PM Boris forms a government

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Er, more like a fifth columnist.

One Conservative speaking to another Conservative doesn't make either a fifth columnist.

Slowly becoming a bigger and bigger story but more EU citizens are getting denied fulled status despite meeting the alleged requirements: https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-br...-idUKKCN1VK0CV

Anna Amato was just two when she moved to Britain from Italy with her parents 55 years ago.

She has lived in Britain ever since, attending school and university, working in a variety of jobs, and paying taxes. She has always lived in the city of Bristol in the west of England, marrying a British husband and raising two British children.

Like thousands of European Union nationals who have made Britain their home after living in the country for decades, Amato always assumed she had earned the legal right to settle permanently.

But the government didn’t agree. The interior ministry rejected her request for permanent residency last year, saying she did not have enough evidence to document her status.

Originally Posted by Damien

Slowly becoming a bigger and bigger story but more EU citizens are getting denied fulled status despite meeting the alleged requirements: https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-br...-idUKKCN1VK0CV

Errr ... you’re usually a little more measured than this. Is the constitutional chaos getting to you?

There are a couple of problems here. The first is, how do we say people have met the “alleged requirements” if they can’t provide the evidence? What evidence are you leaning on in order to judge this case?

Second, if she has met the requirements but her application has failed because of an excessively rigid application of the rules, how does that amount to politicians lying? Are you (or Reuters) suggesting a systematic programme of denying settled status to people who ought to qualify, in order to keep the numbers down?

Third, are we seriously still pretending we don’t understand the difference between a referendum campaign, in which participants suggest what opportunities their preferred outcome might present, and an electoral campaign in which the winners gain power and may reasonably be expected to make good on their promises?

Originally Posted by Chris

Errr ... you’re usually a little more measured than this. Is the constitutional chaos getting to you?

No, I know people who get impacted by this rubbish process and it's terrible.

Originally Posted by Chris

There are a couple of problems here. The first is, how do we say people have met the “alleged requirements” if they can’t provide the evidence? What evidence are you leaning on in order to judge this case?

How many people actually have solid evidence they've been here for a long time? It turns out the Government do not seem to be able to refer to their own tax records half the time even though they claim they can so often applicants need to find their own proof and if you've lived here for decades chances are you haven't kept meticulous records of these details.

People can try to find mortgage statements, bank statements, whatever they can but it's never clear if this will be enough to satisfy the person judging these things. This is worse for people with less conventional working arrangements since P60s e.t.c are the best evidence but even then they request additional evidence you were in the country for the duration of that tax year.

Turning around to people who've never had to question their right to be here and demand they provide evidence of that is an awful way to treat people.

Second, if she has met the requirements but her application has failed because of an excessively rigid application of the rules, how does that amount to politicians lying? Are you (or Reuters) suggesting a systematic programme of denying settled status to people who ought to qualify, in order to keep the numbers down?

I removed that, presumably while you were posting, because I felt it went too far but there isn't a doubt in my mind they had no idea if people would be fine and just didn't care. It was a game to them, the assurances a soundbite to help manage a risk in the campaign.

But the politicians I was referring to are in charge now and have yet to make it clear what happens when we leave. I know of EU residents that aren't applying in case they get rejected but at the same time this might cause a problem for their work, for getting back in the country and for the NHS.

There will be loads of EU citizens that either 1) fall foul of the system or 2) don't apply come October 31st.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

One Conservative speaking to another Conservative doesn't make either a fifth columnist.

One insider passing information to an outsider hellbent on subverting the Referendum doth a fifth columnist make. As if you didn't know.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

One insider passing information to an outsider hellbent on subverting the Referendum doth a fifth columnist make. As if you didn't know.

She's a committed Brexiter - "shadow director" Dominic Cummings comes across as a tad insecure here.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

One insider passing information to an outsider hellbent on subverting the Referendum doth a fifth columnist make. As if you didn't know.

She worked for Liam Fox and the Taxpayers Alliance - not sure you’re being accurate with your supposition.

When I was a Area Vice-Chairman for the Yorkshire Area Young Conservatives (and a member of the National Executive, and on the Candidates List), I had in my phone contacts a number of Labour Party members (including an MP), some trade union officials, TRG and FCS members (groups in the Tory Party with completely opposite views), and Social Democrats (remember them?) - these were family, friends, colleagues and ex-colleagues; did that make me a "fifth columnist"?

When we fire people because of their contacts, it is the first step on a very slippery road...

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Hugh

She worked for Liam Fox and the Taxpayers Alliance - not sure you’re being accurate with your supposition.

When I was a Area Vice-Chairman for the Yorkshire Area Young Conservatives (and a member of the National Executive, and on the Candidates List), I had in my phone contacts a number of Labour Party members (including an MP), some trade union officials, TRG and FCS members (groups in the Tory Party with completely opposite views), and Social Democrats (remember them?) - these were family, friends, colleagues and ex-colleagues; did that make me a "fifth columnist"?

When we fire people because of their contacts, it is the first step on a very slippery road...

I'm a bit mystified by the fifth columnist rhetoric given her pro-Brexit beliefs.
Sounds like she was quite open about meeting a fellow Conservative even if they didn't agree on Brexit. Heck, she even gave Cummings her personal phone as well as her work one. This doesn't come across as how a strong democracy should function in 2019.

[jfman]

Some of the best contacts are surely your opponents. Old politics would involve trading of deals here and there, you support this amendment, we will do this... you abstain from this vote, we might be able to find something here. Not in a corrupt sense, but the sense of trying to give everyone something that we all just get along.

Brexit politics isn't like that. It's do or die for both sides. No deal vs remain. Normal rules of politics are gone.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

Slowly becoming a bigger and bigger story but more EU citizens are getting denied fulled status despite meeting the alleged requirements: https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-br...-idUKKCN1VK0CV

Under the government’s plans, EU citizens who can prove they have lived continuously in Britain for five years will be granted settled status, giving them the same rights to work, study and benefits they currently hold.
...
The interior ministry said Amato had not reapplied under its EU Settlement Scheme and that it had told her where to get assistance with the process.

The government launched its EU Settlement Scheme for registering EU citizens in January this year.

[1andrew1]

Why don't you give the source of your quotes?

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Why don't you give the source of your quotes?

Could be worse, could be behind a paywall.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by pip08456

Could be worse, could be behind a paywall.

It could be, we can't tell that from the post itself as a source isn't listed.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

It could be, we can't tell that from the post itself as a source isn't listed.

The source has already been listed. It's just that certain people only take quotes out of context to suit their agenda.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Why don't you give the source of your quotes?

Because it was it had already referred to in the post I was replying to. The quotes I used were later on in that same article. Perhaps I should have highlighted that. Effectively it had been referred to in the "Originally posted by Damian" part of my reply.