Brexit negotiations

[Scott-Copywriter]

I'm not sure they would as this could encourage nation-level brinkmanship.

I'm not sure either, but it would be an interesting experiment.

All we do know is that:

1). The EU would much prefer the UK to stay, and it would solve some major headaches.

2). The EU can't lose face and can't seem like it's giving preferential treatment to a country leaving the EU. It would still be preferential treatment if this was successfully used as leverage, of course, but ultimately that would only occur if the UK remains, not if it leaves. That's somewhat easier to deal with. And besides, we already get far more preferential treatment as an EU member than any other country. We have more opt-outs, no euro, and a big annual rebate.

Personally I think the EU would grab the opportunity, although to what degree I'm uncertain.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

I've been having a nostalgic look back at Cameron's negotiations today:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35616768

The key points of the deal are:

• An "emergency brake" on migrants' in-work benefits for four years when there are "exceptional" levels of migration. The UK will be able to operate the brake for seven years

• Child benefit for the children of EU migrants living overseas will now be paid at a rate based on the cost of living in their home country - applicable immediately for new arrivals and from 2020 for the 34,000 existing claimants

• The amending of EU treaties to state explicitly that references to the requirement to seek ever-closer union "do not apply to the United Kingdom", meaning Britain "can never be forced into political integration"

• The ability for the UK to enact "an emergency safeguard" to protect the City of London, to stop UK firms being forced to relocate into Europe and to ensure British businesses do not face "discrimination" for being outside the eurozone

Does anyone else feel that these new agreements were largely forgotten during the referendum campaign? I rarely ever saw them mentioned, and I think the remain campaign focused more on the existing relationship as it is now instead of the current relationship plus these new concessions.

In hindsight, I don't think they were too bad. A lot of campaigning involved talks of a "United states of Europe" that we'd be roped into, but we were to be given a legal omission from that. Other concessions would have reduced less "economically valuable" immigration down by a sizeable amount.

I think the emergency safeguard regarding the City of London and non-eurozone discrimination would have helped a lot too, particularly as it will now be in the EU's best interests to discriminate against us as clear-cut economic competitors.

I wonder how it would have played out if the result had gone the other way. I guess we'll never know.

 

[Gecko001]

I am not nostalgic about Mr. Cameron. He's the person who held the referendum in the first place. The ex PR man basically avoided a problem that was too hard for him and gave it too us to sort out for him. Thank you very much Mr Cameron, I hope you have a nice retirement. Close the door on the way out.

 

[Mr D]

I am not nostalgic about Mr. Cameron. He's the person who held the referendum in the first place. The ex PR man basically avoided a problem that was too hard for him and gave it too us to sort out for him. Thank you very much Mr Cameron, I hope you have a nice retirement. Close the door on the way out.

One of two PMs who promised a referendum but the only one to deliver it.

 

[Gecko001]

One of two PMs who promised a referendum but the only one to deliver it.

He delivered it OK. Many wish that he had not delivered it.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

I am not nostalgic about Mr. Cameron. He's the person who held the referendum in the first place. The ex PR man basically avoided a problem that was too hard for him and gave it too us to sort out for him. Thank you very much Mr Cameron, I hope you have a nice retirement. Close the door on the way out.

Personally I think Cameron is one of the reasons why leave won.

There was an interesting set of TV interviews up in the North East around the referendum date where people were asked their opinion. Almost all of them referred more about feeling ignored by the British government, and wanting to get back at them, than the EU itself.

If we look at the referendum result demographics, there was a sizeable leave majority amongst many of the working class communities. They were, of course, strongly against Cameron & co, particularly as 2016 was a time of peak austerity.

I'm well aware there was a lot more to the decision for pretty much everyone, but Cameron fighting to remain in the EU almost certainly made working class communities less likely to vote remain. Some people, particularly in the North East, would have shivered at the thought of siding with him.

I don't think the result would have changed if it was a different party, but I have no doubt that some people out there used the referendum vote just to stick two fingers up at Dave and the Tories. Even today, there's debate over how much of the vote was particularly against the EU, or just anti-establishment in general.

 

[Mr D]

He delivered it OK. Many wish that he had not delivered it.

Perhaps they voted for his party based on the election promises?
We don't know. But we can guess.

 

[Mr D]

Personally I think Cameron is one of the reasons why leave won.

There was an interesting set of TV interviews up in the North East around the referendum date where people were asked their opinion. Almost all of them referred more about feeling ignored by the British government, and wanting to get back at them, than the EU itself.

If we look at the referendum result demographics, there was a sizeable leave majority amongst many of the working class communities. They were, of course, strongly against Cameron & co, particularly as 2016 was a time of peak austerity.

I'm well aware there was a lot more to the decision for pretty much everyone, but Cameron fighting to remain in the EU almost certainly made working class communities less likely to vote remain. Some people, particularly in the North East, would have shivered at the thought of siding with him.

I don't think the result would have changed if it was a different party, but I have no doubt that some people out there used the referendum vote just to stick two fingers up at Dave and the Tories. Even today, there's debate over how much of the vote was particularly against the EU, or just anti-establishment in general.

Even if it hurt their own region.

As I recall some of those areas voting to leave were areas that received quite a bit of money via EU funding.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Even if it hurt their own region.

As I recall some of those areas voting to leave were areas that received quite a bit of money via EU funding.

Sunderland voted leave despite tens of thousands of people relying on the Nissan plant for jobs (either directly or via supply chains). Brexit always risked putting that on shaky ground.

Sunderland was also one of the main beneficiaries of EU funding. It's received tens of millions, and the EU's ERDF part-funded a multi-million pound business tech hub that now supports hundreds of local SMEs.

As far as immigration goes, the North East has the lowest level of EU migration in the country. In fact, it has the lowest level of non-British nationals full stop.

There are other examples, such as Broughton in Wales:

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...e-town-in-fear-after-brexit-warning-by-airbus

Flintshire, the county Broughton is in, voted to leave by a wide margin. Some Airbus employees even voted to leave, despite Airbus clearly warning about the possible ramifications before the referendum: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35958693

Perhaps they really were voting for the greater good of the UK, and were willing to sacrifice their jobs in that pursuit if it comes down to it. I'm doubtful though, so your guess is as good as mine.

 

[Newchodge]

Much as I hate to admit it, but I have found something on which I agree with Boris https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45483679

Of course the Chequers deal is worse than what we have at the moment, partly because "Mrs May's Chequers plan would mean "abandoning our seat around the table in Brussels and continuing to accept the single market legislation"."

Any deal we can get will be worse than we have now. So the logical position is ....?

 

[Mr D]

Much as I hate to admit it, but I have found something on which I agree with Boris https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45483679

Of course the Chequers deal is worse than what we have at the moment, partly because "Mrs May's Chequers plan would mean "abandoning our seat around the table in Brussels and continuing to accept the single market legislation"."

Any deal we can get will be worse than we have now. So the logical position is ....?

Ummm… I know I'm stupid - but isn't the whole point of Brexit that we are abandoning our seat around the table in Brussels?
Regardless of anything else we do.

 

[MBE2017]

Also, since you seem to believe in Brexit no matter the cost as a point of principle, let me ask you this:

How will Brexit benefit the poorest and most vulnerable in our society?

You misunderstand so much... I did vote to leave, but what I am most concerned about is the decision being honoured. Have any remainers thought about the damage ignoring the vote would cause?

As for your last question, that was not on the ballot paper, and until we are told of what is on offer hard to say much. This Gov seems intent like so many in this country of sabotaging Brexit at the expense of the UK’s interests. The so called negotiations have been conducted in a terrible manner.

One thing I believe everyone can agree on is the UK lacks and real vision and leadership.

 

[Mr D]

You misunderstand so much... I did vote to leave, but what I am most concerned about is the decision being honoured. Have any remainers thought about the damage ignoring the vote would cause?

As for your last question, that was not on the ballot paper, and until we are told of what is on offer hard to say much. This Gov seems intent like so many in this country of sabotaging Brexit at the expense of the UK’s interests. The so called negotiations have been conducted in a terrible manner.

One thing I believe everyone can agree on is the UK lacks and real vision and leadership.

If you want real vision and leadership, don't look at politicians to provide it. The best people to provide it won't stand as politicians.
Unfortunately under our system of government its only politicians who will make the political decisions.

 

[Steven001]

Regardless of any individual voter's motivation, Brexit was a vote against "an" establishment (The EU), but it wasn't a vote against "the" establishment (Our government).

Initially I would agree but since the vote I have to disagree as our own establishment has shown its disdain for our country and people in favor of the EU.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

You misunderstand so much... I did vote to leave, but what I am most concerned about is the decision being honoured. Have any remainers thought about the damage ignoring the vote would cause?

If the people were given the opportunity to change their mind and did so, I don't think there would be any lasting damage at all.

Just look at Ireland's constitution referendum in 2008/09: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eighth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

Voters rejected it in the first referendum, the text was adjusted to alleviate some concerns, and then voters approved it with a comfortable margin in the second referendum.

There was a fair bit of discontent, but ultimately, people moved on. In terms of voter participation in general elections, not much changed, with a 69.9% turnout in 2011 (before the referendums) and 65.1% in 2016 some years after, which is similar to 2007 turnout and more than in 2002.

While the government would be in hot water if it ignored the EU referendum result without a mandate, it's very hard for anyone to argue against the electorate changing their mind. A decision should be respected, until the same group of people make a different one.

The "anti-democracy" argument is also fairly weak, as the only argument against people changing their mind is that they shouldn't have been allowed the opportunity to do it. By extension, this suggests we should still leave the EU even if the will of the people is against it, but just avoid giving the people a chance to make that will known.

 

[The Byre]

Jaguar warning -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45489818

 

[Cobby]

I'm well aware there was a lot more to the decision for pretty much everyone, but Cameron fighting to remain in the EU almost certainly made working class communities less likely to vote remain. Some people, particularly in the North East, would have shivered at the thought of siding with him.

As if the chase for austerity wasn't enough, the last couple of years have shown those in government harbour an extraordinary amount of disdain for the citizens and residents of this country. I think that Boris Johnson is top of that pile as one of the most dishonest and vacuous individuals to have held office in living memory.

So, one of my Leave voting friends (now Remain) said in the pub the other night, "If Boris took over the Tories but managed to swing the party around and push to abandon Brexit, would you vote Conservative?"

It was a really good question and we spent the rest of the night chewing on that conversation and the outcome was split amongst us. I think I might.

 

[Newchodge]

So, one of my Leave voting friends (now Remain) said in the pub the other night, "If Boris took over the Tories but managed to swing the party around and push to abandon Brexit, would you vote Conservative?"

It was a really good question and we spent the rest of the night chewing on that conversation and the outcome was split amongst us. I think I might.

but would you trust him to do it?

 

[Cobby]

I did vote to leave, but what I am most concerned about is the decision being honoured. Have any remainers thought about the damage ignoring the vote would cause?

What damage do you think would be caused? A non-binding referendum delivering an illegitimate result due to criminal activity?

There are two Remain outcomes:
If Brexit were abandoned, the outrage would be directly proportional to how much the hate rags (Sun, Mail and Telegraph) wanted to whip it up. I would expect the police and the law to deal with anyone taking part in violent protest or rioting - the outcome Leavers seem to keep implying. More likely, nothing would happen because the very ethos of Brexiters is to stand at the sidelines complaining because it's easier than actually doing anything; see the ERG's recently shelved Brexit plans.

If a People's Vote were provided and we voted to reject Brexit and remain (and precautions against the Vote Leave criminal activity were enacted), then nothing would happen apart from Brexit receding back to the margins of political concern where it was before. People would resume their concern for the cuts to public services, etc.

As for your last question, that was not on the ballot paper, and until we are told of what is on offer hard to say much.

I know it wasn't on the ballot paper. That's not what I asked. Given what we know, how will Brexit help the poorest and most vulnerable in society?

 

[Cobby]

but would you trust him to do it?

That was a biiiiig part of that conversation and it would require extraordinary circumstance to believe any promise he made. Usually, no.

 

[menetworkjadaltd]

Jaguar warning

There's a Jaguar on the loose?!

 

[Mr D]

Initially I would agree but since the vote I have to disagree as our own establishment has shown its disdain for our country and people in favor of the EU.

Wow, different take on the votes in parliament.
It looks like disdain for the EU is alive and well in parliament too.

 

[Mr D]

There's a Jaguar on the loose?!

Here kitty kitty.
(Holds up some catnip)

 

[MBE2017]

I know it wasn't on the ballot paper. That's not what I asked. Given what we know, how will Brexit help the poorest and most vulnerable in society?

That’s the point though, your question should be “Given what YOU believe, how will Brexit help the poorest and most vulnerable in society?

Just because you believe it will be bad, does not make it factual or correct, only time will tell.

Personally I am optimistic about the forth coming change, it will take some time to settle down for the better, which is unsurprising since so many in this country seem to wish to derail and wreck Brexit.

As a nation we should be working towards the best deal we can get, end of. The UK is leaving the EU, get over it, now is the time to fight together to get the best future going forward. Change is coming, adapt or go under, always been that way, always will be. Everything always changes, who knows, maybe the UK will rejoin the EU again in the future.

 

[The Byre]

Change is coming, adapt or go under, always been that way, always will be.

Yes, but change - any change - has to be gradual, if it is to be of any economic benefit.

The rich and the powerful and those of us with assets outside of the UK will benefit from a violent and sudden Brexit. My dream scenario is Kent becoming a parking lot for lorries and supermarket shelves empty. Riots and a hung parliament unable to move one way or another would be even better (for me!) You could make my day with the Irish boarder being closed and the 'Troubles' kicking off all over again! If you have money and other assets, death and destruction, chaos and turmoil is usually 'A Good Thing'.

Boris as PM - yes! Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy 'down there'!

My family and I, my children, my grandchildren and my wife - we all will still be able to travel and work throughout Europe. When the Blue-Rinse Nazis close the gates, we are OK. We shall be on jam! We have those magic documents rather like a press-pass that lets you into the VIP lounge at a trade fair, that allows us to pass through the gates. We call them German passports!

You and your family are going to be stuck on this side of the gates!

When the communists took over East Germany and called it the DDR, clever people left. What was left was nicknamed 'Der Dumme Rest' (the idiots left behind). DDR did not stand for Deutsche Demokratische Republik, but stood for Der Dumme Rest.

Sadly, I doubt the gates will swing shut and my dream of chaos and disorder will remain just a dream. England will not become a DDR, Scotland will not separate, NI will not join the South and BJ will not end like Mussolini, swinging from a lamppost.

Brexit will join other temporary fits of national madness, like the Millennium Bug and electric cars and melt away like the snows of Winter.

Or as HG Wells put it "Today's emergency is tomorrow's joke!"

 

[Gecko001]

Well I do not "dream of chaos and disorder". But hey, each to their own.

 

[Mr D]

If you have money and other assets, death and destruction, chaos and turmoil is usually 'A Good Thing'.

Except where people do know you have money and other assets and insist on taking them from you.

Being known as different is not a good idea in times of trouble. Usually someone with both means and skills to relieve you of your burden. Forcefully.

Oh and electric cars appear not to melt away. They've been around for over a century now.

 

[simon field]

I think he meant this one...

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45495960

After all the talk from Rees-Mogg and the hardline Brexiteers, their recent revelations on how to solve the issues are very disappointing.

Their solution to the Irish border issue is a re-hashed version of "use technology" with little detail on how to actually use it.

They cite the Sweden/Norway border model as one we could use, even though this is made x100 easier as Norway harmonises many of its rules and regulations with the EU - something the "no deal" Brexiteers don't want to do.

Sweden and Norway also use ANPR cameras along many of the unmanned routes. This is something that may not be feasible on the Irish border due to the political sensitivities that Sweden and Norway don't have.

Another key factor of their model is the 15km control zone, where officials from either country can go into the other's country to conduct customs checks. For a country apparently wanting a clean break with "full" control of our borders, giving ROI officials free rein to operate within a portion of the United Kingdom would be a little odd.

To be honest I'm shocked at how poor some of the revelations from Rees-Mogg's group actually are. With all this optimistic talk, I almost got swept up into thinking he was going to reveal some bombshell ideas about a hard Brexit.

This reality check piece from the BBC picks apart a lot of their other arguments quite well too:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45488124

And of course they are still, even post-report, being coy about how these magical GDP figures would supposedly happen: mass deregulation and tariff elimination with a laissez-faire approach that offers zero protection for our industries and the jobs that go with it.

 

[Newchodge]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45495960

If you scroll down there is a photo of the meeting of the ERG, with Rees Mogg standing at a lectern. Can anyone identify the individual in the middle with the knife handle sticking out of his back?

Presumably it is a Remain supporting infiltrator?

 

[Mr D]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45495960

If you scroll down there is a photo of the meeting of the ERG, with Rees Mogg standing at a lectern. Can anyone identify the individual in the middle with the knife handle sticking out of his back?

Presumably it is a Remain supporting infiltrator?

Its Mickey.

 

[Cobby]

That’s the point though, your question should be “Given what YOU believe, how will Brexit help the poorest and most vulnerable in society?

Just because you believe it will be bad, does not make it factual or correct, only time will tell.

Well, there are two points here; "what I believe" and "only time will tell". The second one is just a bland truism thrown in as a way to stifle debate, dissent and opposing views, so we'll put that aside.

I'm not asking the question based on what I believe, I'm asking it based on the facts available; our red lines in negotiation are apparently any regulatory association with the EU, while the EU's red lines are not dividing up the four freedoms for the UK to cherry pick; we will accept no border between UK and NI and insist we don't need one between NI and RoI, the EU will not allow borderless access to their CU or SM.

This is what we know as fact. We can speculate as to whether this will change, but right now, this is fact.

Personally I am optimistic about the forth coming change, it will take some time to settle down for the better, which is unsurprising since so many in this country seem to wish to derail and wreck Brexit.

As a nation we should be working towards the best deal we can get, end of. The UK is leaving the EU, get over it, now is the time to fight together to get the best future going forward. Change is coming, adapt or go under, always been that way, always will be. Everything always changes, who knows, maybe the UK will rejoin the EU again in the future.

If you're optimistic about Brexit, well, I'm pleased for you but I can only surmise you are ignoring a lot of data and evidence (including the government's own analyses). Your desire for everyone else to ignore the evidence and get behind such a damaging course of action is charming but won't actually have any effect on the outcome of Brexit other than exonerating and camouflaging the original Brexit cheerleaders such as yourself.

So I ask again, not based on what I believe, but what we know - and taking into account your optimism... specifically how will Brexit help the poorest and most vulnerable in our society?

 

[MBE2017]

Cobby, you got to stop believing everything you read, negotiations are exactly that, red lines are a starting point, the UK Gov has given way an awful lot, the EU are starting to mention deals after stating nothing would be offered. This is probably to try and keep TM as PM as much as anything else.

My point made though, you do not know anything other than most of what is made up in the press. This thread started a long time ago, and it was pointed out several times that ONLY the final deal matters.

I also have no qualms about people either listening to your “evidence” or not, the same evidence proven to be so spectacularly incorrect before. The UK Gov project fear analysis predicted terrible consequences, IF the country did nothing to respond to changes.

What country would never respond to a change in conditions? One of the EU’s worries is the UK becoming much more competitive once freed from their regulations if we also have access to the EU market, hence negotiations.

As for others believing everyone will be stuck on the UK unable to go anywhere in the future, OK, believe what you want. Never seen so much rubbish and speculation and paranoia from what is meant to be grown ups.

I will say it once more, the EU want a deal as much as the UK, you need to get a bit more frosty.

 

[Ally Maxwell]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45495960

To be honest I'm shocked at how poor some of the revelations from Rees-Mogg's group actually are. With all this optimistic talk, I almost got swept up into thinking he was going to reveal some bombshell ideas about a hard Brexit.

.

Are you actually for real ?

 

[Steven001]

Wow, different take on the votes in parliament.
It looks like disdain for the EU is alive and well in parliament too.

The vast majority of politicians across the political mainstream vocalize ceaseless remoaning claptrap which includes gems like;

"we didn't know what we were voting for"
"we're little Englanders"
"doom & gloom is the only forecast if Brexit becomes reality"
"we want a second referendum"

We have the government, the banks, the large corporations, all mainstream political parties aligned against Brexit and the decision the people made on the 23rd June 2016 - if you can see this you're not living in the real world.

 

[Mr D]

The vast majority of politicians across the political mainstream vocalize ceaseless remoaning claptrap which includes gems like;

"we didn't know what we were voting for"
"we're little Englanders"
"doom & gloom is the only forecast if Brexit becomes reality"
"we want a second referendum"

We have the government, the banks, the large corporations, all mainstream political parties aligned against Brexit and the decision the people made on the 23rd June 2016 - if you can see this you're not living in the real world.

Agree with you that if you can see this you are not living in the real world. But had already got that impression from you previously.

Actions as they say speak louder than words.

Look at the votes in parliament. Nothing else matters.
The votes by parliament indicate politicians in favour of Brexit. Forget media reports about what someone said, forget what non voting groups have done. Look at the votes in parliament.

 

[Mr D]

I think he meant this one...

One model out of how many dozen?

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Are you actually for real ?

Absolutely.

Have you read their whitepaper? What have they said that wasn't already known and spoken about before? What have they suggested that hasn't already had numerous flaws pointed out?

Take, for example, their idea of protecting British industries by only eliminating import tariffs on goods or foodstuffs we don't produce ourselves. Do you realise how few things there are in that category? Just because we need to import certain items, it doesn't mean we don't produce them full stop. It just means we don't produce enough to meet demand, so we must import the rest.

And in their paper, they say this is just about a trade deal only, and that we will still negotiate a non-trade withdrawal agreement. Then a few pages later say there will be no withdrawal agreement, no transition period, and that we can withhold all of the "divorce settlement". Which is it?

They've also skirted around many other issues. Their suggested boost in GDP is not just based on what they've stated in the whitepaper. It also requires unilateral tariff reduction and mass deregulation. Why do you think the paper continually talks about "global free trade"? No country trading on WTO terms has that. Their grand plan is to unilaterally eliminate import tariffs and to deregulate so much that importers have no difficulty in meeting the standards. If we don't do that, this GDP boost will not materialise, even if we trade entirely on WTO terms.

This whole idea from Rees-Mogg's group is based on implementing a hard-right economic model to a degree never seen before in this country. Minimal government intervention on standards, environmental protections, social nets and workers' rights. It's survival of the fittest on steroids. That's why they don't like the EU, because membership prevents them from doing all of this.

That's probably music to the ears of a lot of hardline Conservatives, but for anyone not in that category, this should be very worrying to them. I consider myself a centrist more than anything else, and it's way too extreme even for my tastes.

 

[The Byre]

So far, no person in government has been able to explain how an employer, school, doctor or a landlord or other 'responsible' body is supposed to establish and handle the coming confusion that is inevitable about the status of individuals - the Irish right to work and vote in the UK and visa-versa throws up all kinds of difficulties.

We shall have Irish citizens, UK citizens, dual Irish–UK citizens living in rest-UK, dual Irish–UK citizen living in NI, non-UK citizens entitled to Irish citizenship (e.g. Canadian citizen), non-Irish EU national (e.g. German citizen), non-EU, non-UK national (e.g. Indian citizen), worker in EU with UK citizenship, worker in UK with EU citizenship, UK citizen working in EU but living in UK, EU citizen working in UK but living in EU (thousands of the last two categories along the NI boarder!)

I could add to that list, many other bizarre categories, such as non-EU people with the right to German citizenship, working in the UK. Then there are countless thousands of rest-EU citizens living in the UK that are not working. They live here, they send their children to school here and they enjoy an income from outside the UK.

Then there is the special legal relationship between New Zealand, Ireland and Scotland - I bet that throws up some interesting problems!

Then we shall have EU citizens moving to Ireland, getting Irish citizenship and then having the automatic right to live, vote and work in the UK.

Any lawyer specialising in human rights issues and citizenship must be salivating at the thought of the coming confusion!

The whole situation reminds me of the opening sentence in the Lagos Times from the 50s -

"From tomorrow onwards, Nigeria is to change from driving on the left, to driving on the right. The change-over is to take place gradually."

 

[The Byre]

And not just citizenship. Air traffic control, driving licenses, pensions, insurance, health care and a thousand other cross-boarder issues - all things that seem to have been forgotten.