The Lords debate exposed the prime minister’s contradictory and deceitful arguments against protecting EU citizens living here. If, on this most popular and painfully human question, she will give no inch, that’s a terrible augury for how she intends to conduct these negotiations, opening with a war cry to all 27 countries: we hold your people hostage. The Mail says: “It’s the bloody-minded Brussels bureaucracy, not her, that is bargaining with family lives and happiness.” Because, of course, she is “pushing hard for a deal that upholds the rights of all expats”. This is just a “remoaner” wrecking tactic, “a naked bid to sabotage Brexit by creating difficulties for Mrs May”. As the Guardian reports heart-rending cases of threats to longtime EU residents with British spouses and children born here, Helena Kennedy gave the shocking statistic that a third of all their applications for residency are being turned down by the Home Office. Whoever knew that if they hadn’t had private health insurance in the past they could be cast out for all time?
Yet one Brexit peer after another rose to swear there was never any question of expelling them. Ministers, including the foreign secretary, have assured the TV cameras it will never happen. But if so, why not accept this amendment with good grace when it returns to the Commons?
No, they say: these 3 million people must be used as hostages – though representatives of the 1.2 million Britons in the EU say they want this amendment passed, as an act of goodwill. You can’t bargain unless you sincerely mean to carry out the threat. So which is it?
Mass expulsions would be unthinkable – May as the new Idi Amin? Besides, for a depleted police, border force and administrators, it would be a crippling near-impossibility. Are we really to say goodbye to 55,000 doctors and nurses, a million care workers and prized university students while devastating industries from agriculture to car-washing, hi-tech IT to finance, catering and tourism? Forget tourism entirely – we would become pariahs.
So which is it: they can definitely stay – in which case just accept that amendment and tell the world – or rattle a sabre you may then be forced to use, whatever the self-harm?
Ana
Total
Total :
Jumlah Artikel
Diberdayakan oleh Blogger.
-
...if you are very, very rich. (Most mss. of this age and quality are in national or university libraries and are not for sale at any price...
-
I haven't seen a lot of Fellini movies, and I certainly missed this one when it first came out. It may be just as well -- I don't kn...
Kamis, 02 Maret 2017
Langganan:
Posting Komentar (Atom)
Recent
Weekly
-
...if you are very, very rich. (Most mss. of this age and quality are in national or university libraries and are not for sale at any price...
-
A dissent from the Globe and Mail's endorsement: Anyone but Harper.
-
I haven't seen a lot of Fellini movies, and I certainly missed this one when it first came out. It may be just as well -- I don't kn...
-
An excerpt of the review on the e-mail list, TMR-L (The Medieval Review) , a useful and timely resource you can subscribe to free. Greco, Gi...
-
That's what one expert said about the biggest Anglo-Saxon treasure trove ever found -- a huge collection of items, many of them stripped...
-
I am indebted to the Iraqi journalists who report for McClatchy, an American news service, from Baghdad. In recent days they have been inter...
-
Carnivalesque is a monthly "carnival" which collects interesting links from blogs that discuss pre-modern history. Every other ...
-
Not exactly puritanical: From Arabist.net with this commentary: A wonderful video in the context of calls for strict censorship in state...
-
I am working away at a book about French military history in the 14th century, and I've just come to the realization that my planned tit...
-
For non-Muslims in countries that are historically non-Muslim, understanding the sufi tradition in Islam is perhaps difficult. It's mys...
0 Comment to "Britain is also earning a new reputation"
Posting Komentar