Anna, if you are noticing the differences you are keeping up with the changes, even though they mat not affect you. I find it pertinent that toy refer to watching tv, whilst I had in mind the Today programme and other topical and news programmes.
Valerie, we look after our own, that includes our children and grandchildren.
Anna, legislation regarding pensions is of the utmost importance to retirees living here.
We worked hard for our retirement fund and to say that we should be denied a say in how it is governed simply because we have exercised our legal right to live in the EU is crass.
No I wouldn't say I'm keeping up with the changes. I'm noticing things are different, and I'm getting information at second hand. If I lived there I wouldn't be seeing it through other people's eyes, I would be reacting to things at first hand and having my own opinions. When I lived in the UK, I very rarely saw eye to eye with my brother, we had different views on most things. Now, he's my chief source of information, so I accept what he tells me because I'm not there to experience it for myself and have my own views. I don't know how I'd feel, what things would annoy me, how much they would annoy me, what I would do about it or try to do about it. You do have to live with it day in day out to know that. IMHO.
PS I must admit I don't have UK TV, nor do I listen to BBC radio - I'm sure it's very informative but again, it's all second hand.
Don't worry - no offence taken at all, Anna. Yes I suppose in short it is one person one vote. I'm English and I would expect my one English vote. I have no financial interests in the UK but my immediate family is there. If at some point in the future I need to help my mother then I would try to be there. But because I'm not living next door to her right now I should not be allowed to vote in a decision as crucial as this? That's the logic I don't understand from the government.
I agree that the 15 year rule is wrong Jane. There are clearly no grounds to disenfranchise a person purely because of where they live, or the length of time that they may have lived there.
Equally, it would be incorrect to disenfranchise a person on the grounds of their voting or political involvement history. I wonder if you have considered the possibility that many people who have previously had little involvement in the political process of our country, simply viewed voting in General Elections as being pointless due to viewing all politicians as being essentially from the same self-serving mould. The referendum was different in that rather than it being about who governed in Westminster, it was to a large degree about whether our seat of government should be in Westminster or Brussels ---- hence the substantially increased turn-out at the polls.
The one thing that the referendum has achieved is to increase the number of people who are now giving active consideration to political matters. Surely that is something that can only be good for democracy as a whole, and is therefore to be welcomed.
Really Jane ? Already the countries that make up the EU are giving consideration to change. In the last 48hrs there have been suggestions from senior politicians in both Italy and Germany about the possibility of extending dual nationality to British students and young people living and studying in their respective countries so that Brexit won't mean that they have to go back to the UK.
The referendum result has sent a message to all the countries of Europe that the people of the UK are very dissatisfied with the EU as a concept. Governments in those countries will now be reviewing whether the EU itself needs to change direction in response. My point is that 24 years have elapsed since the Treaty of Maastricht, and so the referendum result will cause the other Governments of Europe to ask the question as to whether the overall goal of the EU is still relevant to the peoples of Europe today, or does it need amending ?
The UKs referendum result is not only going to change the UKs relationship with the EU, but is also going to bring about change within the EU itself. The signal has been given, and the message delivered loud and clear, and there will be change because of it. Therefore I believe that now is the time to wait and see how things pan out for a while, before coming to judgement about whether the referendum result is good or bad overall.
On the other hand it could be argued that the 15 year rule has been in force for some time, and that therefore there has been plenty of time for folks to consider the effects of it --- and plan accordingly. Private pension retirement funds can be moved from one country to another I believe.
As the primary content of this thread has now changed significantly fom the original, may I make the following points:
1. UK democracy is not effected by its citizens directly, and never was. Democracy in the UK is effected by elected representatives whose job it is respectively to govern and to oppose government in what they see as the best interests of the country. That is why referendums are so rare and generally lead to unsatisfactory conclusions. We elect parliament to take the important decisions on our behalf. If we collectively don't like what the government does on our behalf a general election enables us to throw out the incumbents and elect someone else. The will and opinions of the population directly is of barely any consequence. That is also why it is so important for Her Majesty's Opposition to actually oppose government initiatives and decisions. (And please do not take it that my judgement of an unsatisfactory result in this case refers to my dislike of the way it went. What was unsatisfactory is that most of Europe, all the Remainers and a signinficant proportion of the Leavers sees the conduct of the Leave campaign leaders as being too dishonest to get a fair or binding result.)
2. In the 1700s the UK's colony in America rose against its government by London, using the chant "No Taxation Without Representation" to great effect to rally the 'rebels'. It was later used successfully by the suffragette movement to secure votes for women. With regard to the 15 year rule and representation of French resident Brits, surely that is still a valid principle to guide where we should have voting rights. If we are subject to being taxed in the UK we should have full UK voting rights permanently. If we are subject to being taxed in France we should have full French voting rights. Simple. Unfortunately both Cameron and Hollande promised to address the issue and both have renaged on their promises. There is, of course, a question of whether permanent residency or citizenship should be used as a qualifier, but the underlying princliple seems a good one to me.
3. The referendum has been held and we are, for the time being at least, stuck with it. My income has taken an immediate 10% drop, along with anyone else whose income derives from the UK, and looks set to take a long slow, further decline in the months and years ahead. We can wail and rant but all to no avail, but we now need to make the best of the situation rather than expect to undo it. Once you've broken and egg you cannot mend it. But you may be able to make an omlette with it, if we can get the best chef in place.
Robert, exactly that. There was enough dissatisfaction and growth in extremism to give rise to change within the EU without having to leave.
This Referendum was an expression of that within the Tory party and Cameron wasn't strong enough to tell them where to go.
Already, if you listened to the Today programme UK universities are being denied access to international research programmes because the other parties are worried that we will not have EU funding. I judge that as very bad.
Robert, the repeal of the 15 year rule was included in the Conservative Party manifesto, so why not implement it before having a referendum?
Alice in Wonderland politics.
Our private pensions are held in both the UK and another country and are denominated in both sterling and euros. We have done our planning, but like all other pension funds we are exposed to ex hange rate changes, which are dire at the moment, especially for people who have a monthly income.
Jane, the 15 year Rule Bill was brought as a private members bill, it was being debated in the lords and was stopped at the moment it looked like the vote might go through I was watching debate on TV at the time. Several months earlier now. I think Brain .cave even mentioned on SFN or by email to me, that the debate was going to be televised. Anyway it got scuppered for some last minute spurious reason and we've heard nothing since!
Shirley, it might have been brought as a Private Members Bill, but it was in the Conservative Party Manifesto.
Anna I hope you don't mind if I contradict you, what is seen or heard on radio, when People are being interviewed or giving their non politician expert opinion is very much 1st hand not 2nd hand. Straight from the horses mouth as it were.
Over the the years on here we've had many discussion about being involved in whatever British relevant topic, where many expats hav said theŷ left UK,live here now, not interested! (unless it affects family back there, or their own financial affairs still conducted from there. I spent many months on here teŷing to urge people to register to Vote, and relaying by copying and pasting here in any Discussion I started about relevant information sent to me.
Most of it was in the run up to the last General Election, when we also knew the Referendum promise was in the Tory Manifesto, but not how the 'Question' would be worded. All that effort failed also, complacency and apathy is the same with voting be it in UK or amongst expats. The Referendum result this time round, is what May well change our lives in quite a dramatic waŷ! We are seeing it alreadŷ with XR's and the Stock Markets.
So I would say yes it does behove us all, to get as much information as we can from what vet source we can. I don't need to return the UK to know how things have changed, we can see and hear so many things on a daily basis from France, that inform us.
I think that a diverse range of information sources including using the Internet to research, is best way to look, listen, read and then make our own minds up when it comes to potentially life changing situations. I would never rely solely on one source of information only. I'm not having a go at you, just trŷing to give you another perspective.
I'll have a mushroom or cheese omelette please Rhys :-)
You are right the deed is done now, weeping and wailing won't change anything politically - yet - it's going to be over the next 2+ years, while 3 UK political parties change their leaders and also what the EC and Member States reactions will be once Article 50 is triggered - or, may I suggest, the possibility of a very slim chance that it won't be?
Fingers crossed Shirley.
First hand to them, but second hand by the time it gets to me.
I'm sorry, but I think that an individual's views are always coloured by their own life experiences and predispositions. Without that process of synthesis to add your own personal "colour", you're simply taking somebody else's intepretation of what they experienced - with their own bit of colour added. As Barbara Deane said earlier today "My cousin lives in Lincolnshire and she declares that the polish people have taken the jobs. Not sure if I am prepared to accept her thoughts too easily". That's exactly my point; whatever you hear or read, has been processed and filtered and shaped by someone else's brain first, consciously or subconsciously. In fact I often find that people often focus on the negative and tend not to mention ways in which life may have improved; they don't do it on purpose, it's just human nature. Sometimes I go back and mention improvements that the council has made and I get "Oh yes, can't remember when they did that, hadn't you seen it before?" Certainly the more diverse your sources, the better - but you will only ever pick up the information that other people have chosen to put out, ie the things that other people consider important. So yes I appreciate what you're saying, but - taking information from other sources is never going to be quite the same as experiencing it for yourself, feeling it, assimilating it, letting your brain process it and forming your own views.
Anna, in this day and age if you choose to ignore both UK tv and radio, I fail to see how you can say that those who listen and watch are not well informed.
Quite amusing/worrying to see that the most googled question in the week running up to the referendum was 'what is the EU?'
Jane Robert, I see merit in both sides of your discussion. Politics have long been of interest to me, mainly through my dad, when we used to discuss anything and everything, we argued more over Princess Di - I liked her,he didn't!
One thing we both always had a strong belief in is Democracy,be it in UK or EU. I still do, so would he if he were still here, I'd love to be discussing all this with him now, because the EC is not Democratic and at least having the UK Referendum was. It's EU democracy that needs to step up, if we are to remain a virtually war free and peaceful European Union now and in the future.
He wouldn't like the jeopardy of situation with Uni scjentific and biological funding possibly being lost either. Yes I heard on PMQ, PMmentioned Horizon, several members of Thyroid UK use Horizon and pay for private Thyroid blood tests, having more than TSH tested, Horizon's test being a much better one for thyroid health, especially those of us who have an Autoimmune thyroid problem. It's complicated so won't go much farther into it. I'm fortunate though that here I did manage eventually, to persuade my doctor to ask for a more thorough test, the one that I was proved Autoimmune to and was covered by one of my ALD conditions at the time, so cost me nothing.
Yes benefits of EU co-operation and reciprocal arrangments, are another factor to consider, as well as democracy.