EU Settlement Research Articles

Brexit and the EU Settlement Scheme: Continuity and rupture with the European Union

ABSTRACT The EU Settlement Scheme, a product of Brexit, both continues and breaks with the EU legacy, offering dismantlement for the vulnerable and continuity for the rest. In its attempt to keep the rights of EEA and Swiss citizens as close to their EU format as possible, it borrows from Directive 2004/38 and, in doing so, manages to enhance the conditionality ingrained in the Directive, discriminating against the most vulnerable. At the same time, by breaking with the EU legacy, it also moves the most vulnerable even farther away from the ideal of an unconditional right to return. Through an exploratory opt-in online survey, I observe the Scheme’s intrinsic tension of offering both continuity and dismantlement and the emergence of some vulnerability traits. Non-linear employment histories, older age, and lower levels of educational attainment enhance the difficulty of the process and create the prospects for disentitlement.

The EU Settlement Scheme: Footprints in quicksand

Part of an accelerated trend to integrate algorithms in immigration decision-making, the UK's EU Settlement Scheme relies on automated data checks as an essential and mandatory step in the application for UK residence. In this article, I engage with the literature on datafication and algorithmic accuracy to showcase algorithmic inaccuracy within borders in regard to the allocation of residence statuses and rights. I argue that, while the EUSS uses big data to create a data double of the ‘desirable’ migrant, even applicants within this category experience mismatches. Some EU+ Citizens on linear residence and career trajectories were initially offered pre-settled status and had difficulty proving their entitlement to the full status, while others, who did not qualify for settled status, obtained it nevertheless. The analysis is based on in-depth interviews with high skilled applicants, and experts on the EUSS, exposing that footprints are not evidence per se. Instead, the outcomes are decided by an opaque algorithm that is not retained and disappears as easily as footprints in quicksand.

From EU Citizenship to British citizenship via the EU Settlement Scheme: Some Socio-Legal Reflections from the east coast

From EU Citizenship to British citizenship via the EU Settlement Scheme: Some Socio-Legal Reflections from the east coast

Cartel Leniency and Settlements: A Joint Perspective

This paper studies the interactions between a cartel leniency program and a settlement procedure. The EU settlement procedure gives colluding firms that do not apply for leniency an additional opportunity to cooperate with the competition authority in exchange for a reduced fine after a preliminary case has been established against them. We derive the conditions under which colluding firms apply for leniency, settle, or refuse to cooperate with the authority in equilibrium. Our policy results show that settlements can act as a complement or as a substitute to the leniency program. We also study the welfare-optimal policy and highlight a novel interdependence between the fine reductions that should be offered to leniency applicants and to settling firms.

A Gendered EU Settlement Scheme: Intersectional Oppression of Immigrant Women in a Post-Brexit Britain

The EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) is a transitory immigration regime rolled out by the Home Office as part of the measures for the UK withdrawing from the EU. More can be said about whether the EUSS can truly be hailed an overall “success”, as per official Government messaging, several years after its initial introduction. This paper evaluates this by considering two case studies of vulnerable immigrant women required to apply to the Scheme to successfully remain in the UK after the transition period: those at risk of or facing violence against women and girls (VAWG), and non-EU family members (NEFMs) of EU citizens. Using the theories of intersectionality and vulnerability, the paper outlines how gender and immigration status intersect to make women more vulnerable by virtue of the legal framework of the EUSS and its criteria, arguing that it entrenches intersectional oppression faced uniquely by these women.

The partialization (and parcelization) of citizenship?

ABSTRACT In 2016, Turner argued that ‘we are all denizens now’. Taking this argument and the proliferation of quasi-citizenship as a starting point, this article argues that such an argument masks the enduring importance and exclusionary power of citizenship. This article considers quasi-citizenship as a more precarious and less secure status than citizenship, but less precarious and more secure status than non-citizenship. Taking the UK EU Settlement Scheme as a case-study, the article exposes the realities of quasi-citizenship as an intermediary status that seeks to exclude migrants from citizenship. Overall, the article argues that expanding quasi-citizenship policies suggest 1) the weakening of citizenship as a status, via offering increasingly lesser and fewer rights (partialization), 2) the hardening borders of citizenship, and 3) the parcelization of citizenship, with the gulf of differentiation increasing between those who have secure access to the rights and status of full citizenship and those who do not.

“I returned to being an immigrant”: onward Latin American migrants and Brexit

ABSTRACT We explore the experiences of Onward Latin American Migrants (OLAs) in London – individuals born in Latin America who live in London and hold EU passports – with the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS), a programme developed by the British Government to register EU nationals as part of the Brexit process. Drawing from qualitative fieldwork, we show that prior experience of being subject to immigration control in Southern Europe, including periods of irregularity, made OLAs anxious about maintaining lawful residence, favouring their uptake of the EUSS in an effort to re-secure their status and keep their rights. However, many of OLAs’ non-EU family members could not apply successfully to the scheme given difficulties in meeting the eligibility criteria – a pattern exacerbated by the COVID pandemic. For many OLAs, the EUSS ultimately signified a loss of rights and secured status which took them long to achieve and a return to a position of uncertainty.

Brexit, a Hostile Environment, the EU Settlement Scheme and Rupture in the Migration Projects of Central and Eastern European Migrants in Northern Ireland

This article examines the changing migration projects of Central and Eastern European migrants in Northern Ireland. It sets out the context for settlement scheme applications, linking it to broader hostile environment policies in the UK. It explores the dynamic nature of people’s migration projects and how these have been challenged in the context of Brexit and the EU Settlement Scheme. The paper discusses the ruptures in migrants’ narratives in relation to how they envision their future in Northern Ireland and their countries of origin, with some moving towards indeterminacy and some searching for fixity/stability in their migration projects. It examines how the Northern Irish context – and the question of the Irish border specifically – adds an additional layer of complexity to the migrants’ shifting future imaginaries. The paper draws on my covert research and in-depth interviews with CEE migrants, where consent was given retrospectively. It discusses the role of the researcher in cutting the covert/overt continuum and ethical dilemmas in the field.

The EU Settlement Scheme

As the EU Settlement Scheme closing date approaches, a significant gap remains between the number of children eligible and the applications received so far, write Rosalyn Akar Grams and Anita Hurrell

Justice in Automated Administration

Abstract— Public administration has, for some time now, been undergoing a digital transformation. Part of this change is the replacement of human public officials with automated decision-making systems. Beyond its immediate social and political significance, the EU Settlement Scheme—the mechanism established to allow EU citizens to remain resident in the UK after Brexit—represents the coming of age of a new template for automated administration. Understood in its context, this template raises foundational questions about the nature of administrative justice in the emerging digital state. This template, while it has various potential advantages, is essentially half-baked, contains significant risks without sufficient safeguards and requires revision before its suggested wider future application becomes a reality. Amendments to the template ought to be framed by reference to the precautionary principle, as this would continue to make for efficient implementation of policy while better protecting individuals in this experimental phase of automated administration.

Applying for Settled Status: Ambivalent and reluctant compliance of EU citizens in post-Brexit Scotland

This article contributes to scholarship concerning the effects of the UK Referendum on EU membership and Brexit on EU citizen rights in the UK (Botterill, McCollum and Tyrrell, 2018 ; Burrell and Schweyher, 2019 ; Gawlewicz and Sotkasiira, 2019 ; Huber, 2019 ). The paper focuses on applications for, and meanings of, ‘settled status’ among Polish nationals living in urban and rural Scotland. In particular we argue that the ‘simple’ act of application produces diverse responses among Polish nationals, characterised by ambivalent and reluctant compliance, with longer term implications for ontological security and sustainable communities. In the paper we present empirical data from the perspectives of three differently positioned individuals to illustrate the heterogenous experience of Polish nationals in Scotland and to demonstrate how pre-existing vulnerabilities and conditions are compounded by the EU settlement scheme. First, we highlight a view of citizenship as ‘social contract’ through the vignette of Marek who expresses ambivalence about Brexit and for whom the welfare system serves both as a safety net and a space of the undeserving. Second, we reflect on the complex bureaucratic process of gaining citizenship for a family, through the vignette of Monika. Finally, we consider how form filling is an anxious act of validating oneself and questioning one's belonging to place with longer term effects on ontological insecurity, through the vignette of Weronika. We conclude by offering a set of recommendations for Scottish policy on intercultural communication, integration and sustainable communities that, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, is ever more significant.

EEA nationals reminded to apply to the EU Settlement Scheme

EEA nationals reminded to apply to the EU Settlement Scheme

EEA nationals to apply to EU Settlement Scheme

EEA nationals to apply to EU Settlement Scheme

Justice in Automated Administration

Public administration has, for some time now, been undergoing a digital transformation. Part of this change is the replacement of human public officials with automated decision-making systems. Beyond its immediate social and political significance, the EU Settlement Scheme—the mechanism established to allow EU citizens to remain resident in the UK after Brexit—represents the coming of age of a new template for automated administration. Understood in its context, this template raises foundational questions about the nature of administrative justice in the emerging digital state. This template, while it has various potential advantages, is essentially half-baked, contains significant risks without sufficient safeguards, and requires revision before its suggested wider future application becomes a reality. Amendments to the template ought to be framed by reference to the precautionary principle, as this would continue to make for efficient implementation of policy while better protecting individuals in this experimental phase of automated administration.

Protecting EU Citizens in the UK from a Brexit ‘Windrush on Steroids’: A Legislative Proposal for a Declaratory Registration System

Three years after the Brexit referendum, the more than 3 million EU citizens residing in the UK still have no clarity what their legal status will be after Brexit. It is uncertain whether the Withdrawal Agreement will ever be adopted, while national measures adopted by the UK Government do not provide proper protection. The ‘EU Settlement Scheme’ has been adopted through secondary legis-lation, which can be easily changed over time, thus providing limited security. Moreover, the Scheme introduces an application system which will turn legally residing EU citizens into illegal immigrants if they do not apply successfully by the deadline, leading to scenario’s similar to those seen with the Windrush scandal. It is high time that the UK legislator takes appropriate action. This paper presents a full legislative proposal to turn the EU Settlement Scheme into a declaratory registration scheme that will ensure that EU citizens receive a document proving their status, while avoiding turning them into illegal immigrants. It equally provides a proposal to define the rights of these citizens into primary legisla-tion so they cannot be easily undermined.

EU settlement scheme applications

Kamena Dorling, group head of policy and public affairs at Coram, examines the European Union settlement scheme and the barriers faced by many children and young people who may need to apply

Employment cases of note (February 2019).

British Journal of Community NursingVol. 24, No. 3 LegalEmployment cases of note (February 2019)Gareth EdwardsGareth EdwardsE-mail Address: [email protected]Partner and Head of Employment Law at VWVSearch for more papers by this authorGareth EdwardsPublished Online:28 Feb 2019https://doi.org/10.12968/bjcn.2019.24.3.140AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail View article References Baker C for House of Commons Library. Briefing paper number 7783. NHS staff from overseas: statistics. 2018. https://tinyurl.com/y82dyvqq (accessed 12 February 2019) Google ScholarDepartment of Health and Social Care. NHS Pension Scheme: proposed changes to scheme regulations. 2018. https://tinyurl.com/y5p2l5ta (accessed 12 February 2019) Google ScholarHM Courts and Tribunals Service. Mr S Ibrahim v HCA International Ltd: UKEAT/0105/18/BA. 2019. https://tinyurl.com/y7ob3974 (accessed 12 February 2019) Google ScholarHM Government. EU Settlement Scheme: introduction to the employer toolkit. 2019. https://tinyurl.com/y3t7ra5g (accessed 12 February 2019) Google ScholarHM Government. 2018. Good work plan. https://tinyurl.com/y9mxrnks (accessed 12 February 2019) Google ScholarTaylor M. Good work report. 2017. https://tinyurl.com/yaf4fk5e (accessed 12 February 2019) Google ScholarUK Visas and Immigration and Home Office. Using the ‘EU Exit: ID Document Check’ app. 2018. https://tinyurl.com/y5ooy73y (accessed 12 February 2019) Google ScholarWalker (Appellant) v Innospec Limited and others (Respondents). [2017] UKSC 47 Google Scholar FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails 2 March 2019Volume 24Issue 3ISSN (print): 1462-4753ISSN (online): 2052-2215 Metrics History Accepted 1 February 2019 Published online 28 February 2019 Published in print 2 March 2019 Information© MA Healthcare LimitedPDF download

Brexit’s Effect on Citizens, Human Rights & Immigration

This report records the roundtable on “Brexit’s Effect on Citizens, Human Rights and Immigration” organised by Dr Adrienne Yong on 11 June 2019 at City, University of London funded by the Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF) 2018/19. Speakers included: • Hannah Wilkins (House of Commons Library) • Blanca Grey (Home Office)1 • Paul Erdunast (Immigration Law Practitioner’s Association - ILPA) • Christopher Desira (Seraphus Solicitors) • Nicole Masri (Rights of Women) • Ollie Persey (Public Law Project) • Katarzyna Zagrodniczek (East European Resource Centre) • Mihai Calin Bica (Roma Support Group) • Dr Adrienne Yong (City, University of London) • Dr Michaela Benson (Goldsmiths, University of London) • Madeleine Sumption (Migration Observatory) • Sheona York (Kent Law Clinic) A host of unique legal questions were raised in the aftermath of the UK’s referendum result where the electorate voted in favour of leaving the EU on the 23 June 2016. Opinion has been split as to whether the UK and EU have indeed struck a fair deal for citizens, with arguments that citizens have been used as bargaining chips throughout the process to achieve a deal. As negotiations progressed towards the original mandated date of withdrawal, 29 March 2019, various schemes emerged to handle post-Brexit immigration of EU citizens in the UK and reciprocal arrangements for British citizens in the EU. This is now reflected in the EU Settlement Scheme, the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination Bill, and the reciprocity agreed with EU Member States as to British citizens in the EU. These issues and more were discussed at the roundtable.

If the British left: Agricultural policy outside the CAP?

SummaryIf the Conservative party wins Britain's General Election in 2015 the incoming Government intends to negotiate a new settlement with the EU, and then hold an in–out referendum. Opinion polls suggest a narrow majority would vote to leave. To exercise an informed choice the electorate would need to know what feasible alternatives are available, so that these can be assessed and debated. Furthermore, in the event of a No vote the Government must be ready to implement its alternative strategy: Plan B. This implies that both a new EU settlement, and Plan B, need to be negotiated concurrently. There has been no serious attempt to explain what Plan B would mean for UK farm policy. Would, for example, British farmers continue to receive the level of support that they currently enjoy; would support be more focussed on environmental objectives? WTO rules on most‐favoured‐nation treatment and regional trade agreements would apply. Could a WTO compatible agri‐food trade agreement be negotiated with its former EU partners, or would Irish and Brazilian beef face the same tariff barriers on imports into the British market? For the EU, the loss of a major net contributor to EU finances could result in a re‐examination of the CAP budget.