Robert Christopher, a year ago, Cameron went to the EU asking for some form of concession on EU intransigence, to offer the UK electorate. He was sent away with a flea in his ear.

We are better to be the first out, because nothing was going to get better by staying in. Electorates in other countries can now see the UK Economy is doing better than all EU experts forecast, and is actually showing better growth because of BREXIT.

The longer this drags out, the worse the EU's bargaining position becomes.

"And the House of Lords (including many foreigners) has put EU citizens ahead of British subjects!"

What utter drivel.

The House of Lords has no such power. It has asked the House of Commons to think again. The Government will probably be intransigent, and the Lords will be forced to give way.

"What utter drivel."

Not really, even if the Commons votes it down it was the intention of their lord and ladyships to abandon 1.2 Million UK citizens to their fate, which will happen if the Commons vote it down.

To make it worse they weren't asked their opinion on this they were asked to give the government the power to trigger A50, they're just playing silly (old) buggers. Time to get shot of this anachronistic embarrassment and replace it with 100 appointed member in proportion to the poputar vote in the GE, giving a modicum of legitimacy and reducing its costs at the same time.

As to the EU cutting off its nose to spite its face, well the Commission and the Parliament would probably do that because they're not directly responsible to an electorate, I think the Council will me more conciliatory, while simultaneously trying to exact some pain from UK, "Pour encourager les autres".

geronimo
"it was the intention of their lord and ladyships to abandon 1.2 Million UK citizens to their fate, which will happen if the Commons vote it down".

I doubt very much that that was the intention of their loadships; a somewhat biased interpretation is that that will be the outcome. But then an equally biased view is that their lordships intended to demonstrate the UK's intention not to use EU citizens domiciled in the UK as bargaining chips.

If the Commons did vote "it" (the amendment?) down, how do you think UK citizens would be abandoned? I can see that if the amendment is voted down, UK citizens abroad might consider themselves abandoned because they might believe that both their interests and those of EU citizens in the UK were being sacrificed on the remote chance that their fate might influence negotiations.

The Lords, some of *them, took it upon themselves to show no concern about UK citizens living, and more importantly, working abroad in the EU with all the bureaucratic and financial implications of that. For those that hijacked the bill for a claim to the moral high ground, expose that to be only a feather bed afloat in a foetid swamp.

* Yesterday's people in the departure lounge.

Robert Christopher. How do you wish me to criticize the EU ? I will do it willingly. I believe the British Government made overtures, but were rebuffed by EU officials who informed EU leaders there should be no negotiations before Article 50 is applied for. So EU officials are entirely to blame for the lack of agreement, not the EU leaders. Nevertheless I feel it to be morally unconscionable to place the livelihoods of people on both sides into limbo. My feeling is that a unilateral gesture by the UK might prove very beneficial. There would be enormous pressure on EU leaders to respond in kind. Opposition from EU bureaucrats might well prove counterproductive. I don't want my country to score points by putting people's lives at risk.

Mar 5, 2017 at 2:33 PM | Supertroll

No one was asked to vote on the precise details of BREXIT, but those who voted to Remain, can be accused of registering their support for all the EU, Officials and Politicians, have ever done, are doing, and will do in the future.

I wanted a BREXIT win, to get rid of all of this bureaucratic mess, that the UK has been lumbered with, without the Electorate ever having been asked for an opinion.

The EU has never given the slightest indication that it intends to mend its ways. Post BREXIT, the EU level of arrogance has increased, not decreased, as the UK economy has improved despite all the EU expert advice.

I never saw BREXIT as a vote to get foreigners out of the UK. That has been a fabrication of the EU Remain camp. The EU seems keen to emphasise that BREXIT means Brits out of the EU. This does not appear to be fake news.

My feeling is that a unilateral gesture by the UK might prove very beneficial. Mar 5, 2017 at 2:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll

Q1.Your property, state pension rights, acquaintances of many years and children are located where exactly?

Penny dropped? No?

Q2. Should they be located in continental EU, would you want the British government to be cautious or cavalier about protection of them on your behalf?

Belle Epoque.

Not that it's any of your business but some of what you mention are in another country (not in the EU) and others in the UK. Having lived 17 years in North America and also having Canadian citizenship I choose to live in the UK. So no penny has dropped.

Yes I would hope the UK Government would act in my best interests if I were an ex-pat living outside the UK in the EU. But I don't see those interests being served by picking a fight. My view is that the interests of all parties would be best served by being magnanimous. I also believe that by unilaterally offering rights to EU citizens living in the UK we would gain thousands of fifth columnists acting on our behalf and precious good will within EU countries. Nothing we do will effectively prevent EU bureaucrats who are irretrievably opposed to Brexit from acting differently. Relying upon the weapon of EU citizens rights is an empty reed - no UK Government could wield it without causing chaos and bitter resentment.

Supertroll

You lost me at the straw man of 'picking a fight'.

You lost me at "penny dropped" but at least I tried to continue the conversation. Wasted effort it seems.

My feeling is that a unilateral gesture by the UK might prove very beneficial. Mar 5, 2017 at 2:33 PM | Unregistered Commenter Supertroll:

A tad naive!

If the leaders of the EU were a jolly good lot, thoughtful, had the interests of all in mind, then yes perhaps what you suggest might have been a possibility.

However, the leaders of the EU are not nice jolly people. They lead a corrupt organisation that has stated that they do not wish to see the UK to benefit from leaving the EU.

They were asked by PM May to guarantee the rights of expats in each EU state but refused.

What possible benefit could accrue from the UK acting alone on this matter?

I strongly feel that all those who suggest that the UK guarantees the rights of EU citizens in the UK are either absolutely naive, disingenuous or trying to sabotage the forthcoming negotiations.

Steve Richards. And I think that those who refuse to consider more humane options have lost their sense of humanity or are just spoiling for a fight. MAD

'picking a fight, spoiling for a fight'

Where has this been mentioned before? I expect this government to act with civility and in the best interests of its citizens.

Is there a febrile imagination at work here or just an attempt to stir up strong feelings?

You may be disappointed to find that 52% of the population are thoughtful, calm-headed and insightful. I have reason to believe that at least that percentage pertains to both sides of the channel.

I was not aware that the UK Government was looking to throw out all EU Citizens from the UK, and recall or abandon all UK Citizens living elsewhere in the EU.

It seems that is what the Lords have decided the EU will want.

I do not see that the UK Govt has been intransigent. Could the EU declare what it will decide before any negotiations start?