Knoxy_UK

Whilst nothing is certain, it has to be remembered that the UK can attract staff from around the world to work in our fields or NHS etc. Where as it's a lot harder for Spain, Portugal, etc to find replacement ex-pats who bring so much spending power to their countries.

Therefore IMO the pressure that the EU will have from within to keep the ex-pat community settled will be sufficient

macliam

Look at it from a non-British point of view, not all ex-pats are from the UK - Ireland's economy is back on the mend and the firming of the Algarve property market has much to do with the new dynamic of French pensioners choosing to buy outside France. Historically, the UK ex-pat community has been very strong in Spain and Portugal, but with sterling weaker it might be a mistake to presume that things can't change....

This "UK-centric" view is like the argument that the EU will want a trade deal with the UK because it exports more to the UK than it imports from it. But what are the products? If the UK doesn't buy cars or white goods from Europe, then where will it get them - the US? the Far East? People will still buy Mercedes and BMW even if the prices increase due to import duties - people will still see Miele, Bosch and Siemens as quality makes...... whereas UK exports are far more varied - and many can be sourced from within Europe or elsewhere.

I don't think that Portugal will be looking to make life difficult for UK ex-pats, but if the EU decides to remove privileges from UK ex-pats, things must change - and not for the better. Equally, the average Portuguese could be "educated" over time to resent a community that doesn't integrate, doesn't speak the language and has advantages that they don't have themselves - just as the UK press persuaded the population to stigmatize immigrants for the same reasons.

The future for UK ex-pats really does depend on the future relationship between the UK and the EU, so an amicable settlement would be best. It's hard to see that happening, given the current posturing on both sides - and no amount of "strong and stable" government from the UK will change that.

SgtTroy

You mean that for Spain and Portugal it would be a lot harder to, say find Chinese or Scandinavian ex-pats with even better spending power?

I'm afraid that the issue with the expats' spending power may be slightly overestimated as quite a few of them are pensioners and therefore not on very high income anyway.

For both the UK and the EU a Norway-style relationship would probably be best, but if so, then what would actually Brexit mean

Naaling

I think people are getting ahead of themselves.

For any of this to be relevant Brexit must be finalised.
If that process is on course to happen without any issues, then why is the country having a general election at this time?

TM claims it's because the opposition and House of Lords don't support her. So what's unusual about that? Since when has a government needed the support of those two institutions to pass legislation. All that is really required is a majority in the House of Commons, and isn't that the reason why the government is in government in the first place?

This general election is a clear indication that TM doesn't have the full support of her own party for what she is doing, and that when the issue of Brexit finally needs to be resolved in the House of Commons she won't have the numbers.

SgtTroy

Ironically whilst providing (a sort of) an answer about the membership, the referendum raised far too many questions about the future relationship with the EU.

With so many variations and with so many possibilities it is no surprise that TM does not have the full support of her own party for her plans which actually she is yet to clearly articulate.

Naaling

If you assume that the Tory Government intended to honour the referendum result, then I agree the situation is confusing with its number of possible options. However, if you accept the possibility that they never intended to honour the referendum result, then everything makes sense.

P.S.
you = you general not personal.

Knoxy_UK

With recent poling showing few of the leavers have changed their minds, and a reasonable amount of remainers now accept the result and want to get it done well..... the UK government can not go backwards now.
Regards why TM has called the election now is simple, it will give them a few years after leaving the EU to let us forget. im just glad that the Pensioners are no longer being pandered to and a more balanced agenda is planed

mfesharne

Every Govt from both sides has been hammering the pensioners for years........ They were promised an NHS from cradle to grave & didn't get it, they were raided by Gordon Brown's slow ticking pensions time bomb, had their pensionable age extended & now are threatened by the scrapping of the triple lock...... and all despite paying a lifetime of taxes whilst a significant percentage of the younger generation sit on their arses & breed feral kids just for the benefit payments.

If anything, the retirement age should be dropped & the feckless younger poncers be forced to take the jobs made available by those retiring earlier.

macliam

This is off-topic - but needs a response......

If you believe what you say, then the "new truth" has succeeded. The same "new truth" that tells people that problems with social services and health in the UK are not due to underfunding and mismanagement, but immigration. That tells people that the disabled need to be assessed because they are a drain on the state. That tells people that people who contributed to support the previous generation and worked and saved for their future are now too well off to be supported in turn....... That says that people with dementia should pay for their own care, but not people with cancer.

If it is acceptable that care is excluded from the social contract, then how long before it moves on to other areas of the NHS that are "just too expensive" for the state to support? If it acceptable that assets are held ransom in a gamble on future health, why should people save for a rainy day? Let's all borrow for fancy cars and foreign holidays and live in hock to the banks - because people in debt are dependent fodder for the "market".

The election has been called due to May's distaste for opposition - with an overall majority she can ignore scrutiny and objections and her "strong and stable" government can pursue its own agenda. Be careful, here in Portugal they experienced a "strong and stable" government for 48 years.......

Naaling

TM already has an overall majority.
There is no guarantee that she will improve on it or even still have it after this election.

SgtTroy

EMR

If only that were true !!

macliam

Very slim and not assured. She wants a mandate - so this uncosted selection of "nasty party" ideas are just a starter for ten. Either that, or she's so cocksure of victory that she's just flicking the V to those she depended on previously.

For working people, what she suggests is that a new death tax can take all but £100k of your assets in order to provide you with a lesser standard of care than the last generation received via local councils. So, having made it virtually impossible for the young to buy their own property without help from their parents, they are now ensuring that the state has claim on the lion's share of that capital too.

Ignore the individual actions - look to the direction of travel and that's why I think it will be very, very dangerous to give her an increased majority.

.....Then again, someone on the radio today said that their reading of these policies is that she thinks there are very rough times ahead and she'sgetting the cuts in first.....

peterfc

Peter

Knoxy_UK

When we group people to protect them, we need to ensure that they remain the core group we needed to protect in our society.

The winter fuel payment was brought in to protect the vulnerable old people against the dramatic rise in fuel costs, but when does a policy that's designed to benefit become a right? I'm not saying all old people should loose the winter fuel payment. However there's an interesting spilt between Corbin's believe that "Paul McCartney should get the winter fuel allowance" and the new Tory policy that it should be targeted to those who need it more.