This item is updated on the 8th August 2012.
Since writing the piece below on the 6th July some movement has taken place.
A correspondent aged 80+ and who retired to France before 1998 and who has up to now not received the WFP has been informed by the DWP that they are eligible - as long as they can demonstrate an established relationship to the British Social Security system.
I am informed that more information is available on the Spanish Expatriate Association site.
http://www.ukgovabusesexpats.co.uk/
**************************************************
The SUN published the following recently.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/article4398847.ece
Is this item correct? Though it would seem certain that the Winter Fuel Payment should be available to all elderly Britons in receipt of the State Pension and who are totally dependent on the United Kingdom for their social security - wherever they live in the European Union or EEC, the consent by the British Government is still not clear.
The Direct Gov. web site is still saying that one has to have received the WFP in the UK before one can receive it abroad in Europe. The EU law seems to say otherwise.
I am asking questions in Westminster as to the present position. I have searched the EU judgements to see if anything more clear has been said but have so far got no information.
It would seem to be the case that Whitehall is dragging its heels.
Any person who is in the situation, that they would be qualified to receive the WFP were they to live in the UK should claim it now, and keep note of all correspondence.
This Blog discusses the problems of the British expatriate pensioner in France & Europe. If you are concerned then it is essential that you write to your MP or a Minister. Links to find your MP, and ideas for a letter are at on the right below. You can also comment or email the blog author -- see profile. Political Action is ESSENTIAL - one must not just grouse. View "FOUR CONCERNS of this blog".
Friday, July 6, 2012
Thursday, June 28, 2012
TERGIVERSATION** in the HOUSE of COMMONS
*** ‘tergiversation!’*** = turning one’s back on previously held
convictions.
Wednesday 27th
June 2012,
British Democracy has again
been sold down the river, carried away with the flotsam of party politics scattered by the Liberal
Democrats.
During this afternoon the
almost empty chamber of the Commons listened to passionate exhortations from
the MPs - Geoffrey Clifton Brown, Gary Streeter, Nick de Bois and Heather
Wheeler, explaining why the expatriate citizen should have the right to vote
for Life. Mr Clifton Brown had tabled a clause last week which would give all
Britons Abroad a vote (representation) for LIFE.
An extract from a letter by
a campaign supporter (Margaret Hales) was read by Nick de Bois.
Yet David Heath, Deputy
Leader and Liberal Democrat MP for Somerton and Frome persuaded Mr Clifton Brown to withdraw his clause. This was his reasoning:-
what are
registration officers to do to identify all those abroad who might be qualified
to vote? Putting an onus on them similar to the responsibility we are placing
on them in this Bill to seek out everyone who could possibly be qualified to
vote would provide an insuperable problem for them if applied to overseas
electors. I think that the hon. Member for The Cotswolds would probably
acknowledge that that is the case. Then very shortly after he said….
I ask the hon.
Gentleman to withdraw his new clause. He has made some very important points
and I undertake that the Government will give them serious consideration. We
will see whether there are proposals that we might wish to bring forward in due
course to address some of his points.
So many ifs and buts… So
for the foreseeable future, the British Citizen Abroad will still not be
represented after 15 years. I myself
will never again have a representative MP, for next year I am
disenfranchised.
Was it the Liberal
Democrats who not openly, but surreptitiously in the tearooms of Westminster,
pulled the rug from under the foundation for this campaign that we and so many
other expatriates have tried so hard to build.
The Citizens abroad have been thrown aside like some unwanted rubbish to
float away.
Here are the views of Nick
Clegg – as expressed by his assistant Rory Belcher.
“Nick appreciates that there are some
British expatriates who have lived abroad for over 15 years and who want to
vote in British elections. However, as you may know, Nick supports the existing
legislation on this issue, including the removal of the right to vote after 15
years of living abroad. If a Briton has settled in another country, it is
intuitive that they would know about and be directly affected by the issues of
that country. If they want to become politically active, then they should
register to vote in the country they have settled in.”
Did Mr. Clegg put pressure on Mr Heath? It is a mystery why Mr. Clifton-Brown changed his mind. Internal politics? “We mustn’t expose cracks in the coalition must we?”
Is Nick Clegg a Leader? Is Nick Clegg a
Statesman? I do not think so.
Was there not here a
glorious opportunity to stand up for British Citizens – The Citizens who are at
the cutting edge of British Influence in the World. – The Citizens who spread
the spirit of Britain. An opportunity for Britain to stand tall amongst the Nations.
Is any Britain Abroad proud of this
performance in Parliament? I do not
think so.
Hope always remains. This Bill has to go before the Lords – once
again we must express our concerns and get the peers on our side.
There is no good reason for
the Clause to have been withdrawn. There
is absolutely no reason why the current process of registration which I have
performed every year should not in some form continue. There are no increased administrative
difficulties. At the next election in 2015 let us all remember the role of the
Liberal Democrats in this matter. Tell
your children, your parents, your aunts and cousins. Tell your friends. Tell all in Britain what the Liberal Democrats have done this day.
‘The Liberal Democrats
are opposed to Life-time Democracy for British Citizens.’
********************************
Withdrawal statement by Mr
Geoffrey Clifton-Brown
May I suggest
to the Deputy Leader of the House and to the Committee a practical way of
dealing with the issue? The hon. Gentleman should table an amendment on Report
or an amendment should be tabled in another place to take powers to extend but
not reduce the 15-year period at a time when the Government are satisfied that
the registration process is robust and maintains the integrity of the electoral
register. He would be able to do that in tandem with the Parliamentary
Secretary, Cabinet Office, his hon. Friend the Member for Forest of Dean (Mr
Harper), who told the House last week that he would look at the measures for
the registration process that I suggested to him—namely, using the passport as
an identity document, abolishing the annual requirement to register, perhaps
introducing a permanent opt-in for people who had registered validly once, and
the possibility of using British embassies so that people could register and,
even better, vote there. The Cabinet Office Minister undertook to look
carefully at those measures, which could be introduced under the Bill and under
the existing legislation and secondary legislation. I suggest that the Deputy
Leader of the House table an amendment to take a power to extend the 15 years
when the Government are satisfied that those measures are in place. On that
basis, I beg to ask leave to withdraw my new clause.
Note – There is no mention of Life-time Democratic
Representation here!
Removal of the `15 year limit’ is not mentioned. Only
extension!
Mr.Clifton Brown is intelligent and passionate. Why did he change his mind?
What conspiracies are constructed over the coffee
cups in Westminster?
************
We must fight again in the House of Lords.
Author Brian Cave
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Health Costs - Europe June 2012
Posted by Brian Cave (lefourquet@gmail.com)
I have had correspondence
with the EU officials on this
subject and the response is not helpful.
My letter of February 22nd 2012 to Commissioner Andor
can be read here
The reply from Jackie Morin [Head of Unit on Social Security Co-ordination]
of June 22nd can be read here.
Below I transcribe
relevant extracts from the EU Regulations relating to Health provision and costing for British Pensioners in France under EU law.
These regulations consist of two kinds - the Basic
and the Implementing.
The Implementing Regulations are dated 2009. The Basic - 2004. Both have the full power of Law.
The Implementing Regulations explain in detail how the Basic
are to be used. The wording of the implementing regulation is very precise
I have coloured in portions – to make them easier to
understand.
Greyed areas- are of no
interest, but given because they are referenced elsewhere.
Purple entries are added by myself by way of explanation.
N.B. The Basic regulations have been in operation (in a similar form but began under other Regulation headings -1408/1971 and 574/1972) for many years. The more recent Implementing regulation came into force on May 1st 2010. From 1973 to the present day, payment was made via a formula laid down in Article 95 of the the Reg 574/1972 and not on 'actual amounts'. The current Implementing Regulations are more precise and definitive than the previous.
The UK joined the EU in 1973.
It seems to me obvious that
the currant regulations are not being implemented to the letter.
I leave it to the reader to comment – I should reply to Jackie Morin but await
any views before so doing. Views of people with a legal background would be helpful. Brian
Cave.
-------------------------------
REGULATION
(EC) No 883/2004 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL
of 29
April 2004
on the coordination of social
security systems
Article 24
No right to benefits in kind under
the legislation of the Member State of residence
British Pensioners who
have NEVER paid into the French Social Care system have no
right to benefits under French Legislation.
1. A person who receives a pension or
pensions under the legislation of one or more Member States and who is not
entitled to benefits in kind under the legislation of the Member State of
residence shall nevertheless receive such benefits for
himself and the members of his family, insofar
as he would be entitled thereto under the legislation of the Member State or of
at least one of the Member States competent in respect of his pensions, if he
resided in that Member State (i.e the UK). The benefits in kind shall be
provided at the expense of the institution referred to in paragraph 2 by the
institution of the place of residence, as though the person concerned were
entitled to a pension and benefits in kind under the legislation of that Member State.
2. In the cases covered by paragraph
1, the cost of benefits in kind shall be borne by the institution as determined
in accordance with the following rules:
(a) where the pensioner is entitled
to benefits in kind under the legislation of a single Member State, the cost shall be borne by the competent
institution of that Member State (i.e. the Dept. of Health/NHS)
(b) where the pensioner
is entitled to benefits in kind under the legislation of two or more Member
States, the cost thereof shall be borne by the competent institution of the
Member State to whose legislation the person has been subject for the longest
period of time; should the application of this rule result in several
institutions being responsible for the cost of benefits, the cost shall be
borne by the institution applying the legislation to which the pensioner was
last subject.
Article 35
Reimbursements between institutions
1. The
benefits in kind provided by the institution of a Member State on behalf of the institution of another Member State under this Chapter shall give rise to full
reimbursement.
2. The reimbursements
referred to in paragraph 1 shall be determined and effected in accordance with
the arrangements set out in the Implementing Regulation, either on
production of proof of actual expenditure, or on the basis of fixed amounts for
Member States the legal or administrative structures of which are such that the
use of reimbursement on the basis of actual expenditure is not appropriate.
3. Two or more Member States, and their competent authorities, may provide for other methods of
reimbursement or waive all reimbursement between the institutions coming under
their jurisdiction.
CHAPTER 2
Benefits in respect of accidents at work and
occupational diseases
-----------------------------
Article 41
Reimbursements between
institutions
1. Article 35 shall
also apply to benefits falling within this Chapter, and reimbursement shall be
made on the basis of actual costs.
REGULATION (EC) No 987/2009 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
of 16 September 2009
laying down the
procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004
on the coordination
of social security systems
TITLE IV
FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
Chapter I
Reimbursement of the cost of benefits in application
of Article 35 and Article 41 of the basic Regulation
SECTION 1
REIMBURSEMENT ON THE BASIS OF ACTUAL EXPENDITURE
Article 62
Principles
1. For the purposes of applying Article 35 and
Article 41 of the basic Regulation, the actual amount of the expenses for
benefits in kind, as shown in the accounts of the institution that provided
them, shall be reimbursed to that institution by the competent institution (i.e the DoH/NHS),
except where Article 63 of the implementing Regulation is applicable.
SECTION_ 2
REIMBURSEMENT ON THE BASIS OF FIXED AMOUNTS
Article 63
Identification of the Member States concerned
1. The Member States referred to in Article 35(2) of the basic
Regulation, whose legal or
administrative structures are such that the use of reimbursement on the
basis of actual expenditure is not
appropriate, are listed in Annex 3 to the
implementing Regulation.
Annex 3
France is not listed in Annex 3 and therefore will ask for repayment (for any
British pensioners in France) from the UK on the basis of ‘actual costs’.
The UK is listed and will ask France for repayment (for any French pensioners in the UK) on the basis of a fixed amount.
This annex 3 lists the following nations which will seek payment of health costs for foreign EU pensioners on their territory by means of fixed sums. Thus health payment provided in Britain for a French pensioner will be made via a 'fixed sum'. All other countries (including France) will demand the 'actual amount' as defined above -so it seems!
IRELAND, SPAIN, ITALY, MALTA, THE NETHERLANDS, PORTUGAL, FINLAND, SWEDEN, UNITED
KINGDOM
I was informed some time ago by the Department of Health that France will henceforth seek repayment of actual costs.
Friday, May 11, 2012
UK vs French Parliament 2012.
What you can do -
Read Below at end. And read UPDATE at end.
The postal address is :--House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA
UPDATED 4th November 2012 (at *s)
454,901 expatriate French have voted for their President and soon will vote world-wide for deputies to their Assembly in Paris -
<see left << The red is where François Hollande was supported (46.93%). Blue - Sarkozy (53.05%)
454,901 expatriate French have voted for their President and soon will vote world-wide for deputies to their Assembly in Paris -
<see left << The red is where François Hollande was supported (46.93%). Blue - Sarkozy (53.05%)
And
if this had been a British Election?
No such map would be possible without
similar overseas voter representation.
[Map downloaded
from easyexpat.com]
Yet
there are 5,500,000 British people across the globe (twice as many as their French
counterparts). But after 15
years abroad they have no representation.
How
are we to encourage Britons
abroad to vote – permanently and meaningfully?
Is
there any hope in the next session of parliament that a
Briton abroad will be recognised by his/her country?– The overseas
Briton who is still impacted by British government
policies; - the patriotic Briton who
shows the flag of Britain
round the World; - the Briton who,
retired in later years,
still depends on Britain, who still cherishes the traditional memory of Britain, who
still has concern for his/her family and friends at
‘home’; – the younger Briton who extends the
commerce of Britain throughout the World:- what hope is
there for
them to be similarly recognised as their French
counterparts for their contribution?
This nation
that once spread its national British colour red across
the globe must not go on
contracting in influence to
become no more than a past epoch of history. This Government must again grow the
economy through commerce and should in support empower its huge force of Citizens
abroad so that they
promote the virtues that
lie at the heart of British culture. And
by this support render to them a feeling of pride in
being British.
Britons
Abroad can reflect a pride
in Britain , but they remain
detached because they are not represented at
home and have no voice. No politician is
elected or appointed specifically to represent their interests. How
different from the French who are represented
wherever they live. And to the French we
can add the Citizens of Spain,
Italy, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
Portugal, Germany, Greece, Netherlands, Poland,
Romania, Slovakia, Sweden – and USA, and Lebanon - and Morocco
- Tunisia – Russia …and more ...
All citizens of these countries are honoured by their
home Governments in some form or another.
Two
items in the Queen’s Speech give a glimmer of hope.
There are two Bills which touch on this.
- The Bill on Individual Electoral Registration * under debate in House of Lords*)
- The Bill on the re-constitution of the House of Lords.* Abandoned becasue of political infighting between Conservatives and Liberal Democrats*
The
first Bill could include a clause making voting a
permanent right for all Citizens, subject to proof of
individual identity eg by passport for overseas citizens
and a valid residential address eg via utility bills,
as already accepted by the banks in conformity with
international financial regulations.
.
Reflecting their different needs, the second Bill *now dead* could incorporate
several elected representatives in the Lords for Britons
Abroad; (or initially
a Minister who understands and listens to their needs).
Would not every Briton
Abroad raise their heads with pride. And they would think
to themselves ‘we are respected by our British Government
and we really do count for something as British Citizens'.
(author -Brian Cave .)
Lastly - view this -A Veteran of 90 who cares deeply - The story of Harry Shindler.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18017198
(author -Brian Cave .)
Lastly - view this -A Veteran of 90 who cares deeply - The story of Harry Shindler.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18017198
Urge
MPs to favour clauses in these bills supporting
representation of Britons abroad.
[ UPDATE September 21st 2012 - ON October 23rd Lord Lexden will table an amendment to the Electoral Registration BIll which would remove the 15 year time limit on representation of overseas citizens.
Please write to him at lexdena@parliament.uk (copy also to lefourquet@orange.fr) giving support -
* November 4th this bill was delayed in the Lords and has not yet commenced its main debating stage*
"Dear Lord Lexden, I am delighted that you are tabling an amendment to the Electoral Registration Bill to remove the 15 year limit. I (we) support you! "- that is all that is necessary, but you can of course add more. He needs to feel that he is speaking for Britons across the world - that will give him moral strength!]
Otherwise send this item to the MP of the place where you reside (if in the UK) or last resided in Britain .
Please write to him at lexdena@parliament.uk (copy also to lefourquet@orange.fr) giving support -
* November 4th this bill was delayed in the Lords and has not yet commenced its main debating stage*
"Dear Lord Lexden, I am delighted that you are tabling an amendment to the Electoral Registration Bill to remove the 15 year limit. I (we) support you! "- that is all that is necessary, but you can of course add more. He needs to feel that he is speaking for Britons across the world - that will give him moral strength!]
Otherwise send this item to the MP of the place where you reside (if in the UK) or last resided in Britain .
If you cannot do this or believe
it to be a futile thing to do,
then send it to [or also
to..]
* Chloe Smith is now Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform in the Cabinet Office)
* Chloe Smith is now Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform in the Cabinet Office)
chloe@chloesmith.org.uk - Mark Harper was moved from this post.
Several Ministers in the Cabinet Office are most closely concerned with determining policy. Their opinions have been previously expressed as follows. Most are dead in the water, I fear.
Several Ministers in the Cabinet Office are most closely concerned with determining policy. Their opinions have been previously expressed as follows. Most are dead in the water, I fear.
Francis Maude, who
has previously said he is for extending representation.
francismaudemp@parliament.uk
francismaudemp@parliament.uk
Nick Clegg. Who
has till now been strongly opposed to the
representation of Britons Abroad.
nick.clegg.mp@parliament.uk
nick.clegg.mp@parliament.uk
And also Oliver
Letwin, and Nick Hurd (Their
opinions are not known)
The email addresses of all
MPs and Peers can be found at.
The postal address is :--House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA
Please circulate widely to all who should be
concerned about Parliamentary Democracy.
Monday, April 30, 2012
The Extraordinary thoughts of Mr. Clegg
An assistant to Nick Clegg, the leader of the Liberal
Democratic Party wrote on April 25th this year (2012)
“Nick appreciates that there are
some British expatriates who have lived abroad for over 15 years and who want
to vote in British elections. However, as you may know, Nick supports the
existing legislation on this issue, including the removal of the right to vote
after 15 years of living abroad. If a Briton has settled in another country, it
is intuitive that they would know about and be directly affected by the issues
of that country. If they want to become politically active, then they should
register to vote in the country they have settled in.”
It is easy to pick holes in this
statement. To vote in another country
means taking out the nationality of that country and in some cases thereby
renouncing British citizenship. Is Mr
Clegg suggesting that British patriots should become less British? Let us quietly reflect on these thoughts, in Europe
and throughout the World.
In 1973 Britain
joined the European club, which perhaps should be more appropriately labelled
the European Association of Nations, rather than the European Union! Since then there has been a tardiness in the evolution
of the British domestic fiscal and political regulations supporting the tenets
of this Association. They tend to be
fossilised in a fashion which would be considered more appropriate to the early
20th century, before the second World War than to the current age. The regulations within the ‘Association’, which
stem from the EU and have been adopted (it would appear rather grudgingly) by
the British Government, enable Britons to survive on the continent. I and
others could not live in France
if these arrangements collapsed. Further,
I and others hold dear our families and friends resident in the United
Kingdom with whom we communicate on an
almost daily basis. Whatever happens to
the NHS, education services, the police and passport controls and of course the
management of the finances, on which I and all British pensioners depend wherever we live in the world, most certainly affects me and mine, just as
much as if I still lived in Gloucestershire!
Of course such links vary according to the individual, but all British
citizens are always linked in some measure to the triple countries of Britain
and Northern Ireland,
whether they live in Normandy or New
Zealand.
The world has become (as they
say) a global village. Europe
is changing into an association of States, none of which can stand alone. EU
regulations affect us all- if at times imperfectly implemented. Everything in the 21st century
world is connected. Particularly in Europe we have a
network of nations – held
together by the webs formed of its citizens and communicating (hopefully)
with the Governments of their Nation
States.
*****
Politicians often use
phrases such as ‘It is good for Britain
that’.. ‘It is in the interest of Britain
that’ …
What, one must ask, is this ‘Britain’
of which they speak? It is clear that they are not thinking of the geographical entity of hills,
and rivers. They are considering the
welfare of the citizens. Are the only
British citizens of concern to the Government, those who reside amongst the
hills and valleys and the towns and villages of the United
Kingdom?
Is Mr. Clegg prepared to answer ‘yes’ to that question? Or will a shadow of guilt pass across his
mind. Is the Citizen Abroad of little
value? Is the answer from Mr. Clegg – ‘quite so’?
If all the Citizens of Britain
disappeared, then so would the Nation of Britain. The Citizens ARE
Britain. The ‘good’, the ‘interests’ of Britain,
is and are, those of the British Citizens.
Why does a Government exist? Does it exist for the sole benefit of the
members of the Government? No. That is
dictatorship. It exists for the benefit
of the Citizens. All citizens! There cannot be a ranking of, ‘they are all
equal but some are more equal than others’.
A Government exists to serve the
Citizens,
The Citizens do not exist to
serve the Government.
The policies of any Government
must ensure the welfare of the Citizens wherever they may be living, at home or
abroad. Not just those who are resident within the geographical State.
In the global village or more
narrowly, the Association of Europe, the
British Nation is widespread and British influence is spread by these very same
Citizens.
Every British Citizen epitomises
British culture. Their attitudes, the
way they think, and act, appear to their host country neighbours as a reflection
of the British way of doing things.
The good (or evil) that they do,
affects the image of all British citizens, and thereby the image of this entity
called ‘Britain’.
For the good of all Britons, at
home or abroad, would it not seem sensible, imperative even, to engender a
feeling of mutual support between them, of affection one with another.
As things are now, we have
British citizens abroad denigrating the British Government, despairing at the
blindness of British politicians and the civil servants. They despair at the tepidness of respect for
their efforts in promoting British business or culture.
Would it not engender pride and
mutual loyalty to be warmly recognised?
The sense of pride is of huge importance. The notion that one is no longer to be
considered a full citizen – for that is the effect of the law - after fifteen
years - is insulting.
The answer is Representation in
one form or another at Westminster.
Perhaps the House of Lords could accept elected members
from the wider world of British Citizens.
Most expatriates are desirous to be patriots and not ex-patriots.
**************
A full exposition of my arguments on the matter
of Representation of Britons Abroad can be viewed here:-
www.lefourquet.net/Voting-finalversion.html
You can leave comments on that site or this one (see the link below).
***********
**Please view also www.votes-for-expat-brits.com (More in depth analysis of the position of Britons Abroad and voting/Representation). ***You can leave comments on that site or this one (see the link below).
Author --- Brian
Cave
Email addresses for Mr. Clegg are:-
nick.clegg.mp@parliament.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)