UK citizens
The impacts on citizens and security meant that, with ‘no deal’, UK citizens would have had to comply with the EU’s immigration requirements for nationals of third countries, such as visas for brief business visits.
In addition:
- UK citizens resident in the EU who cross borders frequently (for example, those who live in one EU27 country but work or conduct business in others) faced complex issues.
- Longer-term arrangements for economic rights, such as healthcare, pensions and social security entitlements are likely to take years to resolve, particularly when built up across member states.
- Many countries offered a temporary grace period. For example, in Spain this was for 21 months after 31 January 2020.
- However, from 1 January 2021: for travel across member states, UK citizens resident in Spain had to carry their passports and temporary residence permits. Those without a temporary residence permit had to apply for one.
- UK citizens could then apply for permanent residence in Spain, if resident for more than five years.
- In the event of ‘no deal’, many member states, including Spain, made their contingency plans dependent on reciprocity, The rights for UK citizens resident in, for example Spain, would have depended on rights given by the UK to Spanish citizens resident in the UK.
For the EU as a whole, under ‘no deal’, as with the TCA, UK visitors would no longer have been entitled to:
- European Health Insurance Cards, which permit unplanned access to emergency healthcare on the same basis as local residents. This meant travellers would need to take out additional insurance;
- EU caps on mobile phone roaming charges. This was likely to mean additional costs;
- Compensation for flight delays (although the UK may have decided to maintain the rules on compensation);
- Use a UK driving licence in the EU27. This meant obtaining an international driving permit and green card to drive or take a car to the EU;
- Take a pet to the EU.
With ‘no deal’ the WA would have guaranteed most of the rights of UK citizens resident in the EU before the end of the transition period – provided they had completed the relevant documentation. The individuals affected had faced uncertainty on their residency rights, access to employment, ability to claim pensions and other social security benefits, and access to healthcare.
The European Parliament Research Service provided a helpful summary of the current status for each member state’s position. At the time, the Commission provided further details but these are no longer readily available.
EU citizens
The WA meant that the rights of EU citizens resident in the UK were mainly guaranteed provided they had applied successfully under the government’s settlement scheme. The scheme applied to EU citizens, those from other EEA countries and Switzerland. There are two types of status: ‘settled’ and ‘pre-settled’. Pre-settled status requires re-application after five years. Under the WA, those arriving immediately after 31 January 2020, but before 31 December 2020 were able to apply to remain permanently.
From 1 January 2021, either with ‘no deal’ or a deal, the UK applied its points-based system to new arrivals from the EU, other EEA countries and Switzerland. This was a major change compared to freedom of movement within the EU.
Also, there is a distinction between EU citizens who arrived before Brexit and whose applications had been processed, and those who arrived later. Before then it was difficult to differentiate the rights of EU, other EEA and Swiss nationals arriving after 31 January 2020 from those already here. For example, it was unclear what employers, landlords and public services were supposed to do.
An inevitable consequence of Brexit has been to discourage EU citizens from coming to work in the UK (see section on immigration).
Security
‘No deal’ would have delivered a serious blow to the UK’s counter-terrorism and crime operations which depend on networks of intelligence and data sharing with the EU27. Suddenly, the life for global criminals and fraudsters would have become easier as, by the effect of EU law, UK police, border force and security services would have lost access to EU-wide systems such as:
- Europol, the EU’s law enforcement agency, employing over 900 people – an invaluable tool both for intelligence sharing and at the operational level;
- Passenger Name Records – EU rules oblige airlines to hand over passenger records to the UK to prevent terrorism and serious crime, including trafficking in drugs, people or weapons;
- European Arrest Warrant – making extradition of criminal suspects (averaging 10,000 a year across the EU) from the EU27 more difficult;
- Schengen Information System (SIS) – weakening checks on the security risk of arrivals into the country through, for example, DNA and fingerprint records. UK police accessed this system in 2017 over 500 million times.
In addition, ‘no deal’ would have led to the immediate suspension of EU assistance to UK operations, including ongoing operations. International law provides restricted alternatives for a third country but they are less effective.
The UK’s participation in most EU Justice and Home Affairs agencies would have stopped. With ‘no deal’, the UK would also have been excluded or would have had diminished access to many other EU agencies until new arrangements were negotiated and agreed.
These other EU agencies indirectly shape the field of internal security – such as the EU Agency for Cybersecurity and the EU Intellectual Property Office. They serve as co-operation platforms that help member states co-ordinate their counter-terrorism and counter-criminality efforts by sharing expertise and resources.
For further information on the UK’s position as an EU member, please see section on defence and security.