SHARE
COPY LINK

SUE WILSON

OPINION: We shouldn’t expect special treatment from EU just because we’re British

Sue Wilson examines whether Associate EU citizenship could provide the much-needed lifeline Brits living in Europe are hoping for.

OPINION: We shouldn't expect special treatment from EU just because we're British
Photo: Deirdre Carney

British citizens living in EU 27 countries, understandably concerned about losing rights and freedoms after Brexit, are looking for alternative ways to protect themselves. Could an Associate EU citizenship provide a much-needed lifeline?

The idea of maintaining our rights via an associated EU membership for citizens is a popular option with Brits in the EU. It’s an idea that is being widely discussed, even in the European parliament, including by EU Brexit Coordinator, Guy Verhofstadt.

Those in favour suggest it should be made available to British citizens already resident in the EU, as we would be most affected by the loss of our EU citizenship rights. Nobody is suggesting, to my knowledge, that any such scheme would be open to Britons living in the UK.

Understandably, the idea has a great deal of appeal, and is being grasped by many as the answer to all their prayers. For those of us living in Europe, we fully expected when we committed to moving to Europe to having EU citizenship rights for life. We made the decision in good faith, never anticipating the threat of Brexit.

We probably couldn’t have detailed most of those membership rights at the time, but we’re certainly aware of them now, and no longer take them for granted. Never did we think that we would lose, for example, our freedom of movement, or that future generations would have fewer opportunities than we have enjoyed.

Freedom of movement is a benefit that only British citizens stand to lose. EU citizens living in the UK will remain citizens of their home countries and will, therefore, retain their EU citizenship rights. It is this fact alone that is encouraging many Brits to seek a change to the rules for our benefit, without the need for reciprocity. However, should we be granted EU citizenship, it could be argued that EU citizens should be granted British citizenship. I think I can say with a degree of certainty that the British government are never going to allow that to happen.

The idea of Associate Citizenship is not a new one. It was discussed in the European parliament in the early days of the UK/EU negotiations, and was also the subject of a failed court case brought before a European court in the Netherlands. Each time the subject has been discussed, it has been rejected and has proved unpopular with European leaders. Whilst the lawyer involved in the Dutch case, Jolyon Maugham, is currently resurrecting his earlier legal challenge, it’s unclear how this might succeed now, where it failed before.

The reasons the associate citizenship idea has been rejected in the past, and likely in the future, are similar to reasons cited during Brexit negotiations. During the early stages of the negotiations, former Prime Minister, Theresa May, hoped to secure similar terms and conditions for the UK after Brexit as the UK currently enjoys as an EU member.

It was rightly pointed out, frequently, that when you leave the club, you do not maintain the same privileges, or the use of facilities enjoyed by fee-paying members. The UK cannot have its cake and eat it. If we hold with that argument, then why should the rules be different for citizens than they are for the whole country?

With our EU citizenship so highly valued, many have suggested making a personal financial contribution could be an answer. British citizens have each paid a small fee through their taxes to enjoy the benefits of EU membership, and would be willing to do so in future.

Of course, those with sufficient funds can already protect themselves from the loss of rights due to Brexit. Cyprus offers a so-called “golden passport” that effectively allows investors to buy EU citizenship if they spend two million euros on a Cypriot property. Some Tory donors have already signed up to this scheme in order to protect themselves, despite having supported the removal of rights for the rest of us mere mortals.

For those of us with more modest means, there are still many thousands willing to dig deep to save their rights. It would seem like a reasonable option, but what of those without the means, even to make a small contribution? Brexit has been divisive enough already. Let’s not divide ourselves further by creating a two-tier system based on your bank balance.

Personally, I want to keep all my rights. I want to cling on to every single one of them and ensure that others have the same rights. I don’t expect special treatment for Brits in the EU, when EU citizens in the UK are being asked to re-apply for a status they already have, and with the risk of being rejected. I don’t expect to receive special treatment from the EU just because I’m British.  Nor do I expect to enjoy the same rights as a non-EU citizen that I currently enjoy as a fully paid-up member.

Would I like to? Yes, of course! Whilst I don’t believe Associate EU citizenship is the answer, or even possible, if it comes off, I’ll be only too happy to be proved wrong.

There is a better and fairer way. We may not be able to stop Brexit from happening at the end of this month, but the future UK/EU partnership arrangements have yet to be negotiated. We must campaign to get the best possible future relationship with the European Union. Who knows? We could even end up with a softer Brexit, membership of the single market and the customs union, and no negligible change to our rights.

Maybe that’s a long shot, but it’s worth the battle. The closer the UK/EU relationship at the end of the transition period, the easier it will be for the next generation to take us back into the EU, where we belong!

By Sue Wilson – Chair of Bremain in Spain

Member comments

  1. If possible, I would recommend applying for normal citizenship in the EU country where you live.
    I can only speak as a Brit living in Germany (Weimar in Thuringia), but I didn’t find the application process particularly arduous, the officials who helped me were patient, courteous and friendly and the whole thing only cost around 250€ (I believe it’s over a 1000 pounds for the same process in the UK). Also, I wouldn’t say that my German is anywhere near flawless!

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

TOURISM

Reader Question: Does a passport renewal restart the 90 day clock for visiting France?

If you were hoping that your renewed passport might offer a way to avoid the 90-day rule when visiting France, here is what you should know.

Reader Question: Does a passport renewal restart the 90 day clock for visiting France?

Question – I’m British and a frequent visitor to France and since Brexit my passport is stamped when I enter and leave the country, in order to keep track of my 90-day allowance. However I’ve recently renewed my passport and of course the new one has no stamps – does this mean that I get a new 90-day allowance?

While it may seem like passport renewal could be a loophole for getting around the 90 day rule when visiting France, you should not attempt to spend more than 90 days out of every 180 in the Schengen zone without a visa or residency permit. 

Non-EU nationals including Americans, Canadians, Australians and – since Brexit – Brits are limited to spending only 90 days out of every 180 within the EU. Anyone who wants to spend longer than this needs to apply for either a passport or a residency card. These rules apply whether you want to move to an EU country such as France to live, or simply want to make frequent or long visits here.

The 90-day ‘clock’ covers all EU and Schengen zone countries – if you need help calculating your time spent in the Schengen zone, you can do so using this online calculator HERE.

Passports are stamped on entry and exit to the EU/Schengen zone, with dates of entry and exit.

However, getting a new passport does not reset the clock – some have suggested that a new passport could be a work-around, as it would not show previous entry/exit stamps which are used to calculate the amount of time a non-EU national person has spent in the Schengen zone. 

The primary reason is that passports are in most cases automatically scanned when you enter and leave the Bloc, which makes it easy to spot over-stayers and for border forces to enforce the 90-day rule. This means that border forces do not only rely on the physical stamps in your passport.

The EU’s new EES – Entry and Exit System – will tighten up the scanning process, but its entry has been delayed.

READ MORE: How does the 90-day rule work in France?

While in previous years France may have earned itself a reputation among non-EU travellers as being not too fussy about the exact exit date of people who aren’t working or claiming benefits, the reality is that you do not want to risk the possible consequences that can come with overstaying in the EU. 

If you are caught over-staying your allocated 90 days you can end up with an ‘over-stay’ flag on your passport which can make it difficult to enter any other country, not just France, and is likely to make any future attempts at getting visas or residency a lot more difficult.

The consequences for staying over can also include being fined – since Brexit, British visitors have reported being stopped and fined at the border upon exit if they are found to have spent more than 90 days in the Schengen zone.

Keep in mind that the 90-day rule does not apply to all non-EU countries – some states, such as India, are required to have a visa for even short stays. You can access the European Union’s map that outlines which countries require visas for short stays to check to see if you are eligible.

To learn more about the 90-day rule, and alternative options for how to stay in France longer than just 90 days out of every 180, click here for The Local’s guide 

SHOW COMMENTS