, some UK citizens living in the EU – have been discussing what the peers had to say during their debate, as well as the result of thevote by 358 to 256 to amend the Brexit bill.
Below is a selection of views shared below an opinion piece by Polly Toynbee. You can join the conversation by clicking the links in the comments.
‘I would rather EU citizens in the UK be allowed to get on with their lives’
‘We can demonstrate the UK’s intentions by publishing now our offer to EU citizens’
I have relatives both sides of this debate: a French citizen who lives in the UK; and a UK citizen who lives in Italy. In both cases, partners and children are also involved. I see their situations as being mirror images of each other, and would like both to be able to remain in their countries of residence on similar conditions to now.
We can demonstrate the UK's intentions on goodwill in this regard by publishing now our offer to EU citizens, including issues such as access to healthcare and benefits which could be sticking points. We would ask the EU to respond in kind. The ball would then be their court, and other EU governments interested in securing their citizens' rights here (most governments are interested in their citizens wherever they reside) would be likely to support agreement. The indications, however, are that the EU is not prepared to reach an agreement before article 50 is triggered.
‘We owe it in the name of decency to issue a promise to the EU citizens living here’
The simple fact is that it is the UK which has opted to withdraw from the EU for it's own reasons. We owe it in the name of decency to issue a promise that none of the EU citizens living here when we leave will be asked to go and we must do this now. It should have been done within days of the referendum. People are suffering because of this failure by May's government.
The fate of UK citizens living in the other 27 states will be up to those states to decide. They will all loose their EU citzenship from day 1, but that will not be the fault of the host nation but of the UK.
‘I don’t believe the Lords should be embarrassed to use their power’
I don't think there is any doubt that we need a properly functioning 2nd House as a safeguard for if/when the 1st House sinks into collective infamy and the 2nd House we have is what our Governments have made it over the years.
They want the 2nd House to give the appearance of being a safeguard but to be embarrassed to use their power.
At almost any time a Government of the day could have made the 2nd House truly representative by declaring it should be formed by a transparent electoral process of some kind, and I don't believe the Lords could have and would not have wanted to object to this,
because it would obviously be hugely popular in the Country and would have created a far more powerful 2nd House.
I don't believe the Lords should be embarrassed to use their power even though I think it should be radically reformed, as in not doing so it is playing into hands of our sitting Government which wants us to be ruled by the dictatorship of the leader of the elected party in the Commons.
‘If we do it the way the Lords want, there is no incentive to do a quick deal’
The EU have refused to do an early deal on rights because they won't talk to the UK until Article 50 is triggered. Many have pointed out that the quickest way to help both EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the EU is to get on with triggering Article 50 and come to a swift agreement on reciprocal rights.
If we do it that way, the EU has an incentive to act. Once they can no longer hide behind a refusal to negotiate until Article 50 is triggered, they will face political pressure to get a deal done or they will be accused of using people as bargaining chips and leave themselves open to accusations that they don't care about people's welfare.
If we do it the way the Lords want, there is no incentive to do a quick deal. UK citizens in the EU are going to have to wait who knows how many years to have their status assured because it simply won't be a priority for the EU after they've had their citizens' rights unilaterally guaranteed.
The best way to protect both groups is to trigger Article 50 as soon as possible.
‘What exactly did we expect from the woman who defined her own party as “nasty”?’
What exactly did we expect? From the woman who defined her own party as "nasty"? She's living up to it.
Sadly though the point I believe is that the majority of people in this country would support her in not guaranteeing their rights. The country is more right wing and reactionary than ever before. It's clear that there has been an undercurrent of racism in this country for years and it is now boiling over. Who you blame is anyone's guess. Depressing.
‘The EU are not above treating our citizens as pawns’
The EU are withholding assurances for one million UK nationals and Juncker wants payment of 'a hefty sum' of around 50 BN as part of any package, so the EU are not above treating our citizens as pawns.
Remainers would like us to believe that their motives are purely honourable, but Europhiles have a long history of refusing referenda, ignoring referenda, overturning referenda, regime-changing leaders who threaten their project (Mrs Thatcher, Berlusconi, Dominic Strauss-Khan, various Greek leaders etc).
Their amendments on EU nationals are accompanied by amendments to take back control of the decision on Brexit. They would like voters to change their mind, and they perceive their best chance of achieving this is by forcing Theresa May into a bad Brexit Deal or no Deal. By securing unilateral guarantees for the rights of the EU27, Liberal and Labour peers are making it easier for them to offer the kind of unfavourable deal, which they otherwise couldn't risk, that Remainers hopes will get voters to change their mind and allow Brexit to be cancelled.
The Daily Mail is right.
‘Without the Lord’s amendments none of us in Europe have much hope of May “doing a deal” on citizenship’
The basic problem is that without the Lord's amendments none of us in Europe have much hope of May 'doing a deal' on citizenship because she's likely to try and tie it to other issues.
There is absolutely no sign that any member of the EU will try and take rights away from UK citizens in the EU, of which I'm one. From the reaction to people around us to the statements and hopes of politicians, the EU is a far more credible guardian of our rights than the tories who are far more likely to use threats in this area to extract concessions in trade. Which presumably is why UK citizens living in Europe have been pushing the amendment.
What the government should be doing is making it crystal clear that they won't descend into that sort of 'negotiation', will treat residence rights separately and will try and minimise bureaucratic obstacles, given that UK procedures seem to be amongst the most needlessly complicated in Europe.
I'm a Brit in the EU. I would rather EU citizens in the UK be allowed to get on with their life. If I eventually have to leave then that's nobody's fault but Brexit voters in the UK.
Secondly, the Home Office doesn't have to expel anyone, it can just make life impossible with their hostile environment policy (freezing bank accounts, removing driving licence, making it a crime to work or rent when in the country illegally). The 28% of EU citizens who have applied for ILR and received rejection letters are on their radar. If this were not the case then why make it such a complicated procedure prone to rejection when it should be a simple formality?