So Boris's deferred no deal bill

Try this...

.nhs.uk/using-the-nhs/healthcare-abroad/moving-abroad/planning-your-healthcare/

This should put your mind at rest Scoff only half read the stuff as it probably does not impact him.

Assuming your parents have resident status there and are not living 'under the wire', like quite a lot of countries Greece appears to have already confirmed no changes, They DO have two scenarios deal and no deal BUT this relates to grace periods to get things in order for people who have not registered or have lived there less than 5 years.

 

Labour’s Catherine McKinnell says she had also noticed that the PM made reference to checks and declarations on GB/NI goods being “transitory and melting away unless a majority of Northern Ireland choose to retain them”. She says she shares concerns that that is not correct.

Perhaps there has been some confusion between the future decision in relation to the single market and being in a customs union, and does it not highlight the challenge that we have, Mr Speaker, that not only does the prime minister appear to need additional time to consider the real implications on the decisions being taken …

 

Utter rubbish!! Stick to stuff you know about instead of attempting to scare people with so called 'advice'. Read the document from the NHS it largely refers to non-resident status and what MIGHT be the case. Quite a few EU countries e. Spain Italy AND Greece etc have addressed both deal and no deal scenarios.

It is posts like yours that give rise to accusations of scaremongering. After all, if I identify misinformation on subjects I DO know about, how much misinformation is being pumped out by people like yourself on stuff that I don't know about.

 

Yes they have residency and i recall when we voted out my dad stated they would apply for Greek citizenship as they meet the criteria (over 10 years permanent residency). They havn't as of yet so i guess they are just waiting to see what happens.

 

I got it from someone in a similar position to you. They had a letter last week stating their reciprocal cover ends in December 2020. I have no reason to suspect it was a lie (although it could have been).

 

slightly O/T

how did Dan J. vote last night ?

 

He was one of the 19 labour rebels that voted with the government in the first vote. Suspect given the numbers he voted against the timetable motion.

 

thanks!

 

Not saying they were lying but in our area we have close ties with some pretty clued up people (both Italian and British) who have been involved in the expat liaison group working with the UK ambassador and the Italian Government. Whilst there are still a few hurdles to overcome, none of them relate to UK expats with settled status rights re Healthcare .
There is no reference to a time limit (which would be odd since a no deal is a no deal (worst case scenario) - if that were to happen so December 2020 would become an arbitrary random date). As I already said it is nothing to do with EU anyway since like immigration for non-EU residents each country has its own set of rules.
The reasons individual countries are running around urgently trying to sort out legislation in the event we leave the EU is the transference of current documentation for residency that refers to EU citizens to UK citizens. This will be dealt with at local level with the changing of documents in the same way it was done when we went from the 5 year Permesso di Soggiorno document (only needed in the case of non EU citizens) to permanent residency status. It took about 20 minutes and cost us a 28 cent tax stamp as it was exempt from the 16.80 euro marca di bollo ( tax) that applies to things like driving licence change/renewal. On any case, US , Australian, Russian, African and Indian citizens etc. living here with settled status get the same healthcare so it would be discriminatory to single out UK citizens with settled status for different treatment.

 

It would be interesting to know how people on here would have voted had THEY been MPs....

Obviously, as most of you know I would have voted YES for the 'deal' but (and some of you may find this surprising) after reading and accepting the comments on here regarding the timeframe for reviewing I would have voted the timeframe down.

My only concern is whilst many do so in the best interests of due dilligence, there are some who will simply try to use it to try to prevent Brexit altogether and keep introducing amendments ad infinitum. I fail to see, for example, how voting to remain in the CU would not mean the deal is fundamentally changed to the point where it is no longer the deal that has been voted for and agreed by the EU.

 

I would have voted both down in a heartbeat.

I'm not a lawyer and don't profess to be. The things that concern me are that the loose verbal assertions that everything is easy is different to whats in the legal text. Nigel Dodds started to pull at conditions of the NI position in the text and what may happen thereafter under an FTA. Genuine concerns of which jurisdiction they may be under, what checks would go on, if they would benefit. That's not to say they may do or may not, but this is the issue with a very hastily constructed legal text.

There were suggestions that much of this text was from the original May deal. And while many conditions remain from that deal, hatcheting the old text isn't a good way to start. The numerous legal commentators yesterday highlighted a couple of paragraphs that were poorly written and needed to be tightened. Of course that can be done through the reading and committee stages, but this government have shown contempt for democracy for years and denied true scrutiny.

I have no issue with scrutiny. Open it up and debate it properly and come up with the best route forward instead of all this smoke and mirrors rubbish.

In terms of the timetable. Seeing as his own director for legislative affairs suggested 37 days to 4 weeks (depending on which of her public comments she asserts most relevant), its hardly a wise thing to expect such comprehensive and important legislation to be bullied through. Text that was only made available a few days ago and is well over 100 pages.

I'd love to remain. I'd love to have a 2nd referendum. I don't want a general election. I have no power or ability to make any of those happen. What I do expect though is that legislature is debated and scrutinised properly and given the proper time to do so. What I also expect is that MP's are free from bullying coercion and favour to make decisions one way or another and should use the information they have, or need to do what is best for people of this set of Isles.

Sadly, the latter is not being allowed through purpose of the administration. And thats what angers me most.

 

The Bill is centred on the red lines the Tories have set .
There is much more the EU can facilitate if some of these red lines are removed or amended by the Tories.
The Tories by not including parliament in a withdrawal bill have forfeited the right to be guardians of leave .
It was a referendum run in cross party divides and once secured should have been inclusive but typical Tories have brought this on the country in their selfish interests mainly from the right wing .

 

He did vote against the timetable yes. I suspect he and the others that voted with the government on the first vote were just trying to "play both sides" with a potential election looming.
Whenever anything is posted on his Twitter for example most of the replies are Barnsley residents demanding to know why he has previously voted against the government.

 

come on Marlon - lets see your definition of 'Democracy.'

 

Name the ex-Guardian journalists working on the BBC.