When Article 50 Is Triggered

[sp1814]

I'm lead to understanding that those who voted to leave the EU, did so to gain back control of our laws and borders.

With that in mind - what should we do with the hundreds of thousands of EU citizens living and working in the UK?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-article-50-wont-be-triggered-this-week-theresa-may-eu-referendum-latest-news-rome-treaty-a7627676.html

Me, I think that those who can show that they have gainful employment should be granted a 'permanent right to remain' as they are contributing to the UK economy.

Would you be happy with them applying for visas? Or do you think that they should all go?

Sidebar - Theresa's hat is an abomination.

[Old_Geezer]

Surely any sensible interpretation of a right to family life means we'd have no right to prevent a non-criminal returning to their family. Not that we're obliged to accept further folk here.

[youngmafbog]

Provided they are paying their way, are not criminals and not taking benefits or handouts I see no reason why they should not stay.

As for family I think we could put a time limit on it. Bring your family over in the next 2 years no problem (although no benefits until enough NI payments have been made into the system). After the two years then normal visa resrtictions will apply.

We will at some point have to detach ourselves from the ECHR for something that our Judiciary has control over not a bunch of unelected liberal elite foreigners. That doesnt mean we should remove al the good protection it brings just remove the daft stuff. There should be no 'right' to family life in some circumstances for example.

[mikey4444]

What a pity that we can't send our own work-shy dole-bludgers abroad somewhere.

Instead we have to feed them, give them money to buy beer and "fags", pay their rent and council tax, and pay for the upkeep of their children.

[waterboatman]

If they are gainfully employed they should be allowed to stay. If not, they should go.

Islay, the difference being that our pensioners have paid their NI all their life, so are entitled to be treated. It's not free of charge, they have paid for it.
Immigrants from anywhere have not.

[Peter Pedant]

yes I agree the most important thing is a hat-change
we could call it Teresa's hat trick !

Togo is quite wrong in his polemic
The NHS is paid for out of current taxes from year to year - there is no carry over or insurance pot or pot of gold or credit or £350m a week. This means an employed immigrant is paying his current whack in taxes for the NHS and past expenditure on whatever is irrelevant. - and not surprisingly having contributed they, the immigrants want the care they have paid for in the current year.

unless of course with a brexit sense of fairness you make people pay for things that you then say they cant have because the colour of their skins is wrong or they pray 5 times a day

and in Mar 2017 I have heard the first cuckoo!
step forward NJ
//the UK will still be a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights and be subject to rulings by its court (which has nothing to do with the EU). // NJ
Yup human rights will not be affected as it is covered by a different treaty ( signed long before the common market act of 1973, 1949 I think )

so to paraphrase 3T - "blardy ooman rites - you mean we still got dem den ? - and dat bonfire of liberties dey promised us - to be replaced wiv de bill of greater ooman rites - dat ting - where in fact you find we dont av enny ? blardy eck - dat not what I voted for - no way ! end of !! "

however folks - today is the first time that I have seen someone acknowledge that 'ooman rites is narfing to do wiv Brexit - it never was, - but people have to be told [they voted for another pup]

[ yeah another £350m pound moment where people think they are voting for something ( better funding of the NHS and repeal of the Human Rights Act ) and find out instead they have voted for something else because the politicians were LYING to them again ! no change in that last bit then. )

[New Judge]

"....however folks - today is the first time that I have seen someone acknowledge that 'ooman rites is narfing to do wiv Brexit "

I've acknowledged it throughout, Peter and mentioned on here many times.

[Samjenko]

You need to take it down a notch or two, pp. How you get away with your comments about other ABers is a mystery that only the moderators and editor can answer.

[weecalf]

All fancy talk and big and new words .In my humble opinion it's just this nation saying how much will it cost to have our ball back

[Peter Pedant]

// You need to take it down a notch or two, pp.//

thank you SJ

how do I get away wiv it ? The AB editor is my father in law ?
( joke! joke ! - he isnt ! he wouldnt ! he shouldnt ! )

[Togo]

//The NHS is paid for out of current taxes from year to year - there is no carry over or insurance pot or pot of gold or credit or £350m a week.//

Oh no indeed, but managed properly there should be. If the money taken from me and millions like me, without our consent or say in where it was wasted had been left to the individual to invest in private health care, we would be able to enjoy the health care we deserve and have indeed paid for. No doubt the greedy would protest about that too, their default setting you see. Now having paid enough tax in the last 50 years to keep an immigrant family in luxury, I am to be told that I'm now a burden. Meeh.