Those who are allowed to vote

[NormanH]

In the UK general Election might like to listen to this first and reflect that  May's lies are just a continuation of the lying promise in the last Tory manifesto to give the vote to British citizens abroad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxN1STgQXW8

[Grecian]

Hopefully this video will encourage the youngsters to exercise their right to vote, and bring an end to the treatment that the tories have inflicted upon them. They have been the ones to suffer most under the tories, although I would add in the sick and disabled as well.

The video well documents all the lies that the tories have told, how many times was it Ms May you said that there will be no snap election, forgotten have we, 17 actually Ms May.

I see that that the BBC have banned it being played on the radio, understandable I guess, but I am guessing that it will not be played on any topical satirical programmes either. If it had been about Corbyn then I am sure it would have made its way into mainstream TV. Still with over a million hits already it is obviously reaching a large audience.

[woolybanana]

These youngsters brought up to believe they are entitled, are these the ones you are discussing?

[woolybanana]

Norman, you are always telling us that you are an emigrant or if seen the other way, an immigrant, so why are you expecting a vote?

I think that 15 years entitlement is quite enough. A vote is not a vote for life.

Though why your former government should be able to tax your pensions is another matter.

[mint]

Norman, just want to say thank you.[:D]

[Judith]

In this I agree with NormanH.  The rules being such that certain pensions are taxable in their country of origin (and I didn't make the rules, so don't go on at me!), and that every other country in the world to the best of my knowledge allows votes for life, I do believe that votes should be for life.

Mind you, I'd also make voting mandatory, even if it's impossible to control, so important a duty do I think voting is.

I try to explain to my French friends here that we can vote in the UK general election, but not the Presidential, for an MEP in either country, as long as we only vote once, and for the French local /municipal elections, but not the British ones, nor indeed for the French legislative ones, so why I am surprised when they find it all so confusing.

It's all quite stupid and needs regulating.

And that, of course, is only true, if you left the UK less than 15 years ago.  After that, except for French municipal elections, you are totally disenfranchised - and that to my mind is both unfair and unethical.

[woolybanana]

It might be better to have MPs for expats as the French do; the standard of representation might be higher.

[YCCMB]

Wooly mentions the "why your former government should be allowed to tax your pension" issue.

Public sector pensions are the only pensions to which this applies. Thus, the pensions accrued (still significantly more attractive than anything now available to anyone employed in the private sector) are and were funded by the taxpayer.

I'm guessing that successive governments - and migrants didn't have a vote under Labour governments, either - probably imagine a scenario where former public sector employees move abroad, and their taxpayer-funded pensions are untaxed in the UK, giving rise to the private sector workers whose taxes funded their salaries in the first lace feeling a tad miffed.

Or, to put it more succinctly: a proportion of Fred's taxes pay Jim's salary. Jim pays into a pension scheme from that money and gets a pension with more knobs and whistles than Fred will ever see. Jim moves to France, and the money Fred helped him accrue goes with him, and any tax owed goes to the French Government. Fred is cross.

[Chancer]

[quote user="Judith"]

I try to explain to my French friends here that we can vote in the UK general election, but not the Presidential, for an MEP in either country, as long as we only vote once, and for the French local /municipal elections, but not the British ones, nor indeed for the French legislative ones, so why I am surprised when they find it all so confusing.

It's all quite stupid and needs regulating.

And that, of course, is only true, if you left the UK less than 15 years ago.  After that, except for French municipal elections, you are totally disenfranchised - and that to my mind is both unfair and unethical.
[/quote]

 

I dont think that a person should be able to vote in the country of their birth once they have taken up residence elsewhere point bar. Their motivation is a purely selfish one, OK thats true of most of the UK voting population but their position puts them at odds with the UK electorate in terms of things like the winter fuel allowance or Brexit, the UK population are the ones contributing to the economy and who have to live with all the conséquences of the elections or referendums.

 

As for being disenfranchised there is a simple answer, become a French Citizen and have a say in the future of your country, its a feeling of being disenfranchised that you have, in this climate of uncertainty fuelling insecurities I realise that many people left the UK in a physical sense only.

 

You all had your vote on Brexit, now there is this massive interest in the general election that there never was with previous ones, do you really think whoever wins will make any difference to your position as a non UK resident? That was decided with the referendum, its just the detail that is unknown and whilst I appreciate that is what is causing people angst I really dont think the outcome for them will be any different whoever wins the UK general election.

[richard51]

Don't think the Jim/Fred argument is totally correct. Jim would have earned the salary by working for Fred.

Why Fred is cross is probably because of the over-generous pensions provided in the public sector - and that is being polite.

[richard51]

Chancer - I would go one stage further and say that people should not be able to have dual nationality period.

[lindal1000]

I do think the result of the general election will have an influence on British citizens living in France. Many have pensions and income derived from the Uk and government policy affects that.. In addition many people have all their family in the UK, are perhaps paying for Children at Uk universities, or have businesses in the UK but live in France, or go back to the Uk regularly to work. People don't always vote for their own self interests but those of their children, parents etc. And there are many people who genuinely have interests and commitments in both countries and their residency is purely decided by what country they spend the majority of their time in.

[NormanH]

Chancer

You all had your vote on Brexit

No we didn't! At least I didn't...

[NormanH]

Chancer

You all had your vote on Brexit

No we didn't! At least I didn't...

[woolybanana]

Like Norman, I was disenfranchised too.

[YCCMB]

Perception, Rchard, is reality. I concur with your reasoning. However, I can not imagine that this is an aspect of the argument which Fred will take into account. Much less when Fred considers that those most affected (i.e. Those who have been abroad for long enough to become disenfranchised) may well have had the option to retire significantly earlier than Fred is ever likely to d, thus rubbing salt into an already open wound.

As I have repeatedly said, the constant cry for everyone to be treated as a "special case" on just about anything - but especially on anything which has a financial impact on them personally, just demonstrates the total lack of altruism in our current society.

[Chancer]

I didnt have my vote either Norman nor for the general election but that was my choice for altrusitic reasons, probably not the right word.

 

I could, in fact should still be on the UK electoral roll, they keep sending letters threatening to fine me if I dont fill out the forms, I think it would be wrong of me to vote but thats a personal thing.

[alittlebitfrench]

I agree with Chancer, I don't live in the UK so I have no right to vote. It is up to those who live there to decide the best way forward.

I don't think also that an expat should be allowed to vote in the country they have chosen to live in. Especially not Wayne and Waynetta in Eymet.

[NormanH]

[quote user="richard51"]Don't think the Jim/Fred argument is totally correct. Jim would have earned the salary by working for Fred.

Why Fred is cross is probably because of the over-generous pensions provided in the public sector - and that is being polite.[/quote]

I don't consider that words such as 'generous' belong in a discussion about pensions; and "over-generous" is even worse. They introduce an irrelevant element of judgment, even a sort of envy into the debate, and imply that the amount is undeserved

http://generosityresearch.nd.edu/more-about-the-initiative/what-is-generosity/

We wouldn't speak of a 'generous' house price, or a 'generous' payment from a life insurance, which rather resembles the payment of a pension that is contribution-based.

Perhaps the calculations on which they have been based need to be re-considered, but those who paid the contributions into the system did so with  a certain deal promised at the end, and those who didn't had chosen to work in other sectors and also knew the consequences.

[YCCMB]

Norman, perhaps the word (or words) should be "more advantageous".

A case in point to which I can speak is that of local authority employees. If someone working for council X moves to work for council Y, even in a different role, they enjoy a continuity of pension rights and benefits. If a private sector worker moves from firm X to firm Y that rule doesn't apply.

Does this apply to other public sector workers? I assume it does.

Is any of the above a factor in career choices? I suspect not. I also think that private sector workers did not "know the consequences", given that many have found over the same period of employment that their pension benefits have been altered significantly: witness the demise of the final salary pension in the private sector. Yet many private sector workers also began work "with a certain deal promised at the end" .

Not long ago, the BBC conducted a series of interviews with "expats" in Spain. One of those interviewed was a man who had lived full-time in Spain for the last 15 years. He actually said, on British national television, that if he were able to vote, he would vote UKIP, "because we can't carry on letting all these immigrants into our country". This, whilst sanding on a Spanish beach. With absolutely no sense that he recognised any irony in his words.

Regardless of my lack of sympathy with his political views, it would not sit comfortably with me that someone resident in another country should be able to vote to change, in whatever way, the way of life of people in a country in which they have chosen not to live.

I wholly appreciate the frustration of the disenfranchised. I support the view that there should be a means of giving them a vote...but in their chosen country of residence. After all, being fiscally resident in another country, the "no taxation without representation" idea seems to trouble many of them far less from that perspective.

[Chancer]

Thankyou Betty.

 

You express my feelings far better than I am capable of doing.

[NormanH]

It would be nice to be able to choose to be fiscally resident in one country and consequently vote there, but things are messier than that.

Few of us are totally independent entities and I still have family in Britain.

I pay taxes in both the UK and France, but can vote in neither.

I accept that I can change the voting part of that by taking French nationality, but I can't change where I am taxed.

However my desire to vote is not only based on the fact that I have an interest in how my taxes are used (for the education of my grandchildren, their health care  and that of my son, the services that he used to work for but have been cut so inheritance tax for the rich might be lowered) , but on a concept of what Nationality means.

I am a British citizen. I believe that that should include the right to vote for the Government of the UK  where ever I live.

[lindal1000]

I haven't heard the overgenerous public pension argument for a while. The average NHS pension is £8000 pa. Most people in the public sector do not earn as much as those in the private sector. Most public sector workers do not work for the full 40 years required to get a full pension. I will have 20/80 of my final salary when I retire. My final salary was around the average wage. If I bought a house and rent that in the UK and that would bring in more than my public pension. Being able to transfer pensions just means that it is easier to manage as it all comes from one place. As the pension is now based on career average rather than final salary it is sometimes better not to transfer and to just take two pensions, especially if you move to a lower paid job.

[richard51]

Definition of generosity from a quick google :

the quality or fact of being plentiful or large.

Certainly I would say that my NHS pension is generous, especially when compared to many friends pensions who worked in the private sector doing similar level roles.

[andyh4]

Norman is right about fiscal residency being a messy situation. At one stage the OH was fiscally resident in 3 countries at the same time.

Does this mean three sets of voting rights?

If so, think of how the great and wealthy would find ways to capitalise on that to their own ends.

As for the statement from an intellectually retarded ex-pat in Spain being used as the basis on which all ex-pats should be judged, well that is nonsense is it not?

I have heard equally nonsensical statements from British people living in Glasgow, Birmingham and London. Do we then exclude all residents from those cities from having a vote?

The problem of ex-pat voting rights (and I do accept that there is something of a problem) has been looked at around the world. I know of no country that does not use nationality as the basis for being part of the plebiscite. The UK it seems alone deems this a right that can expire. One would hope quid pro quo they would deem their right to tax such people would apply equally - of course it does not.