3. What representations has the Counsel General made to the UK Government regarding the legal status of EU citizens in Wales? OAQ(5)0024(CG)

The Welsh Government has made its position very clear: we have called for the rights of EU migrants already living in Wales to be guaranteed immediately.

Can I thank you, Counsel General, for your response? Last week, in this Chamber, I made reference to a specific case of the uncertainty facing a family of German nationals settled in Wales over the lack of clarity from the UK Government over the position of EU nationals living in this country. As we know, it’s not just the personal impact that the uncertainty has on thousands of families across the UK, many of whom are in Wales; we also know the extent to which our public services and private industry rely on skills that EU nationals add to their workforces. So, does the General Counsel—the Counsel General, sorry—agree with me that it is unacceptable for EU nationals and their families to be treated in this way, effectively being used as bargaining chips by Theresa May in her negotiations over Brexit, and that she should live up to her claim that she wants to guarantee their right to stay in the UK as soon as possible and give this guarantee now, given that she has the powers to do so?

Can I say to the Member, I fully understand the points that she makes, which very much reflect the comments that were made in the Welsh Government’s White Paper? For example, I understand there are in the region of 120,000 EU citizens in Wales. There are 1,360 academic staff, and there are many in our NHS and care sector. And I think back as to—and I’m sure we could all do the same—how these impact. My mother passed away a few years ago. If she were alive now, she would be exactly in that position, as a Danish national, and I would be sitting here answering this question with the view as to whether or not my mother would be allowed to remain in this country. There are many, many people who are in that position.

What it calls for, it seems to me, from the UK Government, is courage, integrity, and actual leadership, because it cannot be right to use individuals and families as bargaining chips. And, sometimes, as far as the UK Government is concerned, it seems to me that it is just necessary for them to stand up and to do what is right. So, I fully agree with what the Member has said.

I agree entirely with what the Counsel General has just said. Many people living in my region, particularly in a town such as Aberystwyth, where there is a university and a hospital, are European citizens who have married people from Wales as well, and they are deeply concerned—and I emphasise that; they are deeply concerned—about the uncertainty for them and for their children, because they do have children in our schools in Ceredigion, too. In addition to making the stance clear on behalf of the Welsh Government, what else can you do on behalf of the Government to urge the Westminster Government not to use European citizens in this way? If we were to show good will at the beginning of the negotiations on Brexit by ensuring security for citizens of other nations, I would think that we would get a fairer hearing, ultimately, during those negotiations, too—bearing in mind, of course, that such citizens are also voters in Assembly elections.

The Member is absolutely right. And, of course, many of those citizens have made the point that they may have lived in Wales, or in the United Kingdom, for 30 or 40 plus years, and that they may have voted in European elections, and yet they were excluded from participating in the referendum, and they do feel an injustice. There have been representations made with regard to the impact and the potential break-up of families that may occur, where one member may have to leave his wife and son.

Now, it is all very well for a Government to say, ‘Oh, don’t worry, it will be all sorted out, as soon as we’ve sorted out our citizens over there’. But that means that we are, effectively, using them as a bargaining chip. To me, I regard that as wholly immoral and totally wrong. And it is a disgrace for the Government at the moment not to have the integrity to stand up for those citizens who have contributed so much to our communities and our society.

Well, isn’t what is immoral and totally wrong the scaremongering campaign, which is still going on eight months after the referendum campaign—the ‘remain’ camp’s project fear? As the Counsel General will know, the United Kingdom is a signatory of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which refers to the acquired rights of citizens of the signatory countries, and which protects them in respect of the rights that they’ve built up before any treaty change takes place. And so, any subsequent treaty that is signed by that country cannot diminish or undermine those rights. This was accepted by the European Economic Community—as it then was—when Greenland left the community, and the commission referred to what were called then vested rights, which would be preserved following Greenland’s leaving what we now call the union. Therefore, any scaremongering on this issue is completely and utterly wrong, and actually it is extraordinary that we are still having this argument so many months after the referendum.

I would agree with the Member that it is extraordinary that we are still having this debate so long after the referendum. It is perhaps extraordinary that the Member is also totally disagreeing with the member of his group who appeared on ‘Sharp End’, who actually said that she was of the view, and that UKIP’s position was, that they should be given immediate rights, and they should not be used as bargaining chips. I have to say of the Member’s approach that at least he is consistent in his ability to actually shock me with comments of inhumanity that do not surprise me in the least.

Counsel General, I know you will be aware of the case of my constituent of Austrian nationality who came to Aberdare in 1996 as a foreign language assistant, studied for a PGCE, became a teacher and set up her own business, but who, because she took the decision to stay at home to raise her children—of UK nationality—now finds she cannot qualify for permanent residency. Paradoxically, if my constituent’s husband was also Austrian, she could apply for permanent residency as a dependant. This is impacting upon my constituent, her husband and her children. What advice could you give to them?

The advice I would give to them is to make all the representations they can through their representatives—whether it be the Assembly, whether it be Members of Parliament—and also to recognise the steps that the First Minister and the Welsh Government are taking to argue this case. I’d also refer specifically—. I think it is worth, perhaps, us reiterating the point in ‘Securing Wales’s Future’, in the White Paper, where it states very specifically that

Wales has benefited from inward migration from the EU and many other parts of the world. We believe that migrants make a positive contribution to Wales’ economy and to society more widely. We regret and condemn the rise in xenophobia and racism exacerbated by the immoderate tone of debate in some parts of the political community.’

Thank—

We stand in full solidarity with all our people, irrespective of their country of origin and believe that the UK Government should already have made clear that everyone legally resident in the UK will have their rights guaranteed after we leave the EU. We call upon the UK Government to make a clear declaration along these lines to provide reassurance to EU citizens living in Wales and elsewhere in the UK. We call upon the EU to make a similar declaration in respect of Welsh and UK citizens living throughout the EU. We reject completely any inference that the status of citizens with legitimate rights of residence should be used as “bargaining chips” in negotiations on the UK’s exit from the EU.’

Thank you. You shouldn’t take a long pause in between your sentences. I was about to cut you off in your prime, but I didn’t. There we go. Question 4, Mike Hedges.

Who never uses a pause. [Laughter.]