A proposal to allow British nationals to keep EU citizenship after Brexit has been dismissed as a non-starter by EU experts and officials.

EU insiders have given a chilly reception to the idea that Britons might enjoy associate citizenship after leaving the EU, following a claim from a leading MEP that it would feature in Brexit negotiations.

Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament’s representative on Brexit, promised last week to ensure that associate citizenship for Britons “was on the table” during the UK’s EU exit talks. He was picking up a plan from his fellow Liberal, Luxembourg’s Charles Goerens, who proposed giving British citizens the right to live and work on the continent after Brexit, in exchange for an annual membership fee.



The proposal has been embraced by dejected remainers but condemned as “sinister” and “an outrage” by diehard leavers. However, it is very unlikely to happen.



Introducing citizenship rights for a non-EU country would require changing European treaties, an arduous legal task no member state wishes to undertake. Jean-Claude Piris, a former head of the EU council’s legal service, told the Guardian that it was legally impossible to allow nationals of a non-EU country to have associate citizenship of the union. “Moreover, politically, a revision of the treaty on this would not be accepted.”



The idea would have to win the unanimous backing of the EU’s 27 remaining countries, which control the Brexit process. Jean De Ruyt, who was Belgium’s ambassador to the EU, said the plan had no chance of being supported by governments.

“This proposal is absolutely not serious,” he told the Guardian. “It is very vague and for the distant future, it is not something which is made for Brexit. Maybe it can be discussed 10 years from now if member states want to change the treaty.”



He added that the EU exit agreement foreseen by article 50 made no provision for any substantive treaty change. “The changes in the treaty linked to Brexit will be minimal and directly linked to Brexit.”

One EU source reflected the sceptical view, describing the idea as a non-starter. “Everybody who hears about this, their first reaction is: ‘How would this ever work?’, so I think we can disregard this idea for practical reasons.”

Donald Tusk, the president of the European council, along with EU governments, has rebuffed attempts by British officials to strike a quick deal on reciprocal rights for EU citizens in the UK and Britons on the continent. In a letter to Tory eurosceptic backbenchers, Tusk called for “precise and comprehensive solutions rather than nice-sounding expressions [which] will provide citizens with genuine guarantees of security”.



EU insiders view the associate citizenship idea as similarly vague and impractical. The Liberal MEPs sounded confident they could bring the citizenship plan to the negotiating table, by tacking it onto the European parliament’s official position on Brexit, due to be voted in spring 2017 after Theresa May triggers the long-awaited article 50.

But their proposal would struggle to win a majority of MEPs. The two largest groups, the centre-right EPP and the Socialists, are full of sceptical voices, while the Greens are also critical.

Jo Leinen, a German socialist MEP and specialist on constitutional affairs, said there was no majority in the European parliament for the Verhofstadt plan.

The idea also contradicts the repeated assertions of EU leaders that there will be no cherry-picking or sweetheart deal for the UK.



“You heard Angela Merkel telling the British partners that you are either in the common market or you are not in and this applies to all the rules,” said Leinen. “If free movement is not granted by Britain, why should the EU grant free movement to British citizens. At least there should be reciprocity.”

The EU would look weak if it granted British citizens rights not enjoyed by EU nationals in the UK, he added.

Spelling out the daunting political obstacles, he said: “One would need treaty change and the 27 member states and their parliaments to agree special rights for a country that is leaving us, and I have doubts.”

Even if the plan won the backing of MEPs, EU officials stress that Verhofstadt has no power to insist the plan will be part of Brexit negotiations.



The EU rulebook makes clear the European parliament is the junior partner in negotiations over any country’s departure from the bloc. Article 50 specifies that EU governments will negotiate an exit deal, which requires the consent of the European parliament. Michel Barnier, the European commission’s chief negotiator, will lead the day-to-day process of Brexit on behalf of governments. While he did not pick up this issue at his first press conference last week, he made clear his top priority was the unity of the 27 other member states.



De Ruyt said the Verhofstadt idea was likely to irritate national governments, who are in the driving seat of the Brexit process. “It is a mistake from him if he wants credibility.”