TERGIVERSATION** in the HOUSE of COMMONS

To go to the index click here.

*** ‘tergiversation!’***  = turning one’s back on previously held convictions.

Wednesday 27^th 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

Health Costs - Europe June 2012

To go  to the index click here

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 22^nd 2012 to Commissioner Andor can be read here

The reply from Jackie Morin [Head of Unit on Social Security Co-ordination]

of June 22^nd 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.

UK vs French Parliament 2012.

To go to the Index  click here

What you can do -  Read Below at end.   And read UPDATE at end.

 

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%)

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.

1. The  Bill on Individual Electoral Registration * under debate in House of Lords*)
2. 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

What you can – should? - do –  
individual mailings are so important!

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 .

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@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.

Francis Maude, who has previously said he is for extending representation.
 francismaudemp@parliament.uk

Nick Clegg. Who has till now been strongly opposed to the representation of Britons Abroad.
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.

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

The postal address is :--House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA

 Please circulate widely to all who should be concerned about Parliamentary Democracy.

The Extraordinary thoughts of Mr. Clegg

To go to the index and beginning click here

An assistant to Nick Clegg, the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party wrote on April 25^th 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 20^th 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 21^st 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

***********

**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

correspondence+id14892@libdems.zendesk.com

How do the British Pensioners live in France?

To go to the Index and beginning click here

UPDATE -  The posting 'Shopping in France' is a useful accompaniment to this post.  It compares a shopping list in the UK and France from time to time, and  gives figures for inflation and the effect of the exchange rates.  ***View it here***.   Last update June 2015

In 2012 I met a British pensioner of long acquaintance in our local supermarket at Gourdon, my home town in the Department of the Lot, France.  I had not met him for some years and at first did not recognise him.  He looked much older than I remembered and appeared distressed.   ‘We’re selling up’ said  Jerry ‘if we can find a buyer for our house’.  I knew he and his wife Anthea had been resident in France for at least 15 years and before that had owned a second home here during the time he was teaching in Britain. 

‘Why do you want to go back?’ I enquired.  ‘Its just too expensive here’, he said.  ‘We can’t manage any more’.

It is indeed expensive.  The food costs are more here than in the UK.   I keep a price comparison list.   You can easily view the prices in Tesco online and similarly discover the general price of petrol in the UK.

In March 2012 I began such a comparison –See the link above. The basket of goods cost the equivalent of 92.07 euros in Tescos, and the same list was 104.23 euros here in Gourdon. That is to say 13% more expensive compared to Britain.  Even four star petrol was fractionally higher in price in March than in Britain.  Fifteen years ago everything was so much cheaper in France. The repeated exercise in March 2013 was far worse.  The £ dropped in value by 10% since December 2012 and French inflation soared to 12% (on my figures). The same basket of goods cost 108 euros, which was 17% higher than in the UK. [ n.b. June 2015. The situation has improved since 2014 - but is still not equitable with UK prices.]

The difference in price is enough that many Britons living in France buy various large items, clothes and the like  via the internet from England,  Nowadays, Marks and Spencer’s, John Lewis,  and even much smaller stores will send goods to France and even with the delivery costs it is still cheaper to buy this way.(* see comment 5 below)

From personal knowledge I know that small pieces of machinery such as parts for a chain saw  can be purchased more cheaply from Britain than in the local shops.  Electric fencing and garden ‘seep’ hoses can be so purchased similarly from Britain at a cheaper price than locally. Clothes, china and so on are all frequently available more cheaply from the UK.

Why is this?  The exchange rate has much to do with it.  We hear so often through the British radio and television that the Euro is in dire trouble.  My inkling is that we should pay more attention to the markets than to the economic soothsayers of the press and the somewhat biased pronouncements from any Government voice.   The undoubted fact is that the Euro has stayed strong against the pound although since 2014 the rate has improved  The £ stood in 2012 any where between 0.87 (April 2012!) (as in the price comparison linked above) to about 0.83 pence to the euro.  In 2015 it has been about 0.73.  It would be more equable in buying power today at about 0.67 - 0.70 pence.  The more the UK Government go on ‘printing’ money the more it will stay weak and even get worse.  [update note- on May 26th 2012 - From April, to July the £  climbed dramatically .  From July to December it fell back again.  Can we be sure of anything in this world?]

My acquaintance and his wife were teachers.   Because of the extraordinary law on taxation this means that they are taxed on their pensions by the United Kingdom.  The law is most decidedly an ‘ass’.  My enquiries to the HMRC as to why this should be so, get the answer ‘Because the pension comes from public funds.’  This is an absolute bananas of a reply.  The Old Age State pension quite transparently comes from public funds, yet that is not, for the British pensioner living in France – I repeat is not - taxed in the UK but is exportable for taxation to France! 

The utter stupidity of the laws on taxation of pensions is repeated elsewhere in Europe.  Would you not agree that the pensions of nurses comes via the public purse?  Yet those nurses who retire to France and Spain can have it taxed in France or Spain.  Those who retire to Germany must by law have it taxed in the U.K. 

The consequence for my acquaintance is that they pay far more income tax to the UK than they would if they were taxed in France.  Moreover as they are clearly of advanced years and I know that Anthea suffers severely from arthritis, they need the aid of a ‘home-help’.   In France the costs of this employment are 50% deductible against tax.  Since their income tax is collected by the UK, this relief is not possible for them.   To add extra absurdity the French take the teachers pensions into consideration when viewing their liability to taxation on their State Pension and their local property taxes.

So, through the complexity of archaic laws which derive from the United Kingdom they get a double whammy of an artificially distorted exchange rate and the hard luck of being suspended between two different sets of laws on taxation.

Because they have been non-resident in the UK since before 1998 they had not received the Winter Fuel Payment {see note at end].

Then again, our two aged people have to subscribe to their health care in France.  This will cost them more than 1500 euros a year and possibly 2,000 (about £1650).  I am convinced that this is because of a misinterpretation of European law.   The EU regulations on health say that the British pensioners should receive health care in France as any French person should receive it and that the cost should be borne by the U.K. Now the exact wording of the law on costs says and I quote……  

“ 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.”  [EU Regulation 987-2004, Article 62]

The competent institution is the U.K. Department of Health.  The U.K. is responsible under EU law for the Social Security costs of all British Pensioners living in the EU who have never paid into any social security of their host country but only into the British system.   It is beyond belief that the precise wording of this regulation can be so ignored. (*The EU Regs need examination by a trained legal mind, especially 987-2004 Article 24 - residence in a State )

Here is part of an email, written on the 10^th February, from another acquaintance. “Just as I was yesterday, I am typing Emails sitting up in bed. I am  fully clothed in three jumpers, two pairs of trousers and a track suit. 
My dear husband, similarly dressed, is tucked up beside me.  He is eighty-six, and suffers from epilepsy and  a certain amount of mental confusion.
Outside the temperature is minus 2 degrees, and is expected to fall to minus 10 degrees tonight - a big improvement on the  minus 14 degrees we had last night.”

And another (let’s call her Ethel) who wrote to me about the non-receipt of the Winter Fuel Payment.  I know that their health insurance costs them over 2,000 euros a year.

“As you can imagine, this past year has been extremely hard on both of us and it is only with the support of the excellent French health professionals as well as the kindness of our friends and neighbours (both French and British) that we have managed to cope.   We live on a joint pension income of 12,000 pounds sterling per annum and have to draw on our very modest savings to supplement this.   Because of our low income, we downsized seven years ago to a tiny, one-bedroomed house which my husband converted from a carpenter's workshop but his illness and treatment cause him to feel the cold in the extreme and, in spite of the size of our house, I dread to think what our heating bill will be this Winter.  It is so dreadfully unfair that we and others in our situation are not allowed to receive the Winter Fuel Payment [see note at end] from the British government when our compatriots do!  And, of course, there is nothing we can do about it as, having lived in France for more than fifteen years, we are now disenfranchised as well!”

This letter from Ethel, just about sums up the predicament.  The EU is supposed to allow free movement of people, with neither loss of privileges nor obstructions placed in one’s path.   Yet the British Governments since 1973 have not considered in any manner at all how the diaspora of British folk are faring in the wider Europe.  Most of the pensioners are ordinary folk, some rich, some poor, but mostly in the middle income brackets.  Most moved to the continent because housing was cheaper and they felt sure that the pound would stay strong.. But the fact is that they are treated as non-existent citizens by their own country.   The UK Governments still tax many of them. The Government ignores it responsibility towards their health care. The Governments have disallowed  the Winter Fuel Payment [see note at end] to the most elderly.  And to cap it all the Governments have not allowed them to be appropriately represented in Parliament [see note at end].  

And now some are forced because of financial difficulties to attempt to return to the UK where no doubt they will add to the population pressure on the health service and the local social security departments.
 [The Winter Fuel Payment - AUGUST 2012 -- Because of pressure from the EU helped along by certain knowledgeable expatriates - the Government DWP has caved in and accepts that the WFP is payable to all those in the EU/EEA who would receive it if their residence were otherwise in the UK.]
BUT----
[Further note  on the WFP - January 2014- The Government has decided that France is a HOT country and on that basis will not pay the WFP to those of us living in France - But Italy is defined as 'not hot' -
View a relevant link here!] 
[The disenfranchisement is being strongly fought -- 
visit and comment www.votes-for-expat-brits.com ]