The effects of a Brexit

         On British Citizens in other States of the European Union.

1.  The effect of a Brexit could be alarming.  The following are possibilities.  One cannot say anything is certain - indeed the uncertainty is the most unsettling aspect.

At root all Britons without dual nationality would become foreigners in the EU State in which they live. As foreign as Americans, or Brazilians or from anywhere else.

Any protection enjoyed  under EU law would cease.

In consequence for those who are retired - The existing EU regulation which protects receipt of UK State pensions and benefits would cease to have effect.  [The Winter Fuel Payment ( an OLD_AGE benefit under EU law) restriction is currently being challenged legally. Following a Brexit, it could not even be challenged!]  - e.g. potential receipts of attendance allowance or any other social benefits from the UK would stop. The UK would have the power to modify the receipt of State pensions in Europe and even freeze them - i.e stop annual increments.  Clause 20 of The Pension Act 2014 specifically allows for this (annual rises can be stopped for pensioners resident abroad).

States have the power to impose any law of their own on 'foreigners' i.e in this case of Brexit, British Citizens, without constraint from the EU - what laws, for example?  There was a time (pre EU)  when France taxed capital being brought into the country.  The current challenge brought about by a Dutchman ( M. de Ruyter) which has challenged the imposition of CSG etc (social taxes) might not apply to the non-EU citizens.  France etc. could impose any law it wished on non-EU citizen held bank accounts. 
Conversely, there was a time when one could take out only a small sum of money from the UK, the amount was entered in the pages of the passport (M.Thatcher changed that rule).  One can scorn such suggestions, but there would be no protection from the EU regulations, which would not apply.

*******************

You could not vote for your local Commune Councillors. One could not be a commune councillor.  [The current system whereby one cannot vote for any other level of the legislature would never be changed - If  the UK remains in the EU then such changes could at some time be achieved - but never if the UK  leaves.]

You could not vote for an MEP.  The existing EU law which entitles you to vote for an English speaking MEP is prevented for many of us because we have not a VOTE under UK law. [Again change is very necessary but it will never happen if the UK leaves.]
 

At present one can easily order goods from the UK.  This freedom could stop - At present some idiotic organisations in the UK put difficulties in the way by, for instance, refusing to honour your credit card.  This is contrary to the spirit of EU regs. It should be changed but it never will if Brexit happened.
There would be nothing to prevent the imposition of French duty on imported goods from the UK.
Again the UK financial institutions are not honouring the EU regs on freedom of movement of capital and services by not allowing one to open a UK onshore bank account or investing in certain accounts and saving opportunities - Again these activities, although not happening should happen but if Brexit comes, there is very little chance of it ever getting sorted. It is another instance of the the UK dragging its heels on EU matters.

The inheritance law changes which have come about under EU rulings, whereby nationals could have they inheritance following the rules of their Nation State. could be scrapped.  The UK has shown itself not that keen on the changes.
****
One would need some form of residency card. 
Freshly arrived citizens would need to prove they are financially solvent or they won't get a residency card.
 

The SI system of health support for retired people from the UK would cease.  At the moment every item of medical treatment for an SI holder which would be paid by the French State as to a French Citizen is sent to the NHS for reimbursement.  Indeed every centime.  Similar rules apply in all EU States. I sought information on this and had an itemised report on my own treatments sent to me from London.  i.e. it is very likely that this health support would cease.  One might well need full health insurance cover. Without EU protection all is uncertain.
 

The CPAM Carte Vitale could well be withdrawn - unless you have paid or are paying into the system, or been resident for some time, i.e. normally working.  At the moment new younger residents [and early retirees] arriving from the UK get two years grace and then the Carte vitale is removed if they have not established themselves in some form.
It could be that in the case of a Brexit that as one would have been an established permanent resident for a number of years, then one might be accepted for such a reason to continue in the system of the Resident State without the financial support from the UK.  That would be expensive for the Resident State Such a State may seek different ways of getting some form of financial compensatory support - who can say?
 

Some form of work permits would be needed for younger people who seek work or wish to set up their own businesses. Remember they would be foreigners.

British Students can at present get support to study in EU universities [The Erasmus Scheme]. That would cease.
 

The passports would need to be changed.  Border controls between the UK and Europe could well be tightened in both directions.
Then one asks, what be the effect on the many tens of thousands of French citizens and others living in London and neighbourhood? That must be worrying them.

Lastly one asks what nuance of change of attitudes between our French (or other) neighbours and ourselves could appear?  - Who knows - Think of our children in French schools,  or employers of British Citizens, or the fonctionnaires (civil servants).

The EU surely needs to change but it is up to us to help the EU evolve.  It won't be possible if Brexit comes about.

2....I am asked -- Do I see any advantages for the residents in the UK?
A stability in the population possibly?  Even that is far from sure.  There would be a hope that pressure on housing, schools, the NHS might ease.
But when we see pictures of Romanian 'immigrants' working in hop fields or pulling leeks in Lincolnshire - how many are truly permanent immigrants? 
Looking at the French in London - French schools exist there; they are young and not so likely to have great demands on the NHS - except perhaps the maternity services.  These are slightly cynical remarks but the demography of the migrant movements are different between the nationalities. 
It is a most dreadfully complicated situation.  I suspect that for many people, possibly with little understanding. immigration in Britain is confusing - the Pakistani/Indian influx is confused with European Romanian influx and the refugee crisis and the EU gets blame where it is not guilty. Much of the immigration is the consequences of actions by the UK Governments.  Greater control of about 50% of the migrants is possible because they are not Europeans.
3. Some claim that under the the terms of the Vienna Convention on International Treaties between States concerning 'Acquired Rights' that all  European expats would be protected. BUT-- France has not signed to that treaty, and neither it seems has the EU. The EU is not a State but a co-ordination structure between States of the Union.
Here are points of view from two lawyers who have been informally consulted.

---How would an acquired right be defined in this context e.g. would an expat Brit have an acquired and vested right of residency if he/she had lived three months/three years/five years or longer in the another EU country?  When would reciprocal healthcare rights be acquired and vested?

How would you enforce rights under the Vienna Convention - which courts?  Unlike EU law, the Vienna Convention does not create direct rights that can be invoked by individuals. 

The EU regulations  are not treaties but co-ordinating measures between States. The Vienna Convention is only concerned with rights acquired under treaties.---

 
If the 69,000 retired brits in France (about 450,000 reside in other EU States) returned it would have a major effect on the UK economy - you can imagine the difficult situation both for the returnees and certain public services. 
 

I suspect that it is in the interest of the UK economy to encourage more retired people to leave for Europe, and to actively foster their support.
 

Reduction  of the freedom of European movement and of European services will not benefit any existing resident in the UK - quite the reverse.
The concepts of 'controlling our borders' or 'making our own laws' is to some degree misleading.  The UK makes 83% of its own laws entirely concerned with governance of  the UK.   The EU Commission makes regulations which concern the co-ordinated economy and social life of  a developing Europe not detailed laws on the internal management of the UK or any other State.
 

Internationally minded industrial firms are spreading across the EU - French firms in Romania - Even French firms in the UK like EDF.  A Brexit,  could isolate Britain. The stock market values of many European firms are doing reasonably well, though wobbling about in the current global economic crisis.  Ones which are chiefly UK based are not any better and even  oscillating more coarsely.
 

If Brexit occurred no doubt some sort of patchwork lawmaking would occur to alleviate the pain for some of us.  It could be that if Brexit does not occur, then it is possible that some form of  'closer union' will occur. The UK might even adopt the Euro in say 50 years or sooner.  But for success, the people will have to take a much greater interest in electing wise and intelligent politicians (statesmen) to the European parliament and national governments to make it all work. There needs to be a closer dialogue between the citizens and the politicians at European level.  Oddly in the UK the close link between the MPs and the citizen, via 'surgeries' is most valuable and tends to be much more vague under the Euopean system of electing 'teams' and 'lists'.
Democracy will have to spread much more widely through the EU migrant and indigenous populations. There are millions who have migrated around the EU, all EU citizens. Few of them and above all the British citizens are adequately represented by any government.

The Drawbridge Effect --- The Future for others
As for future generations of British Citizens wishing to work or live in other EU States, the drawbridge of a Brexit may have been drawn up and they will not be able to avail themselves of the advantages of which some of us had been able to enjoy. Pensioners would be impeded for financial reasons from retiring to live in EU States. Younger citizens would be impeded in seeking work, and even more so in establishing new enterprises  or studying in such States.

Two years of Grace?
There would be two years after a Brexit were announced in which re-organisation is achieved.  That suggests that nothing much would occur in that period.

EU justice & protection

In out shake it all about ....                              To go to the INDEX click here

An article from a correspondent on EU protection for British expatriates in the EU

June 23rd is now the date all eyes are focused upon according to the media in the UK.  A second, (or perhaps a third), 'D' day is fast approaching for Britain and whether the opposing camps are 'in' or 'out' the biggest arguments seem twofold, sovereignty and trade.  The 'outers' claim that the UK is losing too much control and all sovereignty should be repatriated to prevent further 'interference' from Brussels.

So what is Sovereignty?  It is understood in jurisprudence as the full right and power of a governing body to govern itself without any interference from outside sources or bodies. In political theory, sovereignty is a substantive term designating supreme authority over some polity.  So is that a good thing I ask myself and is that really the issue?

Much informed comment will say the EU was not set up as a trade association and the aims and objectives of the EU seem to support the view.  The founding principles of the Union start by saying: 'The Preamble to the draft Constitutional Treaty is preceded by a quotation from Thucydides: "Our Constitution (...) is called a democracy because power is in the hands not of a minority but of the greatest number".

 

The Union is founded, according to the Convention's proposal, on the values of respect for human dignity, liberty, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights. These values, which are set out in Article I-2, are common to the Member States. Moreover, the societies of the Member States are characterised by pluralism, tolerance, justice, solidarity and non-discrimination. These values play an important role, especially in two specific cases. Firstly, under the procedure for accession set out in Article I-57 any European State wishing to become a member of the Union must respect these values in order to be considered eligible for admission. Secondly, failure by a Member State to respect these values may lead to the suspension of that Member State's rights deriving from membership of the Union (Article I-58).

So what, you might say, we live in a democracy and we can vote for people who support our views so why do we need more bureaucracy?  For those of us who live in Europe the answer to that is clear.  We moved according to other reciprocal treaties that allowed free movement together with the right to port benefits gained whilst in employment, (if retired), or other in work benefits.  Without those treaties in place many of us would not have taken the step to live in Europe.  Those rights are now at risk because the checks and balances imposed on the UK by being a member of the EU would be removed and there would be no redress for the Brit abroad in Europe.

If you think that is not the case then take a look at what has happened in relation to the winter fuel payments for pensioners in areas of Europe that the DWP has suddenly decided are too warm in the winter for pensioners to receive that to which they are entitled.  Leaving aside the issue of whether or not WFP should or should not be paid, the fact is the entitlement is there and it has been erroneously removed for many in Europe.  

This decision has been made by the DWP contrary to the treaties signed by the UK and is currently the subject of a complaint to the EU.  Whilst we still await a ruling on the matter without this safeguard there would be nowhere for such complaints to be made and the UK government would have cart blanche to rescind or reduce such benefits that are critical to the well being of the Brit abroad and to which they are entitled.

The UK government has already indicated that it is looking to rescind the Human Rights Act and uses spurious arguments that it allows criminals to shelter behind its protection.  However, what it fails to make clear is that all citizens are protected by the Human Rights Act and watering it down would be a retrograde step for all EU citizens.

Likewise the UK government promised in its manifesto that it would change the fifteen year rule for those of us that are likely to most affected by a leave vote.  As yet there is no sign of that promise being fulfilled and every likelihood that the proposal will run out of parliamentary time.

This demonstrates that to put all our eggs into one Westminster basket leaves us very vulnerable and that we should all be fighting for Britain to remain part of Europe to enable us to remain protected by the existing treaties that allow us to live peacefully in Europe, (it will also retain those treaties that protect citizens living in the UK.)

The fundamental rights are:

As regards the protection of fundamental rights, the Convention makes significant advances. Article I-7 of the draft Constitution reproduces the guarantee of fundamental rights provided in the EU Treaty and refers to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and to the constitutional traditions common to the Member States. This Article also opens the way for the Union to seek formal accession to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

In addition, the Convention reached a consensus enabling the Charter of Fundamental Rights, solemnly proclaimed at the Nice European Council in December 2000, to be included in Part II of the Convention. The European Union therefore acquires for itself a catalogue of fundamental rights which will be legally binding not only on the Union, its institutions, agencies and organs, but also on the Member States as regards the implementation of Union law. The inclusion of the Charter in the Constitution does not compromise the division of competences between the Union and the Member States.

The Charter will be interpreted by the courts of the Union and the Member States. The Convention has slightly amended the presentation of the Charter to adapt it to the changes introduced by the draft Constitution.

The inclusion of the Charter, which contains additional rights not contained in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, such as workers' social rights, data protection, bioethics or the right to good administration, makes it more visible to citizens, who will thus be better informed of their rights.

The foregoing is an extract from the founding principles of the Union and if there is a 'Brexit' it will threaten our very existence in Europe and will have serious repercussions on those of us who have made a life, not on the Isle of Wight, but in mainland Europe thinking that we were safely covered by the blanket that is the EU.

The throw away comments made by those that would have us leave are far too elementary, as they only refer to the basic issues that they want to espouse.  The fundamental issues for us that have made a life in Europe are those rights described above that have been fiercely fought for and will be too easily given away by a 'Brexit'.

The divisions are right across the political divide and even the government of the day is split on the issue but those of us down the pecking order will have much more of a voice by remaining in Europe than we will have if Britain leaves.  That much is very clear.

--------------------------------------------------------------

(Notes:  The author has no political affiliations and is therefore not a member of any political party.  I have lived in France for almost 12 years with my wife, over ten years of which was in the Tarn in the Midi-Pyrénées.  A move north to the Manche eighteen months ago was after much soul searching as to whether or not we should return to the UK because of the gathering storm.  We decided to stay in France because we love 'la vie en France' and because we can enjoy a less stressful lifestyle.  I left school in Dorset whilst still fourteen years of age and went straight into heavy employment as a fireman on steam engines with British Rail.  I later moved to Surrey with the railways but eventually left to join the police service where I worked until I retired just before reaching sixty years of age.  Never out of work and never claimed any benefits until I received my old age pension at the age of sixty five years of age.  We were refused the winter fuel allowance at age sixty until the EU directive that the UK was acting unlawfully.  We battled hard unsuccessfully for the back payments that had been withheld but once again the UK unlawfully refused those payments.  This winter we again find ourselves without the winter fuel payments because of the spurious and unlawful temperature test imposed by the DWP.  I still pay tax to the UK on my police pension and, just about, retain my vote.  My wife worked as a solicitor as well as raising our four sons.  We have never wished to be a burden on France and have never expected nor claimed any benefits from our host country.  As you would expect, having worked in the law for a joint total of almost sixty years we ensured that our position was sound legally before moving to Europe.  That legal status is now being threatened and it threatens our very existence here in France.  Experience has shown us that the UK government is not to be trusted and that we need the protections afforded by being part of the EU.)

Reasons for the European Union

Reasons for the EU by Carol Lavinia Fraser (<link) 

Carol Fraser wrote the following on the Forum  site Survive France Network

  She is stating why the EU is important to Britain and thereby the citizens of Britain.  I have added some comments in purple.

The first two items are so frequently indicated as reasons why Britain should leave the EU.  But they are on a continental scale what every honourable governing body does from countries to communes.  It is a matter of supporting the less economically developed regions, districts and individuals for the good of all.
 1.  The UK puts in £12 billion into the EU.  It gets back £6 billion.

2.  Each person pays €195.82 in and receives €108.75

From the developing economic strength of the less economic areas one gets trade.  That is what items 3 and 4 are about.
 3.  The free market is worth £227 million in exports to the UK - walk away from that?

4.  The new digital market which is in the process of being set up is estimated to be worth €451 billion and millions of new jobs - walk away from that?

5.  One of the biggest receivers of EU funding is agriculture.  Would our farmers get any funding from a UK government? Risky. Probably a hike in food prices, we all know they do not need much excuse to do that. 
The beauty of the landscape and the intimacy of food producers with the consumers (e.g. such as farmers' markets) depend on subsidies.

6.  Britain together with the EU is a world leader in the field of science and technology.  This is funded by the EU and includes Europeans in the university faculties.  This would go!  The EU is encouraging training of British (and other) students across Europe via the Erasmus programme (which see) - Brexit would probably cut it dead.

7.  Free trade into one of the biggest markets in the world.  America and China want the UK to stay leaders in the market and both have specified they would not be interested in the UK if it is out.  The car industry has warned Cameron to stay in Europe.  What are the implications of that?  The EU has over 50 trade deals globally which we have access to because we are in.  Estimate in lost jobs 2 million.

8.  London and the city are the world leaders in finance.  Implications of an out? Nobody knows!

9.  Security.  Loss of the European arrest warrant and cooperation between police and intelligence sources.  Police chiefs are worried about this one.  Turn the clock back to 1939 and Britain stands alone?  In the event of an 'out' a border would have to erected in Ireland with possible repercussions of kicking off the troubles again.  On the home front the Scots are very unhappy with the possibility of any out and are threatening another referendum to allow them to stay in the EU.  The world is currently in turmoil and we have the strength of a united Europe to take comfort from.  Winston Churchill said after the war the only way for there to be lasting peace in Europe was to be united.  How right he was.

10.  Each British subject has the protection of the European Bill of Human Rights.  Cameron said he will rewrite this into a British constitution.  Wow I for one do not TRUST him to do that.

11.  We each have freedom of movement in the EU and many of the low paid jobs are being done by Europeans, including Portuguese nurses in the health service.  The NHS is graunching (grinding/creaking) now, what would happen if they had to go home?

You might be interested in a conversation on Facebook I had with UKIP Bury.  I put six of the above points and expected an intelligent reasoned response.  What did I get? "Oh Carol you have been reading propaganda".  Right, I thought to ask where he gets his info, the response "The Daily Express".  This being run by a media billionaire baron who no doubt has his own hidden agenda.  I can report on that it was like talking to cotton wool.

In conclusion I would recommend you all sign up to British Influence and get their newsletter.  The reports are written by university professors and political grandees with much knowledge.  I would further recommend you demand answers from UKIP because so far they have none.  To vote 'out' would be to take a giant leap into the unknown.  They glibly state that we can have our own trade deals.  Estimated time to set these up? Years.

I could go on and I expect you will have guessed by now I am an ardent european.  I live in France and love it here having been here for 10 years.  I do not wish to go home and I furthermore do not want to see the land of my birth go to the wall.

****

The European endeavour is in its infancy. It is not perfect as no new venture is perfect.  Europe has had two millennia of changes, most of them traumatic.  We need now to guide the future, and not stand aside. Britain is one of three great economic powers of Europe along with Germany and France and we three should work together so that the whole does not founder.

The Referendum Bill

October 13^th 2015 the 2^nd reading of the Bill was debated in the House of Lords.

Many members spoke about the lack of a democratic voice for those who have lived beyond the UK for more than 15 years.

Relevant extracts are included in this *** digest ***.

www.lefourquet.net/HOL-13-10-15.doc

Read what Lord Shipley said

If we left the EU, work permits could return, more people could have to apply for skilled migrant visas, reciprocal health schemes could be reduced, the operation of UK state pensions could be affected and the general ease of mobility for UK citizens across the EU would become much more complicated and uncertain. I wonder whether the Government have calculated the impact if large numbers of UK citizens decided to return to the UK in the event of our exit from the EU.

 The full Hansard report is here

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/ldhansrd/text/151013-0001.htm#15101360000463

 The Liberal Democrat Party intend at the Committee stage to introduce an amendment to widen the franchise (the voting) to include at least ALL British Citizens in Europe.  This concept was supported by at least some members of all parties. Baroness Royall, who was in the last parliament leader of the Labour Party in the House of Lords, approved.

Neil Kinnock (Lab) -at one time leader of the Labour Party- and Paddy Ashdown(LD) - similarly a previous leader of the LibDems- have said that they will vote for any such amendment.  Lord Lexden (Cons) has pushed for the life-time vote for years.

The Lib Dem announcement on this is here……………..

http://uklibdems.eu/en/article/2015/1115459/lib-dems-fight-for-expat-votes-at-eu-referendum

Those in countries beyond the EU who receive this item should grasp the thought that voting rights will add force to the claim for pension parity.  They may not get the vote in this amendment, but if they lobby for support for this amendment – it should hasten the Votes-for-Life Bill.

After that may well follow a true and full representation of the Citizens abroad.  But moreover you may want to live in France or Italy later on or may be your family will – Remember all British Citizens are also European Citizens.

What should be done now…. Lobby a likely Lord!

In the following link you will see lists of the members of the House of Lords. 

http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/lords/

It can be difficult choosing which member or members to contact – By scanning down the list you can see names who you feel may be supportive e.g. Bakewell, Blunkett, Boothroyd etc.. and you can see also how active they have been as members.  Lobby those who have not spoken in the ***digest*** above.

In sending a mail please modify the following - This is important because the HoL clearing room for emails will not forward perceived identical mails - nor multiple addressed copies of mails.

So personalise it.

“Dear (enter the members name),

The Referendum Bill

Do please support the amendment which will be placed at Committee Stage to ensure that British Citizens abroad who have lost their right to vote and have a sincere interest in the outcome of the Referendum can have a voice in this Referendum.  I understand that leading members of all Parties intend to vote for it including members Kinnock, Ashdown, Lexden and others such as Royall, and many Liberal Democrats and also cross-bench Peers.

Extracts from  Hansard of the debate on October 13^th can be read here

www/lefourquet.net/HOL-13-10-15.doc

        Obviously you can invent your own letter or add material to this one.  And when you get a good response do please acknowledge.

FOR those (all British Citizens) who are also European Citizens – this should interest you….. 

https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/EUCitizenship

To Register  to vote (if less than 15 years abroad) --https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

The British Citizens the British Government ignores.

The British Minister for Europe [David Lidington]

Gave a speech in Berlin on 25 June 2014.

Mr. Lidington’s speech elaborates on the relationship between the National Governments and the EU Commission and the EU Parliament.

Below are five sentences from the speech which have significance for the democratic standing of British Citizens in the EU.

1.      We must recognise that it is national systems which enjoy greatest legitimacy with voters.

2.      We need to work within the grain of what people understand.

3.      And that is why we agree with those who are calling for a greater role for national governments in the Council and for national parliaments in the EU’s functioning. 

4.      National parliaments have significant expertise to bring to the legislative process, ensuring outcomes that are more relevant to communities by involving those who know them best – their representatives.

5.      National parliaments have a positive role to play, both sharing their expertise with EU institutions and helping citizens to feel connected with the EU.

Comment –
How can the British National Government claim to speak in the interest of all the British Citizens?

Concerning this 'positive' role national governments should play, the British Government  sets a very poor example in refusing its citizens full representation, including their national right to vote after they have lived 15 years in other EU member countries.

How is this helping such expatriate British citizens feel more connected with the EU, particularly if after 15 years they have no voice in any future referendum on UK membership?

A fuller quote including these five sentences and the full speech can be read via this link

What you should do – Send this to politicians in Westminster.

Addresses of politicians are found…

http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/mps/

Winter Fuel payment in Europe - Dept of Work & Pensions manipulation of Statistics.

To go to the Index click here

This message has been sent to all members of the Select Committee for Work & Pensions.

From the Campaign for Representation (votes) for Britons Abroad, and
Pensioners Debout! [Stand up!] France.
Look at the end to see what you can do.   This 'tail piece' was not included to the Select Committee members.

The Winter Fuel payment in Europe
The Manipulation of WFP and Temperature statistics by the DWP .

NOTE! ---A resumé of a much larger briefing paper to be viewed here
http://www.lefourquet.net/WFP-RBpaper-V4.pdf   (if the link fails please copy and paste the address to the left in your browser)

July 2011 -  Following a European Union Court of Justice  (CJEU)* judgement which in train confirmed  that ‘old-age benefits’ for eligible British Citizens should be paid across the EU, Iain Duncan-Smith said.

“We will fight these ridiculous EU rules. The Winter Fuel Payment is about helping British pensioners with heating costs and it is ludicrous that we could have to pay more pensioners living in hot countries.”

*http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=9ea7d2dc30dba4e0f84c4b0945c091cdde9cc21fd65d.e34KaxiLc3qMb40Rch0SaxuMb3z0?text=&docid=107933&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=29792

June 2013 – George Osborne said “…. from the autumn of 2015, we will link the winter fuel payment to a temperature test; people in hot countries will no longer get it”

July 2013 the DWP said “The WFP-Temperature Link  proposal lists 7 countries (Cyprus, France, Gibraltar, Greece, Malta, Portugal and Spain) that will become out of scope for payment of WFP."

The DWP has consulted the Met Office but not the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia from where the temperature data originated. The DWP has used this data supplied by the Met Office to fit its policy. The  paper (available via the above link) details this history thoroughly.

An FoI request to request a view of the actual correspondence between the DWP and the Met Office, has been partially refused, though a copy of the Met Office report to the DWP has been received and can be read here - http://www.lefourquet.net/Report_to_DWP.pdf  [It is 70 pages in size]. (if the link fails - paste address into a browser)
The Met Office  has independently disclosed that they used the CRU data and “ the report provided two temperatures, one to include the French départements d'outre mer (DOMs), and one without. The average winter temperature for France (including the DOM's) is 7.0°C; without DOMs, it is 4.9°C.

The above report details temperature data for the SW region of England and computes an average winter daily temperature of 5.6 degrees C.  This temperature the DWP used as a standard to compare with temperatures of countries in Europe.

The chart below gives these comparisons

But in order to formulate France as  a ‘hot’ country, the DWP report  incorporates the Nov-March temperatures for the tropical French DOMs (Overseas Departments)  - i.e French Guyana, Martinique, Réunion,  and Guadeloupe [officially listed as Outermost Regions of the EU]  into the figures for mainland France. [Similar measures are used for Spain and Portugal.
This was done solely for political reasons – no other.
There is no professional geographer who would classify the DOMs as geographically part of France.
The data published by CRU (available to us) is not in agreement with the Met Office/DWP Report -
e.g for Italy the CRU gives 7.54 degrees C- The Met Office/DWP gives 5.7.- BOTH are above the 5.6 in the DWP report for SW England.  Yet the DWP has classified Italy as 'not hot'.  Statistics have been chosen to fit a policy.

To the left is the isotherm distribution for Europe (January) . The whole of  mainland France lies within the same isotherm distribution range as Britain and so does much of Spain and Italy.

The Outer Hebrides and Belfast lie on the same isotherm as Lyon.
Oddly, both Italy, and Ireland (marginally on the CRU data) have, warmer winter temperatures than SW England yet the DWP do not classify these countries as ‘hot’. Data -for Ireland CRU - 5.64 : Met/DWP  5.5
Why has the DWP  classified France and Spain as ‘hot’ and Italy (and Ireland?) as ‘not hot’? 
With Ireland, the data (from CRU or the MET?) may be related to the delicate political situation. To exclude Britons in Southern Ireland (eg Donegal) whilst retaining those in Northern Ireland would be politically unacceptable.  But there again -- to somehow define Italy as 'not hot' on these confusing set of statistics is a mystery.

Is not the true reason because the number of WFP payments for 2011/2012  are as follows?
Spain  33,815   -  France  18,155   - the two highest in Continental Europe.   The data is manipulated to save money, without consideration of the citizen.

Whilst Ireland has 7155 ,  Cyprus 5420, Portugal 2080, Italy 1425. Greece 1,405, Germany 1220, Malta 1110    ----  All other countries are below 400 each.

Aged British Citizens in straightened financial circumstances, who happen to have chosen to legally reside in other countries of the European Economic Area, recently delighted to have this extra help, would once again be deprived, unless this disgraceful affair is exposed.  These ageing Britons have no political voice, and if it were not for the concern of a very few of the more able of us, the matter would remain hidden.

Brian Cave (lefourquet@orange.fr)  (with acknowledgements to R. Boaden)  www.votes-for-expat-brits.com  http://pensionersdebout.blogspot.com

WHAT YOU CAN DO ----[This version is sent to all activists.]

Dame Anne Begg MP (Chair)	Labour
Debbie Abrahams MP	Labour
Graham Evans MP	Conservative
Sheila Gilmore MP	Labour
Glenda Jackson MP	Labour
Kwasi Kwarteng MP	Conservative
Stephen Lloyd MP	Liberal Democrat
Nigel Mills MP	Conservative
Anne Marie Morris MP	Conservative
Teresa Pearce MP	Labour
Dame Angela Watkinson MP	Conservative

1.  To the left is listed the members of the Select Committee for Work & Pensions.  Clicking in any one will raise a profile and an email address.  You can write as follows, but try to use your own phrases..
"Dear xxxx,  I am not one of your constituents* but I have no other way of stating my views. You will have received information on the manipulation of data by the DWP concerning the suspension of the WFP for people in continental Europe --- Here state your circumstances.  If you are hard up say so.  State the climate where you live. etc etc."

2.   *If you still have an MP, write also to him/her.  You can also claim attention from the MP of the constituency where you were last living in the UK.

3.  Get people to sign this petition [ http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/55085 ]  Few people realise the importance of this.

4.   Circulate this message.