Why Would You Want To Inflence A Country That You Have Forsaken?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36159009
Credit where it's due the High Court got this one right. The limit is 15 years abroad but really I'd say 1 year. If you choose to *** off to some foreign place because it suits you why would you want a say in how your home nation is run?

[jourdain2]

I always felt myself to be a temporary resident in France. My home, my nationality, upbringing- everything about me is British - heck, come on, I even still paid tax in UK (was there something about 'No taxation without representation' somewhere in History?) as do most of the Brits I knew.. My children and grandchildren are English. I always continued to care first about what affected them and my homeland.

So now I'm home, T.G. - I'm still the same person TTT. I resent the '*** off'
remark - you are classifying people unfairly. I would have had the same feelings, the same passions were I still (through inability to sell house) resident in France. Disappointed in you.

[DTCwordfan]

Quite right, jourdain, TTT at times, he wouldn't merit a spike on a London Gate, never mind Hadrian's Wall or drowning in a butt of Malmsey wine.....though count me in for drowning in a 1955 Warre's port.....great year for port but not for babies.

[New Judge]

“…you can't 'emigrate' within the EU, that would be like 'emigrating' from Wales to Scotland.”

Wales and Scotland are part of the independent sovereign nation that is the UK. Although migration does not necessarily have to apply to countries, in this context it clearly does and Wales and Scotland are not independent countries. It’s like saying that moving from London to Birmingham is “migration”.

Having said that I can clearly understand now, Eddie, why you are a keen “Remainer”. Do you not consider all the Poles and Romanians now living here as “migrants”? Alas you have fallen for the big lie that the EU wants you to believe – that the EU is a single nation. It is not (yet) but it aspires to be and it will succeed. So when you vote you must ask yourself do you want to live in the UK, or do you want to live in Europe (under a single unelected government) because that’s the choice you face.

Your stance is all well and good, jourdain. Now you are back in the UK of course you should be entitled to vote. At the other end of the scale is Mr Schindler (one of the parties in the action mentioned). He is 94, has lived in Italy since he was 60 and obviously has no intention of returning to the UK. His desire to vote is not to take part in a decision that will profoundly affect people in the UK. He wants to vote so that he can have his cake and eat it. He wants the UK to remain in the EU (regardless of the pernicious influence that organisation has on the UK) simply so that he can remain an “EU citizen” and retain all the benefits that status bestows. Meanwhile the disadvantages to the UK of its EU membership are of no concern to him whatsoever. His solution is simple – he can apply for Italian citizenship and so be sure of retaining his EU rights. His being allowed to vote in a UK referendum would be an absolute travesty.

[jim360]

"(under a single unelected government)"

[citation needed]

[New Judge]

I remember this tale from few weeks ago (obviously when it was at an earlier stage in its stately procession through the courts). I particularly remember Mr Shindler. He is 94, has lived in Italy for more than 30 years and clearly has no intention of returning to the UK. Yet he wants the right to vote in a referendum that will have a profound effect – whichever way the result goes – on all those living here. It is quite true that the result – whichever way it goes – will also have a profound effect on many of those (of all nationalities) living in the rest of the EU. However that does not mean they are entitled to have a say. The pair’s argument was based on their contention that denying them the right to vote impinged on their right under EU law to freedom of movement. That is ridiculous and I’m not surprised m’Learned Friends struck it down.

There was an earlier question on this issue:

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1488534-2.html

My impression of Mr Shindler was this:

“He wants to vote so that he can have his cake and eat it. He wants the UK to remain in the EU (regardless of the pernicious influence that organisation has on the UK) simply so that he can remain an “EU citizen” and retain all the benefits that status bestows. Meanwhile the disadvantages to the UK of its EU membership are of no concern to him whatsoever. His solution is simple – he can apply for Italian citizenship and so be sure of retaining his EU rights. His being allowed to vote in a UK referendum would be an absolute travesty.”

And it hasn’t changed.

[jno]

anyone who lives in another European country would be a little biased

Unlke those who still live here? All opinions are biased, but that shouldn't be a reason for them to be barred from voting.

Living abroad isn't forsaking your country. That only happens when you abandon your citizenship.

[Jackdaw33]

FAO Sqad.

Regardless of the number of letters, the AB filter reduces all forbidden words to three asterisks.