In November 2020, the UK Government admitted that the EU Settlement Scheme is likely to discriminate against some groups protected by the Equality Act 2010 and published an official assessment on this concluding that any discriminatory effects are justifiable. However, discrimination of this type is often defined on a single axis, such as those seen in statistics published quarterly on the EUSS (age, nationality, local authority). This paper will scrutinise a specific group of individuals that risk being discriminated not on their single-axis characteristics, but at the intersection of multiple identities: here, the intersection of gender and class. The former focuses on women, the latter on non-linear career trajectories such as those involving unpaid care or part-time employment.

The argument in this paper is that those who interrupt their continuous employment are at higher risk of being offered protection under the EU Settlement Scheme, disproportionately affecting women more as they are more likely to interrupt full time employment to assume carer roles more often than men. The reliance on automated checks in Government databases to prove residency as one of the main criteria for successful status under the EU Settlement Scheme exacerbates the precarity faced by these women, who are already at risk of falling outside the scope of protection under EU law due to undertaking non-traditional work or care. By tracing the origins of this intersectional discrimination in the EU citizenship legacy and its dependence on the market citizenship paradigm, this paper seeks to explain how this risks being replicated in a post-Brexit Britain. 

This paper examines the discursive construction and recontextualization of the Northern Ireland Protocol (NIP) in the context of Brexit, focusing on British right-wing political and media narratives. The NIP, a critical element of the Brexit agreement, governs the trade relations between Northern Ireland and the European Union, aiming to circumvent the establishment of a hard border with the Republic of Ireland.

Employing a mixed-method approach that merges content analysis with critical discourse approach, the paper analyses the construction and evolution of the NIP narrative from 2020 to 2023. This period saw significant developments in both the political landscape and the public’s perception of Brexit. Our analysis draws from a broad dataset, including political speeches, media reports, and editorials from leading right-wing newspapers. We identified key narratives, including the ‘Article 16 saga’, ‘EU/UK wars’, and the rhetoric of an ‘incomplete Brexit’ needing resolution through ‘fixing’ the NIP. These narratives illustrate a complex interplay between political maneuvering and media representations, revealing a strategic resemioticisation of the Brexit discourse. The study highlights how these narratives and frames reshape the understanding of Brexit, emphasizing sovereignty and nationalistic rhetoric while critiquing the European Union's role.

Our findings provide insights into the ongoing political and ideological reworking of Brexit within conservative British politics and media. They underscore the significance of discursive practices in shaping public understanding and policy interpretation, particularly in the context of complex geopolitical changes such as Brexit.

Local authorities and devolved administrations have operated liaison offices and representations in Brussels since the 1980s. These offices confirm the existence of a significant subnational dimension to the EU integration process, which emerged in parallel with its national and supranational dimensions. Despite the exit of the UK from the EU, some UK substate authorities continue to operate Brussels-based offices today. What is the role of these offices post-Brexit? What are the reasons for their continuing presence in Brussels? What does their presence tell us about the impact of Brexit on the UK and the EU? These are the questions this paper will attempt to answer.