RayC

Even by the basement-level standards of the "legends" at Spiked this one is a cracker😂: The Covid inquiry is just a pretence for 'Remainers' to bleat about Brexit. One wonders why they stopped there? It's common knowledge that Covid was invented by Remainers working in the Wuhan lab, and then unleashed on the world as a punishment for the world not intervening to stop Brexit.

From the gov.uk website re eligibility to pay voluntary National Insurance contributions: "Living and working abroad: (Eligible to pay) Class 2 contributions but only if you worked in the UK immediately before leaving, and you’ve previously lived in the UK for at least 3 years in a row or paid at least 3 years of contributions Living abroad but not working: (Eligible to pay) Class 3 contributions but only if at some point you’ve lived in the UK for at least 3 years in a row or paid at least 3 years of contributions"

Thanks for the clarification. There are very few British overseas territories now, so not really an issue. My suggestion is that the vote is withdrawn after 5 years outside of the UK. It's unlikely that overseas postings for government officials and members of the armed forces will exceed that length of time, but exceptions could be written into any legislation in such cases.

So it's the amount of tax that an individual pays that counts? By that line of argument, votes should be weighed according to an individual's tax liability. Maybe you can find out the names of the lazy dossers that you are supporting, so that they can thank you for your altruistic generosity.

How many expats can be bothered to vote is anyone's guess, however, I'd suggest that my assumption isn't without foundation. 5.5m Brits live abroad. 1m are over 65. Based on previous elections, Tory voters outnumber Labour supporters 2-1 in this age group. There has also been a substantial majority for the Tories for both UK and expat voters in the 50 - 64 age group. The country with the most working Brits is now the US. More assumptions but I'd suggest that these individuals are mostly working in financial services and are more likely to be economically conservative, and hence natural Tory voters: Boris' Brexit blunders have probably lost the Tories support amongst the EU expat brigade but, overall I'd suggest that the Brit expat community would lean towards the Tories.

Around 2/3rds of government spending is on public services such as the NHS, education and policing. As someone who has no intention of returning to the UK, why should you have a say in how that money is allocated?

I lived in Thailand for +/-7 years. (I would have remained but for the Asian crisis in 1997). I then lived in Belgium for 20 years. I was not a guest in either country; I - together with my family - were residents of those countries. IMO I should have been entitled to a vote in those countries' elections. The arguments put forward by expats in favour of their entitlement to vote seem to rest largely on the fact that some pay some UK tax. It's an argument but imo not a particularly convincing one. As I pointed out previously, non-Brits, who are not resident in the UK, pay tax on their UK assets to the UK government. Should they also get a vote?

That maturity meaning that, generally speaking, they favour low-taxation without having to worry about the consequences of lowing public spending on services. Why should being born in the UK, having family and owning property there entitle you to a vote whilst living overseas? Money flows around the world so that is completely irrelevant. It is probably more accurate to say that you pay some tax in the UK, as do foreign nationals on their UK assets. Should they also get a vote in UK elections? Having said all that, you answered your own question: Imo you shouldn't get a vote in UK elections because you have chosen to live abroad.

Of course. The last 13 years under Tory leadership has gone so well. The obvious irresistible retort is that if they care that much then why don't they return there? I am a Brit who has also lived in Belgium and Thailand. I care about what happens to those latter two countries as well as the UK. However, as a non-resident I don't expect a say in how they run the country.

Agreed. In general, I believe that an individual should be taxed, and be able to vote in the country, in which they reside. I don't understand your point? Are you suggesting that Brits in the UK should be able to vote in, say, an Indian election? 70% of Brits vote according to party allegiance. Of the remainder, imo it is domestic issues, notably tax and the NHS, which decide how they will cast their vote.

I doubt that Labour can do much worse than the current Tory government but even if they do, you'd probably get very generous odds from the bookies that they can't make as big a mess in 35 days as your favourite, Liz Truss, did. (Yes, I know that she was in office for 49 days but she was unable to inflict even more damage for 14 days due to the Queen's passing).

The majority of ex-pats are more likely to vote Tory. No doubt purely coincidental that this proposed piece of legislation is put forward prior to a General Election. In any event, if an individual is out of the country for a significant period of time (imo 5 years: one parliamentary term) then the franchise should be withdrawn. Why should non-residents influence domestic policy that directly affect the day-to-day welfare of residents?

In the very majority of countries, individuals had the choice whether to take a vacinne. By the other 'solutions' I assume that you are referring to lockdowns, mandatory mask wearing, etc? Opinions differ as to whether such measures were excessive but, irrespective of whether that was so, how could any government have enacted solutions tailored for individuals?

Well, at least we are similar in that regard

My replies to you are, by definition, personal. I do not intend to offend you but, on the 'Ukraine issue', I disagree with your comments vehemently. I have been direct in stating my disagreement but I do not believe that I have been offensive towards you personally.

It's pure conjecture on all our parts what happens next: Are we entering another long 'cold war'? The US funded 30-odd years of the last one; would it do so again? Could the EU - together with the UK - take the lead from a US-led NATO in defending Europe with the US committed to supporting in the event of a war?

I don't think that I've ever read such perfect written English from a Russian. My compliments, sir 👍. Out of curiosity do you speak with a Russian accent?

I can imagine that Blair may have some influence on Starmer if the latter becomes PM, as they appear to have similar views on many issues. Corbyn? Can you elaborate on how he might influence a PM Starmer. They don't appear to have much in common politically, and probably aren't drinking buddies.

Perhaps you should act your own advice in that case.

So long as you post comments which I disagree with l will post what I consider to be valid responses: As others have said, it's a public forum so you should expect to be challenged about your posts I am not trying to bait you into saying something unintentional, I am pointing out what I consider to be flaws in your rationale. You clearly do not wish to address my challenges to your argument directly which is obviously your choice.

Given that Corbyn will not be a Labour MP in the next Parliament, it's pretty certain that he will not be a member of any Labour government.

There is no perfect electoral system. There are many problems with PR, but at least it has the benefit of ensuring that all individual votes matter to some extent. The main benefit claimed for a FPTP system is that it delivers 'strong' government. The governance of the UK since 2016 suggests otherwise.

Methinks you doth protest too much.

But there is plenty in your posts as a collective to support the view that you are an apologist for Russia's actions in Ukraine. By your rationale, the governance of Ukraine has nothing to do with anyone apart from the Ukrainians. Fine. If only Putin would agree with your view. Much as it irks you to acknowledge the parallels with '30s Europe, they exist: The dangers of the liberal democracies of Europe (and the US) passively accepting aggressive land-grabs by totalitarian states such as Putin's Russia are clearly obvious. Why anyone would seek to defend such aggressors is beyond me and you have been completely unable to offer any justification. Next.

So the 'undefeatable' Russia maintains its' record by ensuring the end of life on Earth? Great!