Citizens abroad and party strategy

There were many things to support in the party strategy motion. It includes confident liberalism, modern campaigning, and reaching new communities. However, there is one notable exclusion. In fact, around five million notable exclusions: citizens abroad.

The strategy talks about reaching out to all communities in our country. These five million people are not in the UK, but they are served by our democracy. I live in Switzerland now, having moved for a job. Yet decisions made in Westminster continue to affect my life.

The starkest of those in recent years was of course Brexit. Many of the million British citizens living and working in Europe spent years in limbo after the referendum, not knowing what residency status they would eventually be afforded in the country in which they had built a life. We continue to see Britons being removed from EU countries, most recently Charles, a British citizen deported from Sweden.

All because of a decision made in Westminster. 

It doesn’t stop there. A pensioner retiring to Australia from the UK in 2006 would now receive less than half the basic State Pension of a pensioner who stayed in the UK, despite having made exactly the same contributions.

A family looking to repatriate to the UK from abroad, bringing a non-citizen spouse, had their income requirement increased by nearly 60% in 2024: a decision by a Government wanting to look tough on immigration, using citizens living abroad as scapegoats.

As liberals, we believe democracy means more than simply having the right to put a cross in a box. Voters need the opportunity to make an informed choice. Yet at the last general election I received no campaign material from any candidates standing in my Twickenham constituency. Many candidates don’t even put their leaflets online, so a determined voter like me can’t even do their own research. Not that I would’ve voted for anyone other than Munira, of course.

The strategy calls for more video content to reach people beyond our traditional ground campaign. Citizens abroad are perhaps the clearest example of people our ground campaign cannot reach.

Five million citizens abroad deserve a voice, and those entitled to vote deserve to be reached, so it is regrettable that Lib Dems Abroad’s amendment was not selected. We weren’t asking for a wholesale rewrite of the strategy, but for small tweaks to language that we felt inadvertently excluded citizens abroad: for example, by replacing “in our country” with “served by our democracy”.

We may live beyond Britain’s borders, but we are still part of its democracy. Westminster’s decisions still affect our lives, and our party’s strategy should have recognised that.

 

* Tom McAdam is the Lib Dems Abroad representative on FIRC, a member of the Lib Dems Abroad Steering Committee, and Membership Development Officer of Lib Dems in Europe Local Party.

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Advert

2 Comments

  • Perhaps we need to publish our own literature for British Citizens abroad

  • Deborah Newton-Cook 25th Sep '26 - 9:24am

    We absolutely do need to see the Party to produce literature- and social media content- aimed at the 5 million + Brits living overseas.

    Also, at the next General Election, MPs and Candidates should be mailing their overseas voters’ list of their electoral rolls, something which is neglected every time 🙁

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Sarah
    The triple lock is unsustainable but that doesn’t mean the richest generation to ever live will be poor. It means pensioners who need help and don’t have as...
  • Hywel
    @Jana - hence the word 'blanket' As it stands a political party cannot discriminate against someone for a belief 'worthy of respect in a democratic society, ...
  • Jason Connor
    Well said Chris Nicholson. What an encouraging post and for recognising that party's blatant anti semitism....
  • Jana
    @Hywel “ It is inherently nonsensical for a blanket prohibition on discrimination on the grounds of belief to apply to political parties which are founded on...
  • Hywel
    " 65 seats on 8% is a possible outcome which would see us overrepresented significantly under fptp." That may be possible. The actual electoral arithmetic g...