Unfortunately these things have not been standardized throughout Europe Frenchie. If people have been away from the UK. for more than 15 years and happen to live in a country where naturalization is a condition before getting full voting rights in their host country then they can be in a position of having no full votings rights. I was in that position for a long time - not able to vote at national or state elections. There are some countries where all tax payers have full voting rights regardless of nationality - Portugal is the most liberal on this. Germany does what it has to do by EU. law and nothing more than that. Apparently a British subject living in Russia can vote there faster than in Germany.
There is no right to vote after 15 years of being an expat so your tax rule is erroneous. The expat also needed to be over 18 years of age when they left the UK. Expats also lose their NHS entitlement to anything but emergency treatment as an EU citizen. There has been several attempts to secure expats their own specific MP representation in the past few years but all have failed. There was some talk about scrapping the 15 year rule, has that been scrapped instead? Will you lose your right to vote in UK elections under the section 1(3) and (4) 15 year rule or Brexit first?
The pay tax and have a right to vote on how that money is spent has been a right, which is why the 15 year rule was thought to be denying people their rights, and was due to be changed. There has been no serious attempts to create European MPs, just talk about would it be a good idea. Strangely enough there are polling stations in England for the French to cast their votes in. Seems quite democratic to me. The question about which will come first, 15 years or Brexit is not known. Yet another thing that could go on being discussed for years. There could be a change of UK government in that time that might have different priorities. As more and more are now forecasting you could well have something that looks like Brexit, but is little different to what we have now. Totally unknown.
It just shows up how many things are still controlled by individual countries, and not by some gigantic super state. France is the same as Germany, local and EU elections only without naturalization.
I was specifically asking if the end of your 15 year qualifying period was near or would Brexit affect your right first?
Today we heard Davis say that the civil servants had gone as far as they could, and it was now down to politicians. What do we know from this statement? If you think back, companies such as Nissan were promised something. What they were promised has been kept very much under wraps, but a month ago the company did start to make noises about keeping the same conditions for their supply chains, and tariffs, or making plans to move away. It would be simple for them to leave with Renault having spare production capacity, and being shareholders in Nissan. There are more examples, but this one is simple to understand. The question for the politicians is now, can we have companies such as Nissan leave for the EU, or should we agree to the method of calculating what is owed, and try to form a deal that would not force them out? This is what politics is about at present.
What Davis is seeking is some leadership amongst the major member leaders to break the deadlock over the ransom demands. He is probably keen to support May in reminding them that much damage will also be inflicted on businesses in the EU if no deal can be reached. The dogma on saving the EU 'project' is so ingrained in the Eurocrats minds that common sense is unlikely to surface at this stage. Negotiations with the EU have always been long and drawn out, Brexit will be no exception.
The problem with your argument is that the time for the UK is running out. There will not be talks on trade deals until the government agrees to the method of working out just what is owed. Without some idea of what a trade deal could look like companies have said they will activate plans to move away. These companies have said that they need to know within the next six weeks, so long drawn out negotiations are no good. As so many of them will be relocating to mainland Europe, the EU will be making some gains, although there will be some damage it will be slight compared to what the UK will suffer.
The EU knows exactly what it is doing by attempting to screw a large ransom from the UK using the diminishing time available. I agree companies need certainty so they can plan. The only way to prevent this saga from dragging on is to walk away now, citing the EU's unreasonable behaviour.
Have you heard, or seen, any confirmation from the EU. as to how large this 'huge ransom' will be - the answer to that is no. All you have seen are rumours from the British press. If you have direct evidence from any reputable source quoting figures then please produce them, together with reasons why you think this payment is unrealistic, rather than always resorting to soundbites such as 'ransom'. Nobody is ransoming anyone - the fact is that you want something from the EU. ie. trade, and, that being the case, outstanding debts and obligations must be settled first - or at least a transparent plan on how to deal with them.
Companies have planned which is why they have warned what they will do if they have no idea where the country is going. Business does make plans which is more than can be said about this hopelessly split and weak government. If there had been a plan a year ago we would not be looking at the possibility of companies leaving.
60 billion Euros has been widely bandied about, this ties in with the Macron boy stating 20 billion is much less than half of the required amount. The problem is it does not matter who is negotiating on behalf of the UK, the EU eurocrats are hellbent on securing what must be seen as a bad outcome for the UK. For their own political ends they must deter others members from choosing to exercise their democratic right to reject the path to a EU superstate. It is correct to call their demand a ransom if they cannot completely justify the amount line by line. It is also unreasonable to demand a financial outcome without regard to the implications of all other details, this is simply bullying. The ex Greek finance minister who obviously has much more experience of negotiating with the EU than any of us, has basically the same attitude as mine and has recommended walking away a.s.a.p. He has referred negotiating with the EU is like negotiating with the mafia.
It is your position that is hopeless and weak, you would have the UK cower to the EU bullies without any opposition. Whether you like it or not, Macron is taking a fast route to an EU superstate with less member state control over financial matters.
The trouble is that some politicians told people they could have everything they had at the time without paying anything. How much money was talked about to settle our debts before the referendum? Wasn't even mentioned was it. Now reality kicks in you see all the whinging, trying to disown what promises were made, and washing their hands over the disaster that is about to happen to those who will lose their jobs. The UK took the decision to leave, and should stop trying to blame others for the mess it has got them into .
The UK government has always intended to pay what is reasonably owed to the EU. It has rightly demanded the EU to justify the huge figures it has been bandying about. As previously stated the 'EU project' cannot allow a member state to exercise it's democratic right to reject the superstate option without being seen to suffer. If you cannot see this you are being extremely naive or putting your head in the sand. Some jobs will be lost others created, the UK does not suffer France's problem of job creation. You should be more concerned with the horrendous unemployment in the EU.
If the EU. has been bandying figures around can you point me to them please. Nearly all of the 'bandying' has come from British media sources. How can the EU. justify the 'huge figures' when they have not quoted any ?
Did you really think that you could have a deal that is better outside the EU than inside it? You fell for the nonsense if you did.
Nobody I know expected a better deal with the EU after Brexit than before. What most people expect is an EU that takes a sensible pragmatic approach that secures a future relationship with mutual benefit for both parties as the major consideration. The problem is the EU's political controllers need to ensure this does not happen, that there is not a smooth breakup. There is a willingness amongst the eurocrats for a considerable amount of self harm, whether this is shared by industrialists in the EU is to be seen.
Well if you expected things to be worse you should stop and think a bit longer, how much worse. All of the countries within the EU set the rules for the negotiations. Have you seen one who is asking to change anything?
