What a load of cope on The Gaurdian’s part, trying to blame this shit on Sweden instead of the UK.
Examples:
The problem centres on the Migration Agency’s apparent refusal to allow late applications from people who were not aware they had to formally apply to remain post-Brexit – a process used in only 12 other EU countries.
Yeah, “only” more than a third of the total, so rare and weird!
But in the post-Brexit scenario in Sweden, deportations of Britons have been ordered even when no crime is involved.
As if Sweden shouldn’t be allowed to do that, even though the UK insisted on being considered separate and foreign.
Part of the problem, he says, stems from the lack of communication to registered British people living in the country, causing missed deadline applications.
He said the Sellers’ case was “yet another example of systemic failings in Sweden’s implementation of the withdrawal agreement”.
Blaming Sweden for British immigrants’ own failures.
Sucks for the individuals involved (which I sure hope voted against Brexit, as that’s the only thing that stops it from being a !leopardsatemyface situation), but the UK is getting exactly what it demanded.
Well it actually starts before that, how can someone live in another country for 24 years and not claim citizenship?
And yes Brits living in another country should be able to read up on what they have to do after Brexit.
It’s not like that Brexit never hit the media.
Why is everyone today calling for someone else to manage their own life?!
Get your shit together.
You know that’s an interesting thought there. If you’ve lived in a certain place for at least 10 years, I almost think that you should be forced to renounce citizenship of your prior country and become a citizen there or you’re basically just a long term squatter.
Long-term squatter here, applying for citizenship is expensive (almost 2 grand) and it’s a bloody awful process. It involves taking a test that I’m sure the vast majority of actual citizens would fail. I’d rather put the money towards a house deposit.
that wasn’t the case in sweden until very recently, no test, no language requirement, not sure about the price but i’m sure it wasn’t that expensive cus there were no language tests or knowledge tests to bump up the fees
they basically gave out citizenships to everyone that had lived in the country for a few years.
basically the only option for him to be denied citizenship is that he committed a crime and got jail time or a suspended sentence, and that’s his fault at that point. maybe get citizenship before commiting serious crime lol
I get that, but consider getting a house deposit requires paperwork and financial testing. Skipping or ignoring that paperwork may not serve getting a house deposit.
But it does seem like the person in the article did their paperwork and still ended up being rejected.
Then I’d argue you’re refusing to integrate and you shouldn’t be there. You’re talking about a house, which means even longer term roots. If you’re going to take advantage of their system, you should become willing to integrate.
Well the UK left the EU so of course there are consequences. People should have paid more attention. Britain really just wanted to separate and not have any consequences.
I think if I were in his shoes, I would have been asking myself and my country’s embassy some questions. As a EU citizen, I am now required to get myself a travel passport if I want to travel to London for just a weekend, as well as some kind of electronic mini-visa similar to the US Esta thing. Assuming that new (in my eyes absolutely bonkers) post-Brexit restrictions only work one way is pretty silly.
Unless The Guardian left some important details involving masked, armed thugs and concentration camps out of the article, what Sweden is doing is nothing like what Trump is doing.
And speaking of things left out of the article, it doesn’t explain why his “three failed attempts to remain in the country” actually failed. It makes me wonder if there’s a good reason for it that we’re not being told. (And that, by the way, also sounds markedly different from the complete lack of due process currently happening in US immigration “courts.”)
So wait, is he being kicked out because Britain voted for Brexit or because of something he did? You’re not even keeping your story straight. In the meantime that they’ve been there for a long time it’s literally the reason that we can’t give land back to the Palestinians or Georgia back to the Cherokees, so as a Native American I’m very interested in why it’s OK now. Kind of seems like this is just yet another instance of the people in charge getting to make the rules no matter what the morality is.
So wait, is he being kicked out because Britain voted for Brexit or because of something he did? You’re not even keeping your story straight.
What do you mean, “my story?” I’m not The Guardian! They’re the ones claiming he’s being kicked out because of Brexit while leaving out the reasons why Swedish immigration authorities ruled against him three times.
Do you just lack reading comprehension skills or something? Why do you keep assuming random shit I didn’t say?
Of fucking course Brexit has something to do with it; it’s why he doesn’t have an automatic right to live in Sweden indefinitely. But that is not the same as being the reason his non-automatic application to stay failed three times. Clear now?
What a load of cope on The Gaurdian’s part, trying to blame this shit on Sweden instead of the UK.
Examples:
Yeah, “only” more than a third of the total, so rare and weird!
As if Sweden shouldn’t be allowed to do that, even though the UK insisted on being considered separate and foreign.
Blaming Sweden for British immigrants’ own failures.
Sucks for the individuals involved (which I sure hope voted against Brexit, as that’s the only thing that stops it from being a !leopardsatemyface situation), but the UK is getting exactly what it demanded.
At the end of the day, your immigration policies suck when you can kick out someone who lived there for 24 years, fully integrated.
Well it actually starts before that, how can someone live in another country for 24 years and not claim citizenship?
And yes Brits living in another country should be able to read up on what they have to do after Brexit.
It’s not like that Brexit never hit the media.
Why is everyone today calling for someone else to manage their own life?!
Get your shit together.
They must have managed their life quite well considering they were no citizen.
You know that’s an interesting thought there. If you’ve lived in a certain place for at least 10 years, I almost think that you should be forced to renounce citizenship of your prior country and become a citizen there or you’re basically just a long term squatter.
Long-term squatter here, applying for citizenship is expensive (almost 2 grand) and it’s a bloody awful process. It involves taking a test that I’m sure the vast majority of actual citizens would fail. I’d rather put the money towards a house deposit.
that wasn’t the case in sweden until very recently, no test, no language requirement, not sure about the price but i’m sure it wasn’t that expensive cus there were no language tests or knowledge tests to bump up the fees
they basically gave out citizenships to everyone that had lived in the country for a few years.
basically the only option for him to be denied citizenship is that he committed a crime and got jail time or a suspended sentence, and that’s his fault at that point. maybe get citizenship before commiting serious crime lol
I get that, but consider getting a house deposit requires paperwork and financial testing. Skipping or ignoring that paperwork may not serve getting a house deposit.
But it does seem like the person in the article did their paperwork and still ended up being rejected.
Then I’d argue you’re refusing to integrate and you shouldn’t be there. You’re talking about a house, which means even longer term roots. If you’re going to take advantage of their system, you should become willing to integrate.
Can you truly be fully integrated, if you did not obtain citizenship?
Well the UK left the EU so of course there are consequences. People should have paid more attention. Britain really just wanted to separate and not have any consequences.
I think if I were in his shoes, I would have been asking myself and my country’s embassy some questions. As a EU citizen, I am now required to get myself a travel passport if I want to travel to London for just a weekend, as well as some kind of electronic mini-visa similar to the US Esta thing. Assuming that new (in my eyes absolutely bonkers) post-Brexit restrictions only work one way is pretty silly.
Sweden shouldn’t be allowed to do that, just like Trump shouldn’t be allowed to remove people who’ve been living in the US for 24 years.
Unless The Guardian left some important details involving masked, armed thugs and concentration camps out of the article, what Sweden is doing is nothing like what Trump is doing.
And speaking of things left out of the article, it doesn’t explain why his “three failed attempts to remain in the country” actually failed. It makes me wonder if there’s a good reason for it that we’re not being told. (And that, by the way, also sounds markedly different from the complete lack of due process currently happening in US immigration “courts.”)
So wait, is he being kicked out because Britain voted for Brexit or because of something he did? You’re not even keeping your story straight. In the meantime that they’ve been there for a long time it’s literally the reason that we can’t give land back to the Palestinians or Georgia back to the Cherokees, so as a Native American I’m very interested in why it’s OK now. Kind of seems like this is just yet another instance of the people in charge getting to make the rules no matter what the morality is.
What do you mean, “my story?” I’m not The Guardian! They’re the ones claiming he’s being kicked out because of Brexit while leaving out the reasons why Swedish immigration authorities ruled against him three times.
You literally called it a leopards eating faces situation and said that the UK was getting what they demanded.
The point is they ruled against him 3 times after he had been living there for over two decades.
If he didn’t oppose Brexit.
If brexit doesn’t have anything to do with it then why does that matter?
Do you just lack reading comprehension skills or something? Why do you keep assuming random shit I didn’t say?
Of fucking course Brexit has something to do with it; it’s why he doesn’t have an automatic right to live in Sweden indefinitely. But that is not the same as being the reason his non-automatic application to stay failed three times. Clear now?
Why if your not a citizen you don’t really have any rights in the country.