Thread. “Common Market 2.0” is much more honest about state legal powers under EEA to control FMoPeople.
But if’s still seriously false. 1/
But if’s still seriously false. 1/
Claim 1: EEA states can use “Safeguard Powers” to control FMoPeople. Unlike others, SM2 recognises key limitations: it’s an emergency power, and only regional or sectoral. 2/ 
SM2 *don’t* claim Safeguard clause could be used to actually stop people entering UK or taking up jobs. 3/
SM2 *don’t* make false comparison with tiny Liechtenstein - which has a unique side-agreement & even then isnt allowed to restrict entry or work, only residence. 4/
SM2 say that if UK has serious regional unemployment difficulties, jobcentres could give preference to UK nationals.
That’s unexplained & almost certainly false > 5/
That’s unexplained & almost certainly false > 5/
Safeguard clause might allow employment favouritism to *local residents*, eg bcos of serious local unemploymt
But it wdnt allow pref for Brit cits from *other parts* of UK, or discrimination against *local resident* EU citz.
Because that wouldn’t help local unemployment. 6/
But it wdnt allow pref for Brit cits from *other parts* of UK, or discrimination against *local resident* EU citz.
Because that wouldn’t help local unemployment. 6/
Claim 2: EEA Safeguard clause could allow regional cuts in welfare bens *just to EU cits*
False. Cuts don’t counter a serious regional problem like unemployment, they make it worse. If UK can’t afford bens, it can make *non-discriminatory* cuts. 7/
False. Cuts don’t counter a serious regional problem like unemployment, they make it worse. If UK can’t afford bens, it can make *non-discriminatory* cuts. 7/
Claim 3: Safeguard clause allows for “renegotiation”.
Literally true, but misleading. EEA & EU states are committed to full free movement. They’ll never allow one of Europe’s largest & most “flexible” economies to pretend, after 48 years, that it “just can’t cope” with FMoP 8/
Literally true, but misleading. EEA & EU states are committed to full free movement. They’ll never allow one of Europe’s largest & most “flexible” economies to pretend, after 48 years, that it “just can’t cope” with FMoP 8/
Claim 4: after 3 months EU cits who are not in work & can’t support themselves “may” have their right to reside revoked.
False - and seriously misleading. 8/
False - and seriously misleading. 8/
SM2 falsely imply unemployment is what matters. But EU law explicitly states that EU cits who are genuinely looking for work cannot be expelled on grounds of unemployment: Art 14.4 of Directive 2004/38. 9/
SM2 say other EU states do things differently. They imply this makes a difference - but they don’t dare claim this explicitly. Because there’s no evidence it does. 10/
So what if Belgium “applies existing rules”? How does that benefit people of Belgium? Does it mean EU citizens take low-paid jobs for fear of deportation? Or stay “below the radar”? SM2 don’t say 11/
For 2 years N Clegg, T Blair, S Kinnock have been saying “but Belgium!” Yet still no evidence of what difference it makes. 12/
Belgium Gov doesn’t even keep separate figures for people deported because they aren’t economically active. They lump them in with criminal cases. 13/
For 2 years N Clegg, T Blair & S Kinnock have said “Theresa May isn’t doing all she could to control free movement”. Yet they never say what benefit more law enforcement would bring.
Here’s a detailed thread on that 14/
Here’s a detailed thread on that 14/
UK deports a larger proportion of EU citizens than Belgium does.
BE 900 deported pa out of 1 million EU27 residents
UK 4,000 deported pa out of 3 million EU27 residents 15/
BE 900 deported pa out of 1 million EU27 residents
UK 4,000 deported pa out of 3 million EU27 residents 15/
Theresa May & Home Office staff have tried hard to deport EU citizens. So hard they systematically broke EU law trying to deport homeless people> 16/
And when May became PM, her officials “accidentally” systematically threatened 100 EU citizens with deportation under the same rules SM2 claims shoud be used more (the letters were rightly withdrawn) 17/
Claim 5: other EU states restrict public sector jobs to own citizens. Literally true but seriously misleading. 18/
EU law makes this exception but it’s very narrow: “participation in the exercise of public authority & duties designed to safeguard the general interest of the state” 19/
So, yes, UK can (and does) limit some jobs for judges, police officers, spies, to British citizens. But it can’t do this for NHS or natuonalised rail - or administrative staff in Government.
So why mention it, if not to mislead? 20/
So why mention it, if not to mislead? 20/
Claim 5: UK can require EU citizens to register after 3 months residence.
True - but pointless. Planners & service providers know enough already. Who else needs data? Under UK law, benefits can only be claimed by EU cits with a right to reside. 21/
True - but pointless. Planners & service providers know enough already. Who else needs data? Under UK law, benefits can only be claimed by EU cits with a right to reside. 21/
Then SM2 just repeat Charles Clarke & Alan Johnson’s recent mix of bad uncosted ideas about making 65 million people have a card to catch a few more “illegal immigrants”. 22/
And C&J’s illegal plan to ban recruitment from abroad 23/
Yet another shoddy text with half-baked ideas, none of which will make any difference to migrant behavior - or convince nationalists. But all of which appease idea that freedom is bad and red-tape *on the least powerful* is good. 24/
ICYMI English is the main language of EU law & policy. Whoever writes these things has access to all the laws, all the caselaw and every significant study or report.
Yet this is cobbled together from deliberately ignorant politicians tossing out ideas for op-eds. 25/
Yet this is cobbled together from deliberately ignorant politicians tossing out ideas for op-eds. 25/
SM2 follows same old elite strategy. Make up stuff about the EU and hope no one looks too closely. That’s what got us into the Brexit mess. It won’t get us out of it. 26/26
PS: if UK were allowed to discriminate between British & EU citizens, they couldn’t have a *citizenship based* exception for Irish citizens. EU law doesn’t allow Gov to use that as basis for choosing which EU27 cits to favour.
