Web chat with Jim Murphy Minister for europe today 25th at 1645 BST

[Deimos]

Well I decided to take the dogs out for a walk as it was so slow.  when I returned I thought it finished as he had answered virtually nothing in the 20 mins I was away.  Maybe its like so many politicians; when you get a question you can answer (or "prepared earlier") spend as long as possible answering it as the next question might not be so easy.

IAn

[Boiling a frog]

Well we did get an answer of sorts not a lot but something

 

Rosie: I'm 16 years old and my parents have been British residents in France since 1999. They're about to lose their health care rights even though they have an income and contribute to the social security system. What will the British government do to protect my rights in Europe?

Jim replies: Thanks for your post Rosie.  A number of people have been in touch about this today and on my Foreign Office blog.  We have had further contact with the French Ministry of Health and we await clarification from them on this.  We have raised our concerns with the French Government regarding the impact on British citizens living in France.  In particular we have asked if any change is to take place that it does not apply retrospectively.  We will continue to raise this.

[Ninthace]

[quote user="Russethouse"]YES - just got 'on topic' !!!!![:D][/quote]

 

And off it and away as fast as he can with no more information added to that in his Blog.  Chocolate teapots come to mind!

[Russethouse]

I must be looking in the wrong place, where on that site is it mentioned ?

[Deimos]

[quote user="Ninthace"]

[quote user="Russethouse"]YES - just got 'on topic' !!!!![:D][/quote]

 

And off it and away as fast as he can with no more information added to that in his Blog.  Chocolate teapots come to mind!

[/quote]

I just added another comment to his BLOG.  I think we were just watching "something he prepared earlier".  To have got through so little in such a long time beggars belief.  More has been happening here in the same time.

Ian

[rothrugby]

Lets not get too negative, he did answer the Q & I was particularly interested to see that he is still challenging the rerospective application. He could have just ignored it !!

 

[Ninthace]

[quote user="Russethouse"]I must be looking in the wrong place, where on that site is it mentioned ?[/quote]

 

http://blogs.fco.gov.uk/blogs/jim_murphy/archive/2007/10/11.aspx  click on comments

[Tony F Dordogne]

What's interesting is that the children are supposedly posting the messages on behalf of their parents - on his blog as well I think or the telegraph site, can't remember which.

Bad approach, it's the people effected directly (not that the children wouldn't be if they had to return to the UK) that need to be making the fuss, using the kids was, in my experience at this sort of thing - quite often counter productive.

[Catalpa]

I didn't read it that way. I read it that Rosie was concerned on her own behalf too. If she's 16, been here 8 years, half her life has been in France. She didn't choose to come to France originally but is probably indistinguishable from her contemporaries now. Doesn't she have to have some form of medical insurance as part of her qualifying criteria for further education, university, etc. In which case she has every right to be raising her own case.

[Russethouse]

I had a feeling she may be the young lady who has posted on TF ?

[Catalpa]

I'm not sure, RH - I have seen something from someone I recollect as Rosie somewhere but as someone said earlier, it might've been on the Telegraph comments page or on Jim Murphy's blog. My analysis of her situation (didn't choose to come here, etc) is analysis / assumption,btw, not what I remember her saying. It's interesting to realise that it isn't "just" 50+ early retired British people who are affected by this ruling.

[krusty]

Jim replies:  In particular we have asked if any change is to take place that it does not apply retrospectively.  We will continue to raise this.

This little part of jim`s reply sounded like good news , but obviously France will have the last word.

[Deimos]

The thing that concerns me a bit is that the

French have already clarified things to the FCO and given them

reassurances then changed their minds within a day or two. Thus,

should the FCO receive further reassurances and clarification, I

expect the French to go back on those pretty quickly - called

learning from experience.

Thus, I think the UK/EU need to be a bit more

assertive and tell the French what they are doing is wrong and will

stop.

Ian

[Russethouse]

I wonder if the French idea of retrospective is the same as the British?

[cooperlola]

I assume, Deimos, that you are the Ian HERE - if so, I see we both got on the blog. Even the website name didn't get edited out, even if it's not a proper link.

[Deimos]

[quote user="cooperlola"]I assume,

Deimos, that you are the Ian HERE -

if so, I see we both got on the blog. Even the website name didn't

get edited out, even if it's not a proper link.[/quote]

Afraid

it is (the Ian without any surname).  I get a bit irritated by

the "meeting culture" where people discuss, seek

clarification, etc., etc.; all of which goes on forever so nobody

actually has to do anything but they just hope that if the extend

things long enough the problem will just go away.

Ian

[tigerfeet]

[quote user="Russethouse"]I wonder if the French idea of retrospective is the same as the British?[/quote]

Slightly off thread , did anyone see roger cook last night , he followed up the case in Spain where criminals were staying there without being extradited , when the UK  and Spain finally got an extradition agreement it was not applied retrospectively , so the cons who were there already were allowed to stay.

Not saying we are `cons` but if we are in the French health system we should be allowed to stay in , I can dream.  [;-)]