House of Lords amendments bill

[EuroTrash]

Was that recently Andy, and was it in Europe?

My experience is that British embassies abroad, or at least in France, have cut staff to the bone in recent years and no longer consider it their job to help individuals. A couple of years ago a young British employee contracted by a UK-based SME that I sometimes work for, unfortunately died in an accident in France. We thought the British Embassy might be able to help or at least advise, but when we eventually managed to contact them they more or less said "what do you expect us to do, it's your problem". We got zero help and it was left to the company and the parents to repatriate the body, deal with the press, etc. I'm not saying the Embassy should have helped but we thought it was reasonable to ask, and their response was barely even civil. Even if they weren't going to help they could have been polite about it and pretended to be supportive, was a bit shocked by their attitude to be honest.

[idun]

I would say that insurance should have been in place and not a charge to the UK government.

There are lots of cases of people without insurance and huge hospital bills abroad, in spite of the EHIC bills can still be huge, especially if people have gone to private hospitals. In fact there was an appeal for money for a young women the other day.

Being responsible for oneself is surely part of being a good citizen and NO ONE makes us leave our native shores, we chose to.

[andyh4]

Insurance covers the costs. It does not advise on what formalities need to be carried out with the local authorities, how to organise with the undertaker to hold the body in storage pending shipment, what requirements are needed for said shipment or what documentation might be required to export and import the body.

Being a responsible person is one thing. Being a responsible child, who does not speak the language - may indeed never have visited the country - has no idea of procedures etc. is quite another. Or are you suggesting that before I take a holiday in (say) Turkey, I should inform my children that in the event of my death while on holiday they need to follow the following............? I doubt I would easily find out myself, let alone be able to inform next of kin.

And yes it was Europe.

[Chancer]

I am not disagreeing with anyone, to me its how I feel, others may feel differently, I concur with the contract idea, rights and above all responsabilities, I have no sense of entitlement through having a British pasport, I feel that having left the UK I no longer have any rights except perhaps to an accrued pension and I fully expect if it is ever paid, which I doubt, then I will probably have to reside in the UK to claim it. I do however feel that I have a responsability to my country of birth to be viewed positively in regards my behaviour, what I do and how I live my life, many of the types you have described that cry for mummy or their country when things go wrong dont seem to follow that principle.

 

How I feel today is how I felt when I left the UK so for me Brexit does not make me feel insecure, I have always been since leaving the comfort of the nest, I quite like it. I did have very string feelings regarding the Brexit vote though, I did not feel that I had the right to vote on the future of those who remain in the UK and who currently enjoy rights through their continued residency and loyalty, had I voted it would have been selfishly for my own position outside of the UK.

 

I dont feel any responsability to France or a contract between us, I have always felt as if I was just passing through, if I do end up staying and if the French government allows myself and the rest of us to do so under reasonable terms (paying our way for healthcare) then I would indeed feel that I was indebted to France.

 

I have had a very easy ride here, been able to just get on and do my thing without interference or hindrance but probably only because I am caucasian and from an EU country so dont think that I owe France itself for that, all good things must come to an end and the future will decide my allegiance to France.

[EuroTrash]

"Insurance covers the costs. It does not advise on what formalities need to be carried out with the local authorities, how to organise with the undertaker to hold the body in storage pending shipment, what requirements are needed for said shipment or what documentation might be required to export and import the body. "

I would have thought a good insurance policy would provide all this. In fact I would have thought an insurer would insist on handling the entire process themselves rather than leave it to the family because they will presumably have their own network of partners and contacts that they use to keep costs down.

[NormanH]

I have no sense of entitlement through having a British pasport, I feel that having left the UK I no longer have any rights

I too am not disagreeing as such, but I think what you say raises the philosophical issue of what is meant by having citizenship/nationality.

It is clearly not simply geographical since that would imply that only people living in Britain at a given moment are British.

At what point does one stop being a Brit abroad? What does it mean to leave the UK

A clear case would be someone who took another nationality and renounced  the British one. That person has clearly left the UK, but there are so many possible shades ..

[EuroTrash]

But you've answered it. You're a British citizen until you renounce your nationality and rip your passport up or surrender it or whatever you have to do. The fact of being a British citizen is your status and a person's nationality status is important for all kinds of reasons, there is a raft of legislation about it. I don't think it's up for philosophical discussion - it has to be very black and white because so much depends on it.

[mint]

I agree, ET, citizenship is not simply something you feel or don't feel.  You are or you aren't.

Nationality, however, can be to a large extent in the mind.  So, these people, born and brought up in a European country who seem to feel no allegiance to their country of birth and upbringing, going off to identify with terrorists in the Middle East, I find very intriguing.

The other thing, of course, is religion, as Idun has brought this up or I wouldn't really want to discuss this.  I remember back in the late 60s travelling back to England after a holiday abroad when the plane stopped at Teheran but we couldn't get off because one of the Israeli-Palestine wars was on (I think it might have been the 6-days war).

As a keen traveller, I was very disappointed not to be allowed to disembark.  The middle-aged Australian couple sitting in my row saw my bewilderment and explained the situation to me.  They said they were "going home" to do what they could for the war effort.  Clearly being Australian did not stop them considering themselves as Jewish first and foremost. 

[EuroTrash]

It is a lot neater I suppose if your emotional identity attaches itself to a nationality which also happens to be the country of which you are a citizen, and probably for a majority of people that is how it works. But as your example shows, Mint, your sense of identity may well not be particularly focused on nationality or citizenship at all. It may be a religion, it may be an international cult / movement / idealism. Or you might be a free spirit, as I get the impression Chancer is for instance, and not feel any need to pledge allegiance anywhere. I think it's scary when people feel too strong a need to "belong" because it makes them so vulnerable to being manipulated.

[Chancer]

I am still waiting for someone to explain to me how they think they are being used as a bargaining chip.

 

Presumably someone whose emotional identity is British and who feels that the government owes them better, just how could they, would they or are they using UK passport holders who have left the UK permanantly as bargaining chips? I must be missing something fundamental.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjPBp6DOwgU

[NormanH]

I don't understand what the two sides of the 'bargain' are supposed to be.

[Chancer]

I jusr dont get it at all, those that were protesting about being used as bargaining chips have gone silent on the subject.

 

I completely understand that a French/Spanish/German immigrant worker in the UK could feel insecure and feel that they might be threatened with repatriation if the negotiations go sour but the British in France?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjPBp6DOwgU

[NormanH]

Quite. The British in France can see their position about residence clearly set out on the site I linked to above, and as stated the issues of S1 and pensions are in Mrs May's control anyway.

Plenty of non-EU nationals reside in France.

[idun]

[quote user="andyh4"]Insurance covers the costs. It does not advise on what formalities need to be carried out with the local authorities, how to organise with the undertaker to hold the body in storage pending shipment, what requirements are needed for said shipment or what documentation might be required to export and import the body.

Being a responsible person is one thing. Being a responsible child, who does not speak the language - may indeed never have visited the country - has no idea of procedures etc. is quite another. Or are you suggesting that before I take a holiday in (say) Turkey, I should inform my children that in the event of my death while on holiday they need to follow the following............? I doubt I would easily find out myself, let alone be able to inform next of kin.

And yes it was Europe.[/quote]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would expect the insurance company to sort everything out, I really would. I suppose that if things started going wrong, then I would contact the embassy and ask some questions. These things happen and all one can do is cover oneself for such a situation prior to leaving.

My Dad used to travel to other EU countries with just his EHIC...... used to drive me mad, but I could not make him take insurance either. Fortunately he didn't pop his clogs whilst away....... in fact thinking about it, he has been to Canada twice without health insurance in the past......... he's been a stubborn old sod for years thinking about it!!!!

[idun]

 Bargaining chips, don't get it.......... and wasn't it Sarko who said that the french send their young professionals and France gets UK retraites.

People have always moved around......... none of this worries me and in our circumstances, maybe it should. What on earth is the point of being anxious about 'what ifs' road to insomnia etc, and one I refuse to go down.

[lindal1000]

The term 'bargaining chip' was first used by the government to justify why it would not reassure EU nationals living in the UK about their future. Some of us just feel that using people's future as a thing to be bargained with shows at best a lack of moral compass and want no part of it. Hence the campaign to remove this possibility. It was/is never about getting a good deal for British citizens living in other EU countries. On a personal level I would rather be in charge of my own future than leave it up to the whims of the governments.

[EuroTrash]

"On a personal level I would rather be in charge of my own future than leave it up to the whims of the governments."

Wouldn't everybody, unfortunately it will always be governments who decide (with or without interference or pressure from outside) who they will allow to live in their country and under what conditions. It can't be otherwise. It comes back to the "rights and responsibilities" thing, the state has responsibilities towards the people who live and work there legally, and it has to be able to put limits on who it's willing to take responsibility for.

I'm not sure whether the government realised what it was doing when it called people bargaining chips.or main cards or whatever it actually called them. Either it knew how much feeling it would inevitably stir up and somehow thought that a massive reaction and outcry would somehow be in its interests, though I can't see how. Or it simply didn't anticipate people reacting as they have, almost incredible that it could be so stupid, but sadly possible. But, It takes two to bargain and so far the EU has poured cold water on all the posturing about using people as bargaining chips, making the UK a tax haven etc, hopefully it'll continue to do so.

[Chancer]

[quote user="lindal1000"]The term 'bargaining chip' was first used by the government to justify why it would not reassure EU nationals living in the UK about their future. Some of us just feel that using people's future as a thing to be bargained with shows at best a lack of moral compass and want no part of it. Hence the campaign to remove this possibility. It was/is never about getting a good deal for British citizens living in other EU countries. On a personal level I would rather be in charge of my own future than leave it up to the whims of the governments.[/quote]

 

I'm sure you were one of those that said they didn't like to be used as a bargaining chip but perhaps I am mistaken, so the OP was incorrect when they said

 

 So eu nationals living in the UK will be guaranteed rights (if amendment agreed) -
but WE will have NO rights.

Now how does that square with all those who, after the Brexit vote, were shouting about the rights for UK citizens in eu countries.
We've been treated like 'bargaining chips' - BECAUSE of the HoL and the eu

 

 

[lindal1000]

I have no intention of being used as a bargaining chip which is why we will apply for citizenship, regardless of what is agreed. I don't particularly agree with the OP. I think the government should guarantee the rights of EU citizens living in the UK unilaterally and independent of what is decided about our rights in the EU.

This is also the view of the cross bench committee set up to review these issues.

Their conclusions are

"But Hilary Benn, the Exiting the EU committee's Labour chairman, said it was wrong to use EU and British citizens as "bargaining chips".

Report here: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39151755

I see Boris and Davis are also now saying that EU residents should be given guarantees of their status.

My guess is they're all getting into a bit of a panic as skilled workers start to leave. We met a couple last night..one French, one English, both under 40, good jobs in the Uk, left the Uk and now have good jobs in France. They aren't the first I've met either. Those that are the most capable are the first to leave because maybe, like me, they don't like the idea of their future being decided by politicians?

[Chancer]

I agree that current EU résidents in the UK should continue with  their status and would have been really surprised if it were to be any other way, however I must be really dim because I cannot envisage any way in which you, a UK migrant living and working permenantly in France could be used as a bargaining chip by the UK as part of Brexit,  - help me out here!

 

I am beginning to think that the OP actually wanted the EU migrants in the UK to be used as that phrase to protect her status.

 

I am 100% with you regarding :

 

I think the government should guarantee the rights of EU citizens living in the UK unilaterally and independent of what is decided about our rights in the EU.

[lindal1000]

I don't think they can Chancer but that is the excuse they are using..that they need to also secure the rights of British citizens. In fact until the UK triggers art 50 there is really nothing the EU can do with regards to anything. Also immigration for non EU citizens is the responsibility of individual member states and not the EU as a whole, so separate negotiations will have to be carried out with every single state.

[NormanH]

immigration for non EU citizens is the responsibility of individual

member states and not the EU as a whole, so separate negotiations will

have to be carried out with every single state.

But the regulations for immigration for non EU citizens already exist (at least in France) and can be read here:

http://accueil-etrangers.gouv.fr/demande-de-titre-de-sejour/vous-etes-ressortissant-e-non-europeen-ne/vous-etes-ressortissant-e-de-pays-tiers-non-algerien-ne/vous-etes-en-france-vous-avez-deja/vous-souhaitez-obtenir-son/pour-l-obtention-d-une-carte-de-resident/article/vous-residez-en-france-depuis-au-moins-5-ans

(that page is for those who have been here for over 5 years but links to other cases are easily found from there, this one for example:

http://accueil-etrangers.gouv.fr/demande-de-titre-de-sejour/vous-etes-ressortissant-e-non-europeen-ne/vous-etes-ressortissant-e-de-pays-tiers-non-algerien-ne/)

  

What has the UK to do with what France has already decided for her own territory? What is there to negotiate?

[Chancer]

Nothing that I can see but I admit to not following this with anywhere near the interest and close scrutiny of others who are better informed.

 

Having had time to think and in the absence of a response from those claiming (fearing) to be used as bargaining chips I think that I can work out what their underlying fear is.

 

Had (or should) the UK take that tough line removing the current rights of EU migrants then I believe that they fear that France will do the same to UK citizens perhaps compounded by fears that MLP may become the president.

 

I dont share those fears, I dont believe that the UK would take that line, I have not read up on the speech containing those terms but it just sounds like posturing, whilst it is possible that MLP will win the élections I do not believe that France even under her would do the same, to do so they would have to remove the rights of all other current non EU migrants from all the other countries of the world.

 

I do not feel that I had the right to vote in the referendum, the country has decided, others may argue it was not a big enough majority whatever floats their boat, the UK has decided and I accept that my future will change to some degree as a consequence and it will cost more but then I/we have had a remarkably easy ride for a very long time, a trip to the prefecture clearly shows that.

 

I had for years intended taking French nationality because I felt that in the future, in another part of the world having the choice of passports, nationalities and even names (I would Franciwhateveritscalled my name) might one day be to my advantage, as I dont intend staying in France I probably wont bother, I have enough on my plate, but should I stick around then Imight just do so.

[lindal1000]

For me the issue is that no one should be used as a bargaining chip.. whatever their nationality.

I am not as confident as you re the current government, and of course if they take tough line regarding EU migrants in the Uk then it will be reciprocated. Theresa May introduced some of the toughest criteria for non EU migrants of any country..so tough that currently 25% of applications submitted by EU nationals for permanent residency are being rejected, creating great uncertainty for those people, many of whom have lived in the UK for over 20 years and have British children and grandchildren.