Jump to content

France backs down on access to CMU for inactifs


Recommended Posts

[quote user="Chancer"]

I have a strange présentiment that this is going to engender some bad press for the new wave of immigrants that will henceforth be able to join the CMU.

Prior and even post its withdrawal the majority of French were completely unaware that early retirees from the UK or other countries were able to profit from the system put in place to reduce hardship for French citizens, but the elections are soon, every side is posturing and picking on the easy targets, the proposal to tax the percieved rich second home owners was well recieved by all but that now has been withdrawn, you can be sure that the opposition will be quick to exploit this apparent weakness on the part of the government.

Once the new measures are announced, (and we should wait and see what they actually pan out to be) if they are as reported I reckon that the opposition will really go to town on the easy target of (percieved) rich early retired foreigners being rewarded by the government, I can imagine articles showing the Range Rovers, probably still UK registered and the swimming pools etc with a comparison against someone like the retarded guy in my village who no longer has CMU cover or any remaining teeth.

I do hope not but it does seem like a win-win situation for the far left.

[/quote]

 

Or for the far right. As I said earlier my perception was of aisé british buying in France.

have pm'd you chancer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As I inferred before, there is as yet no evidence to suggest that CMU will necessarily be the route taken - that it still up in the air.  All that the authorities have been told to do (as far as I can make out from the very thin amounts of info' coming out at present) is to allow those who cannot get cover (those who are sick?  have long term chronic conditions? - still not clear) to be able to do so.  If you look at the quote from the French authorites in the Connexions piece you will see that the FG is being very cagey so I wouldn't assume any details at this stage. 

As has been pointed out already in this thread, CMU was originally designed as a safety net for those with no other viable healthcare alternative.  Imho, there is still nothing to stop the FG from drawing up a new scheme for EU citizens and others - perhaps an umbrella private scheme which could and would accept those who have a pre-existing condition and which would cover all the eventualities which the state currently does.  I'm just speculating here, I don't know anything that you don't know but I think it would be foolish to assume that it will be just the good old 8% for all.  What has been ruled on here, afaik,  is where the legislation in France goes against the EU free movement guidelines - by denying the right to retire early to France if you have a pre-existing medical condition - not denial of access to this particular caisse (CMU), as far as I can see.  It may still be the easiest route and thus the one taken but I wouldn't bank on it yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not know whether it is because I lived in France so long, OR I am a stroppy middle aged woman, or I am just plaint stroppy, but the idea that anyone can leave their homeland and be 'a charge' by another country really annoys me. I don't give a hoot about the United States of Europe, may that incarnation die a death. I would like a good trade zone with a flexible movement of workers, and yes other people should be able to move, but only if they can afford it.

I believe that the system in the UK needs lots of adjustments too. .

A country needs to look after it's own. France has had enough problems looking after it's own, and as Chancer has mentioned, still is, never mind having to care for those who think that France is some sort of, no idea what to say, utopia, as it is far from that, and the french are not responsible for anyone other than their 'own', and neither is the UK, come to that! So that word 'responsible', my opinion is that people with preexisting conditions these days have the chance to have their own country caring for their needs, not up to another country to do it.

Ofcourse just my opinion, but I would bet that I could rally up an awful lot of french friends in France to back most of that. And I bet I could rally up a lot of british friends too to back that. Times are hard, charity begins at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="idun"]

I do not know whether it is because I lived in France so long, OR I am a stroppy middle aged woman, or I am just plaint stroppy, but the idea that anyone can leave their homeland and be 'a charge' by another country really annoys me. I don't give a hoot about the United States of Europe, may that incarnation die a death. I would like a good trade zone with a flexible movement of workers, and yes other people should be able to move, but only if they can afford it.

I believe that the system in the UK needs lots of adjustments too. .

A country needs to look after it's own. France has had enough problems looking after it's own, and as Chancer has mentioned, still is, never mind having to care for those who think that France is some sort of, no idea what to say, utopia, as it is far from that, and the french are not responsible for anyone other than their 'own', and neither is the UK, come to that! So that word 'responsible', my opinion is that people with preexisting conditions these days have the chance to have their own country caring for their needs, not up to another country to do it.

Ofcourse just my opinion, but I would bet that I could rally up an awful lot of french friends in France to back most of that. And I bet I could rally up a lot of british friends too to back that. Times are hard, charity begins at home.

[/quote]

 Whatever our personal preferences the fact is that France was out of step, and that has to be rectified. I don't know the situation with other European countries, but any French person coming  to live in the UK benefits from our health care system - it seems appropriate to me that the situation is reciprocal.

Yes, I know France gets more UK retirees, but thems the breaks ! [;-)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thing is if anyone moved to Australia they know that they would have to have their health care covered. They aren't really fascist these days are they? I daresay people would have to pay taxes too if they moved there, but the health care, which can be costly has to be covered. And that does not sound unreasonable to me.

So I have my IMNVHO too. [:P]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Russethouse"][quote user="idun"]

I do not know whether it is because I lived in France so long, OR I am a stroppy middle aged woman, or I am just plaint stroppy, but the idea that anyone can leave their homeland and be 'a charge' by another country really annoys me. I don't give a hoot about the United States of Europe, may that incarnation die a death. I would like a good trade zone with a flexible movement of workers, and yes other people should be able to move, but only if they can afford it.

I believe that the system in the UK needs lots of adjustments too. .

A country needs to look after it's own. France has had enough problems looking after it's own, and as Chancer has mentioned, still is, never mind having to care for those who think that France is some sort of, no idea what to say, utopia, as it is far from that, and the french are not responsible for anyone other than their 'own', and neither is the UK, come to that! So that word 'responsible', my opinion is that people with preexisting conditions these days have the chance to have their own country caring for their needs, not up to another country to do it.

Ofcourse just my opinion, but I would bet that I could rally up an awful lot of french friends in France to back most of that. And I bet I could rally up a lot of british friends too to back that. Times are hard, charity begins at home.

[/quote]

 Whatever our personal preferences the fact is that France was out of step, and that has to be rectified. I don't know the situation with other European countries, but any French person coming  to live in the UK benefits from our health care system - it seems appropriate to me that the situation is reciprocal.

Yes, I know France gets more UK retirees, but thems the breaks ! [;-)]

[/quote]And this starts the debate about all the young French people coming to London and taking "our" jobs.  It is the swings and roundabouts of reciprocity.  I added up all the repayments we have had from CMU (my accident is paid for by the lorry driver's insurance) and all my payments and I have had back 4% of what I've paid in in the 7 years we've been here.  Unfair?  No- it's the way the system works, we are relatively well off and pretty healthy so we care for others less fortunate via what we give to the state.  Do we want to live in a world where only the rich are treated and the poor must suffer and die?  I hope not.

 

On the subject of this particular ruling though, it is as I said above.  This is not about CMU, it is about the fact that the decision made by the FG excluded those non French EU citizens with chronic conditions - however minor - from retiring early to France.  This is where the discrimination comes in and that is what has been ruled illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="idun"]

Thing is if anyone moved to Australia they know that they would have to have their health care covered. They aren't really fascist these days are they? I daresay people would have to pay taxes too if they moved there, but the health care, which can be costly has to be covered. And that does not sound unreasonable to me.

So I have my IMNVHO too. [:P]

[/quote]

 But Australia didn't sign up to the EU, or did I miss something [:)][:)][:)]

 Coops, I agree, EU countries can't pick and choose which bits of reciprocal arrangements they want or do not - they have to take the rough with the smooth !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that is the thing, the poor in the UK have health care. And now they do in France, if they can get a Dr to honour it.

We can have a million arguments about people having rights to this that and the other. It is all complicated and has been made even more complicated by the EU getting too big and I think, stupid to boot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 The French poor have healthcare  don't they, through CMU  - the same poor French person would have healthcare in the Uk too, but the poor UK person would not get the same in France.

I'm no great fan of the EU either but if we are in it the rules have to be applied equally and fairly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been said, getting an automatic right to health care in France is not that easy and some Dr's don't like using it as they have to wait to get paid, no mega pay for GP's in France, 23€ a visit to the surgery.

Not the same systems and not easy to compare either.

What 'right's should poor people have? does it boil down to that simple question? How far does that go? How far should 'human rights' to have the same as others go?

The freedom of movement, does it mean that other than our own are responsible for 'us'.

As I said, I have nothing about workers crossing the borders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Russethouse"][quote user="idun"]

Thing is if anyone moved to Australia they know that they would have to have their health care covered. They aren't really fascist these days are they? I daresay people would have to pay taxes too if they moved there, but the health care, which can be costly has to be covered. And that does not sound unreasonable to me.

So I have my IMNVHO too. [:P]

[/quote]

 But Australia didn't sign up to the EU, or did I miss something [:)][:)][:)]

 Coops, I agree, EU countries can't pick and choose which bits of reciprocal arrangements they want or do not - they have to take the rough with the smooth !

[/quote]Is anybody wanting to move to Australia obliged to have insurance which covers doctors' visits, medicines, hospital, additional care such as physio, dental, optical , all transport to and from hospital etc etc, or can they choose to pay as they go or have partial cover such as hospital only?  Because sorry, that is the issue here.  Make no mistake the system is not as it was before non-French EU citizens were allowed to join CMU because in those days they were not forced to have full insurance - they could choose to pay as they go or take less than comprehensive cover.  So somebody who had a chronic condition which they were prepared to fund (such as buying regular asthma medicine and paying for it) could retire early here.  Now (or at least up until the latest ruling) they can't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Russethouse"][quote user="idun"]

Thing is if anyone moved to Australia they know that they would have to have their health care covered. They aren't really fascist these days are they? I daresay people would have to pay taxes too if they moved there, but the health care, which can be costly has to be covered. And that does not sound unreasonable to me.

So I have my IMNVHO too. [:P]

[/quote]

 But Australia didn't sign up to the EU, or did I miss something [:)][:)][:)]

 Coops, I agree, EU countries can't pick and choose which bits of reciprocal arrangements they want or do not - they have to take the rough with the smooth !

[/quote]

 

Re Australia; just commenting on Wooly saying that it could be the slippery slope towards fascism. One can expect people who want to move to be responsible for their health care  and not be a fascist country or even heading towards fascism.

Are my views are very clouded by having lived in France for so long, probably are, it used to upset and worry me seeing people who would lose their 'rights' and then have to scrat around getting any sort of health care via charity or the red cross or both, like bloody refugees! awful it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is from The Telegraph and just confirms what friends of ours who moved to Oz had to go through.

 

That attitude is not so far off that of other countries popular with Britons as retirement spots. Australia is the favourite choice, with a British population of 600,000. When asked what healthcare access early-retired Britons could expect there, the reply from the Australian embassy in London was characteristically forthright.

We don't want retired people," said Laura Bailey, embassy spokeswoman. "No country wants them – Britain doesn't. To get into Australia you need a visa. They come under different categories and there isn't a retirement visa."

However, Ms Bailey added: "Some people would be covered under the reciprocal healthcare agreement. However, people applying for this class of visa need to show evidence of being part of a private healthcare scheme."

Australia's Investor Retirement visa is designed for "self-funded retirees" who have no dependants and want to reside in Australia. Applicants need to demonstrate they have money and the "designated investment" needs to be maintained. Furthermore, the applicant needs an "adequate health insurance package."

Those who buy insurance are far from rare. Spurred by tax breaks, 43 per cent of Australian citizens have private cover, compared to 11 per cent in the UK. Australians have 40 insurance providers to choose from. The market is expected to grow as politicians strive to move the state healthcare burden onto individuals.

 

I agree that previously it was better when people could just pay up themselves in France and I don't know why they stopped that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Whatever our personal preferences the fact is that France was out of step, and that has to be rectified. I don't know the situation with other European countries, but any French person coming  to live in the UK benefits from our health care system - it seems appropriate to me that the situation is reciprocal.

Yes, I know France gets more UK retirees, but thems the breaks ! [;-)]

There are broadly 2 different ways of accessing state health care in European countries.

One is by criterion of residence ( as in the UK)

The other is by criterion of paying into a specific system (as in France)

Does any other country have the UK system, or are they mostly like France?

If that is the case, as I suspect it is,  how can you say that France is out of step?

I suspect that the opposite is the case, and the root of the problem is British misunderstanding

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EU legislation is derisive isn't it.

If I think about what it is and how it works, I feel like one of my capacitors'll blow. 

 

I struggle to think of anything good to come of it, apart from, as my MP pointed out, we haven't all been at war for the last 70 years. But I personally don't feel at peace with it, it feels like a malfaisant force is at work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="NormanH"]France was out of step, and that has to be rectified.[/quote]Not knocking it but if anyone is out of step it's probably the UK where health care is totally free for anyone legally resident, does any other country in the world operate such a system ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if anyone is out of step it's probably the UK

And that's why it was the UK ex-residents who caused such a problem when the French changed the rules.

I believe that most of the other countries operate an insurance based system, which meant that people moving to France were able to continue their contributions to their existing policy, until they were able to join the French system. This also goes to explain the French insistence on existing insurance cover, it's nothing out of the ordinary if you are already covered..

If you have a compulsory insurance system, then charges can be based , as do the mutuelles in France,  on a premium which doesn't take into account existing conditions,just the age of the client, because the risk pool can be assumed to mirror the total population.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The french rule always were discrimatory and still are to some extent.

Wish the NHS and french health service would have overhauls and good sense built into the way they are run.

 

As with so many things somewhere mid channel is where perfection lies, if we can ever get 'there' without drowning ofcourse.[6]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...