An informative post Mickeyfinn, but let’s straighten out a few realities here to previous postings, and ask some uncomfortable questions.
To suggest that voters knew or were advised (pun intended) that this was only advisory prior to the vote, is a denial of the truth. This advisory status was never identified by David Cameron or the remain camp during the referendum campaign, nor was it debated in any of the live TV debates, nor covered by the media, and has only come to light AFTER the vote went to a Brexit majority. So to suggest otherwise is not true.
To also imply that this was not a majority vote or democratic given there was the largest % turnout for many years is another denial. Those who didn't vote used their democratic right not to vote, but to imply that this in effect made it any less democratic is to turn our voting system on its head. Have you ever heard of a British vote being declared undemocratic because people chose not to vote?
So the question then turns to the requirement to respect the democratic vote as voted for by the British public in the referendum.
Most MPs that have been interviewed since the majority Brexit vote, and indeed it appears that the majority who have spoken in Parliament to date, have declared that they WILL respect the democratic decision by British citizens to exit the EU.
But moving on, and now recognising the devil is in the detail, I would have thought that what is of concern to those currently living and working in Spain is if the European Commission and other EU states decide to bully the UK following their democratic right to exit the EU at citizens expense, such that they will not respect those who in all good faith chose to reside and work in one of their member states.
The British PM has already stated in Parliament that, post Brexit, she wishes to respect those EU citizens who currently reside and work in the UK, but she stated that she is not prepared to do so in a unilateral manner since she considers this would lay British citizens residing and working in the EU susceptible to being denied equal reciprocal arrangements.
The suggestion has-been made for citizens to take control as best they can and obtain the relevant documentation that can prove their current right to work and reside in the country. The fact they are advised to do so, is sadly indicative that the EU could act in a vindictive manner post Brexit, in such a way as to significantly compromise citizens who chose to reside and work in that member state in all good faith. Have you heard of any reassurances from the EU bureaucrats prior to negotiations in this regard? Have you demanded that they show their hand in this regard prior to negotiations?
But back to the devil being in the detail…..What does this tell you of a treaty that from the outset does not appear to legally protect citizens acquired rights when they chose in all good faith to live and work in one of their member states, should a member state decide to use their democratic right to leave the EU? And what does it tell you of an intransigent EU Commission and bureaucrats IF(please to goodness they dont) they would even contemplate such compromising behaviour and place their existing EU citizens living and working across member states at risk in this way, and use this tactic to bully a member state to remain in the EU?
It would appear that denial of acquired rights has also been hidden from those citizens exercising their right to live and work across member states, and this is what you should be bringing to the attention of the EU Commission and bureaucrats, to make them accountable and fully aware of your concerns.You should be demanding treaty change.
If this is the way they do business and would be prepared to "use" citizens in this fashion in their negotiations, rather than look to mutually agreeable arrangements post Brexit ( which our PM has ALREADY suggested in Parliament that she aspires to), then this will only reaffirm the lengths they are prepared to go to, to bully the UK in the negotiating process.
Is this the form of democracy and protection that you seek, where a ruling body (EU Commission) can ignore citizens acquired rights, and use this gap in treaty arrangements as a means of bullying a member state? If this be the case then why haven’t they already addressed this aspect of protection of citizens acquired rights? Might it be that they purposefully left this open so as to act as disincentive to member states and in that process had no intention of protecting citizens acquired rights from the outset. In which case why was this risk to citizens not openly identified and debated by all EU bureaucrats when they negotiated the treaty arrangements? Do you now see why the risks to citizens in the CETA treaty was identified?
Isn’t this akin to what they have done with Greece whereby they encouraged them to join a union (having turned a blind eye to essential financial accession criteria), in full knowledge that they had an intractable hand in terms of financially crippling them if they chose to leave the EU? This is not looking after or respecting citizens rights, it’s become akin to an unaccountable dictatorship that is sadly failing to address citizens rights.
Let me ask you, who to date has endeavoured to reassure citizens in this specific matter of acquired rights and their aspirations to protect citizens post Brexit, those citizens currently living and working in the EU? Sadly it certainly does not appear to be the EU Commission and bureaucrats.
You should be demanding a reform to the treaty such that citizens acquired rights are protected in these intervening years, and whilst you are about it, please can you also demand that the EU adhere to the rule of law and use infringement rights against any member state that fails to ensure that adequate resources be made available to ensure that all citizens rights to consistent fair and timely justice are protected.
IMHO, the light from all of this should be shone firmly and brightly on the lack of citizen protection within the current EU system.... Surely it's in everyones interest to do so?