31 ms·

EU 'does not accept' UK decision on diplomats

24 points by dustinmoris 6y ago

rusk 6y ago
Is there a precedent for representatives from other blocs e.g NATO, mercosur etc getting diplomatic status? If so this is fairly petty. If not I can kind of see where they’re coming from but yeah still a bit petty considering it’s an established precedent with the EU in itself .. especially under the circumstances.
- Traster 6y ago
  The innevitable conclusion to this (after plenty of willy waggling and insisting that Brexit meant taking back sovereignty whilst also now inisting the EU doesn't have soveriegnty) is that you can cover the diplomats as representatives from their home countries. So Joao Vale de Almeida will just be a Portugese diplomat serving in his role in the EU.
- emptyfile 6y ago
  Every other country in the world gives this status to the EU ambassador. Even Donald Trump managed to figure that one out. Beyond petty. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/04/world/europe/us-eu-status-ambassador.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/04/world/europe/us-eu-status... In a Change of Tone, U.S. Restores E.U.’s Diplomatic Status
  - dogma1138 6y ago
    The UKs existing laws do not allow the granting of diplomatic status to organizations only to representatives of nation states the existing laws need to be amended. Why they weren’t and why this wasn’t part of the withdrawal deal I don’t know, probably more oversight than outright malice. So I’m not so sure it’s petty at least not as of yet as there is no legal framework in the UK to extend diplomatic status to people who represent the EU (or any other organization) but who’s own nation state has not issued diplomatic credentials to and requested the UK to accept them.
    - rusk 6y ago
      If it’s a matter of oversight that EU officials heretofore had not this status then it is surely petty to not recognise the precedent and amend the laws if needs be.
      - dogma1138 6y ago
        The law does not allow for the recognition of organizations, the fact that it would be a precedence is exactly why it cannot be amended this quickly as the impact on the British legal system needs to be reviewed and understood. The law hasn’t been amended since 1964 and it has impact on other things including taxation https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1964/81/contents https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1964/81/contents It’s literally hasn’t been even a month since Brexit and only about 2 weeks since the request came in and about a week since it became an actual issue.
        rusk 6y ago
        Okay, the devil is in the detail on this one. I took it that the UK said they “won’t” - or are unwilling to - but by your interpretation they say they “can’t” - presently but might like to review that in the future ...
- pseudo0 6y ago
  NATO and the UN generally have their own classes of visas that do not grant diplomatic privileges. In the US for example, there are NATO visas for NATO representatives, and G visas for members of international organizations [0] (although they made an exception to that and let the EU and African Union representatives enter on diplomatic A visas) [1]. The funny part is that this is a total tempest in a teapot. Diplomatic immunity hardly ever gets used nowadays; the only real advantage to diplomatic status is avoiding the London congestion taxes. [0] - https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/other-visa-categories/visa-employees-nato.html https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/other-vi... [1] - https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/other-visa-categories/visas-diplomats.html https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/other-vi...
  - rusk 6y ago
    > Diplomatic immunity hardly ever gets used nowadays Harry Dunn’s family might disagree with this ...
    - pseudo0 6y ago
      And that turned into a significant diplomatic incident precisely because of the way diplomatic immunity was exercised in that case... In serious situations like that between friendly countries with fair judicial systems, diplomatic immunity usually gets waived.
      - rusk 6y ago
        It still hasn’t been resolved last I checked and it was a decision made by the current administration so I’ve little faith that the attitude has changed.
bryanrasmussen 6y ago
I had figured the stupidity of Brexit was basically smart for some people because they profited from it, but where is the profit in this and for whom? This just seems like "hold my beer, give me that gun, I can prove I'm the stupidest" level of stupidity here.
- rusk 6y ago
  The “Profit” is in performing to the pre-senile grumps that make up the rump of the Tory base. This kind of thing wouldn’t be out of place in the Telegraph at all ...
diveanon 6y ago
Vindictive and petty conservatives embarrassing themselves and their entire country. That's new.
AnimalMuppet 6y ago
Well, does France, say, still have an ambassador to the UK? Why? Does Alaska have one? No, but the US has one. So if the EU wants to be a country, accept their ambassador, and send away the ambassadors of France, Spain, Italy, Greece, and all the rest. But if you've got ambassadors from all of those countries, why should you have an EU ambassador? If France and Germany are countries with ambassadors, then what's the EU?
neilsense 6y ago
After what happened with the US and diplomatic immunity of the women that murdered the kid, I'm not surprised that the UK is not willing to extend it to huge delegations coming in. It's easier to control and administer on a per-country basis.

24 points by dustinmoris 6y ago

rusk 6y ago

Is there a precedent for representatives from other blocs e.g NATO, mercosur etc getting diplomatic status? If so this is fairly petty. If not I can kind of see where they’re coming from but yeah still a bit petty considering it’s an established precedent with the EU in itself .. especially under the circumstances.

Traster 6y ago
The innevitable conclusion to this (after plenty of willy waggling and insisting that Brexit meant taking back sovereignty whilst also now inisting the EU doesn't have soveriegnty) is that you can cover the diplomats as representatives from their home countries. So Joao Vale de Almeida will just be a Portugese diplomat serving in his role in the EU.
emptyfile 6y ago
Every other country in the world gives this status to the EU ambassador. Even Donald Trump managed to figure that one out. Beyond petty. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/04/world/europe/us-eu-status-ambassador.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/04/world/europe/us-eu-status... In a Change of Tone, U.S. Restores E.U.’s Diplomatic Status
- dogma1138 6y ago
  The UKs existing laws do not allow the granting of diplomatic status to organizations only to representatives of nation states the existing laws need to be amended. Why they weren’t and why this wasn’t part of the withdrawal deal I don’t know, probably more oversight than outright malice. So I’m not so sure it’s petty at least not as of yet as there is no legal framework in the UK to extend diplomatic status to people who represent the EU (or any other organization) but who’s own nation state has not issued diplomatic credentials to and requested the UK to accept them.
  - rusk 6y ago
    If it’s a matter of oversight that EU officials heretofore had not this status then it is surely petty to not recognise the precedent and amend the laws if needs be.
    - dogma1138 6y ago
      The law does not allow for the recognition of organizations, the fact that it would be a precedence is exactly why it cannot be amended this quickly as the impact on the British legal system needs to be reviewed and understood. The law hasn’t been amended since 1964 and it has impact on other things including taxation https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1964/81/contents https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1964/81/contents It’s literally hasn’t been even a month since Brexit and only about 2 weeks since the request came in and about a week since it became an actual issue.
      - rusk 6y ago
        Okay, the devil is in the detail on this one. I took it that the UK said they “won’t” - or are unwilling to - but by your interpretation they say they “can’t” - presently but might like to review that in the future ...
pseudo0 6y ago
NATO and the UN generally have their own classes of visas that do not grant diplomatic privileges. In the US for example, there are NATO visas for NATO representatives, and G visas for members of international organizations [0] (although they made an exception to that and let the EU and African Union representatives enter on diplomatic A visas) [1]. The funny part is that this is a total tempest in a teapot. Diplomatic immunity hardly ever gets used nowadays; the only real advantage to diplomatic status is avoiding the London congestion taxes. [0] - https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/other-visa-categories/visa-employees-nato.html https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/other-vi... [1] - https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/other-visa-categories/visas-diplomats.html https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/other-vi...
- rusk 6y ago
  > Diplomatic immunity hardly ever gets used nowadays Harry Dunn’s family might disagree with this ...
  - pseudo0 6y ago
    And that turned into a significant diplomatic incident precisely because of the way diplomatic immunity was exercised in that case... In serious situations like that between friendly countries with fair judicial systems, diplomatic immunity usually gets waived.
    - rusk 6y ago
      It still hasn’t been resolved last I checked and it was a decision made by the current administration so I’ve little faith that the attitude has changed.

bryanrasmussen 6y ago

I had figured the stupidity of Brexit was basically smart for some people because they profited from it, but where is the profit in this and for whom? This just seems like "hold my beer, give me that gun, I can prove I'm the stupidest" level of stupidity here.

rusk 6y ago
The “Profit” is in performing to the pre-senile grumps that make up the rump of the Tory base. This kind of thing wouldn’t be out of place in the Telegraph at all ...

diveanon 6y ago

Vindictive and petty conservatives embarrassing themselves and their entire country. That's new.

AnimalMuppet 6y ago

Well, does France, say, still have an ambassador to the UK? Why? Does Alaska have one? No, but the US has one. So if the EU wants to be a country, accept their ambassador, and send away the ambassadors of France, Spain, Italy, Greece, and all the rest. But if you've got ambassadors from all of those countries, why should you have an EU ambassador? If France and Germany are countries with ambassadors, then what's the EU?

neilsense 6y ago

After what happened with the US and diplomatic immunity of the women that murdered the kid, I'm not surprised that the UK is not willing to extend it to huge delegations coming in. It's easier to control and administer on a per-country basis.